Committee Hearing, March 27, 2003

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING COMMITTEE ON LAW AND GOVERNMENT - - - Room 696, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Thursday, March 27, 2003 5:00 p.m. - - - RESOLUTION 030117, authorizing the City Council Committee on Law and Government to hold hearings to investigate the failure of the Philadelphia Housing Authority and four local unions, AFSCME District Council 47, Locals 2186 and 2187, AFSCME District Council 33, Local 934, and the Fraternal Order of Housing Police to negotiate new contracts, and authorizing the Chairperson of the Committee in furtherance of such investigation to issue subpoenas or other process as the Chairperson deems necessary or appropriate to compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of documents to the full extent authorized under Section 2-401 of the Home Rule Charter. - - - PRESENT: COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN, Chair COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN MICHAEL NUTTER COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN TASCO COUNCILMAN ANGEL ORTIZ REPRESENTATIVE LEANNA WASHINGTON - - - V A R A L L O, INCORPORATED LITIGATION SUPPORT SERVICES 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 2 I N D E X RESOLUTION 030117 PAGE THOMAS CRONIN, AFSCME District Council 47 ... 34 TRACY JORDAN, Fraternal Order of Housing Police ................................. 40 JOYCE WILKERSON, Chief of Staff ............. 49 MARK FOLEY, ESQ. ............................ 60 MR. MARK WOOLEY, ESQ. ....................... 87 RODNEY LITTLE, Fraternal Order of Housing Police ................................. 91 3

Can I have your attention, please? The Committee on Law and Government is now in session pursuant to the fact that we have a continuing quorum, since this is a recessed meeting of the last hearing. I'm going to ask the Clerk of the Committee, my assistant, Tim Kearney, to read the Resolution, which has authorized the action today, just to refresh everybody's mind. I hope you had a good day today so that tempers stay cool, because some of the issues may tend to move in the other direction. So try to be cool. Try to have good humor, if you can, because we're all hoping to achieve good results ultimately. We don't know how long ultimately it will be, but we live in hopes that it can be done in a friendly, cooperative way. If it can't, then that will be another matter. It might be a change of humor. But for the time being, at least let's hope everybody is going to stay in good humor today. All right? Other Members of the Committee will be coming in as soon as they hear that action is taking place. And we'll proceed. I don't want to hold the 4 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 hearing up, because we are authorized to proceed. Mr. Kearney, would you be good enough to read the Resolution which authorized the hearing today? May we have order? If you feel compelled to speak to your neighbor, then I suggest you and your neighbor go out in the hallway and have your conversation and come back. It's important that everybody hears everything. At least that much, I think, we can all agree on. Mr. Kearney will now read the Resolution 13 that's before us.

Resolution 030117, authorizing the City Council Committee on Law and Government to hold hearings to investigate the failure of the Philadelphia Housing Authority and four local unions, AFSCME District Council 47, Locals 2186 and 2187; AFSCME District Council 33, Local 934; and the Fraternal Order of Housing Police to negotiate new contracts, and authorizing the Chairperson of the Committee in furtherance of such investigation to issue subpoenas or other process as the Chairperson deems necessary or appropriate to compel the attendance of witnesses and the 5 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 production of documents to the full extent authorized under Section 2-401 of the Home Rule Charter.

Thank you. This Resolution was adopted unanimously. In the course of time since the Resolution was passed, we invited Carl Greene, who is the Executive Director, to appear. And we got a letter from the attorney for the Board -- I guess it was outside counsel. The first letter saying that Council had no authority and, therefore, they were politely rejecting the request for Mr. Greene to come. They asked further that since they believed we had no 15 authority, they asked City Council to withdraw its Resolution and its request for subpoena. That letter arrived, you will recollect, those of you who were at the previous hearing, that arrived here to me during the process of the hearing. It was the first I saw the letter. Subsequently, the next day an answer went out in which I, as Chairman of the Committee, authorized to issue the subpoena enacting on the basis of the Resolution by City Council. I rejected their request that we withdraw the Resolution or the 6 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 subpoena. And said this time, in as plain language as I could figure out to say, that we will expect you all to be here. I also took the unusual step -- because I felt it was required -- to individually write to each of the five members of the Board that, as I understand the law, are responsible for carrying out the law with respect to PHA, and who I believe have the power to control the action of the Executive Director, Carl Greene. So I asked the five members of the Board to come today, and I also asked them to take action to assure that Mr. Greene's presence would be here and that they would direct him. Since four of the five members are appointed by -- two by the Mayor and two by the City Controller -- I sent copies of my letters of the Board members to the Mayor and to the City Controller. That resulted in another letter from the attorney for PHA, kind of repeating the same statements he had made earlier, saying that Council had no authority, that PHA is not a City agency, that we give it only minimal financial support. Again, he requested the withdrawal of the Resolution 25 and the subpoena. 7 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 I consulted with some Board members, and then we reached a conclusion that it seemed likely that no one officially representing PHA Board would come. We decided to ask Ms. Wilkerson, who is the Chief of Staff and also, I understand, the Chair of the Board -- if there is such a thing. At least she's one of the five Board members. Somebody told me she's also the Chair, but she can explain that. I asked her if she would come, not as a member of the Board, because pretty much she's bound by the recommendations of the lawyer for the agency, but to come as the Chief of Staff in her other position because I believe -- some people may have other thoughts -- I believe she has a stronger responsibility toward the Mayor than any other member that I know of in the City of Philadelphia. And I thought there might be questions that this Body might want to raise of the Mayor, and they would raise it through the Chief of Staff. She agreed to come and I note she's here. Now, when she testifies, if you don't agree with her testimony, please do not boo or act unfriendly. She does what she does because she believes that she has to do it or that it's the 8 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 correct thing to do it and she's within her authority to do it. You or I may strongly disagree, or we may agree, but I think you can tell from what I've said so far that this may turn out to be a case that may wind up some day in the United States Supreme Court because the law seems to be quite muddy. The only clear law we find so far is a State Supreme Court decision of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania which seems to State very clearly that the PHA is not what they call a Commonwealth, meaning a State institution, and, therefore, it must be a City institution.

But I do have to agree that along the way, a number of courts inferior to the Supreme Court have at different times had different conclusions. Sometimes they say for different purposes the PHA may be a State agency. For other purposes, it may be a City agency. I have here Robert Jaffe, who I will call on in a moment to make a brief report with respect to that. One thing I'm clear about, I have to find out, or I will not be able to be happy with the way in which I conduct my role in City affairs, not 9 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 knowing what the agency is, whether it belongs to the people of Philadelphia or belongs to the State. I can't possibly imagine that an agency whose appointees all come from the Mayor or the City Controller can be anything other than a City agency. Maybe a court some day will declare PHA a Commonwealth or a State agency and maybe that will be the final decision, just like President Bush had no power to decide -- or the Supreme Court had no 11 power to decide who the President of the United States was, but the Federal Supreme Court made that decision anyway. Sometimes courts are the only ones that have the right and power to break the law and get by with it. But whatever it is, we're going to learn that. Because what the PHA does is, it impacts on the life of Philadelphians. It provides housing for, I think it's something like 70,000 Philadelphians. The controlling Executive Director and the Board members are all appointees, as I said before, by the Mayor and/or the Executive Director. So we're going to find out what that is, maybe. If that's the case, the road may be long; it may be hard. 10 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 But I certainly suggest to all people, don't give away any of your rights in the process. Don't agree with anybody that Philadelphia has lost its power to control actions of the Mayor and the City Controller, their City agencies. We elect both of them, we the citizens of Philadelphia. That's going to be my position, though I will ultimately respect, and will have to, the recommendation of the Court. What this will do is very troublesome because I have to tell you my deep concern, I'm very concerned about the unions that have to negotiate. I'm very concerned that there may be labor unions, which for one reason or another, maybe they were just mistaken, have written away the rights of their members. I'd be very concerned if that happened, because what I see happening in PHA is a threat to every employee who works for the City of Philadelphia, not just for PHA, because it makes no 21 sense to me to have the City of Philadelphia have a policy for PHA and have a different policy for employees. And if the City Administration has decided to begin its bargaining, using the PHA as the guinea pig a year before the regular time, I 11 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 think everybody has to be alerted. I intend to make it my business to see that every City employee knows that the City of Philadelphia is apparently urging that people's pension rights be capped at year 2003. Or if they pray enough and smile enough as this is done to them, maybe somebody will agree to extend the date to 2005 and that will cap their pension rights. I know you have a lot of complaints about health benefits and the very tiny wage proposal given, but I have to tell you the thing that impacts me most is -- maybe because of my age. Most of you can tell by looking at me that I'm past 39, like Jack Benny was -- retirement rights. If you're telling me that the City of Philadelphia is going to have a retirement policy that basically limits retirement to the amount of money that you earn when you first -- that your retirement is going to be figured on the amount of money you earn when you first worked for the City, and earn nothing thereafter towards your retirement, I am very concerned.

Because as much as I've condemned Enron and another business corporations, I've never known any of them who dared to propose such an outright 12 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 crazy policy, I have to say. Because nobody is going to stand for that in Philadelphia. We're going to have to get the facts. Maybe the unions allegedly filed -- maybe they were misled in what they agreed to. I decided I couldn't believe the contracts and that's the reason, in addition to subpoenaing Mr. Greene, I wanted to subpoena him to produce the documents. I do not believe for a moment that any self-respecting labor union would ever agree to that. But Mr. Greene, you will remember, in his letter to me said that, I think, four or five unions have already so agreed. I asked to see the documents. His failure to supply them -- and they're public documents -- troubles me very much, because it raises a question as to whether the representation he made was, in fact, true or false. I don't know the answer because I have not seen the documents. Having said all this at the beginning, let me note that Representative LeAnna Washington has joined us in the hearing. She is a State Representative from the northwest. She does an outstanding job in Harrisburg on behalf of all people of Philadelphia. 13 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 Councilman Ortiz, everybody knows him. He's recently been in the paper. I don't know whether it's because of some Democratic politics or whether it's because his daughter is such a beautiful actress on NBC on Tuesday nights -- is it 9:00?

Thank you for the plug. 9:30.

And to my right immediately is Tim Kearney, my legislative director of my office. To my left is Robert Jaffe, who is the attorney on my staff. And to his left is Stan Shapiro, who is the director of the technical and legal staff for City Council. We're well prepared. I'm going to ask Mr. Jaffe, that you introduce yourself -- or I'll introduce you for the record. I'd like you to read the subpoena that was served on Mr. Greene. I want everybody to know what the facts are. Mr. Jaffe.

Good afternoon, everyone. Robert Jaffe. I'm Special Counsel for Councilman David Cohen. And this is a subpoena enlarged so you can see it, as well, to Carl Greene. 14 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 "You are ordered by the Council of the City of Philadelphia to come to Room 696, City Hall, Broad and Market Streets, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on Thursday, March 27th, at 5 p.m., to testify before the Committee on Law and Government in connection with the investigation authorized by City Council Resolution 030117 and to remain until excused. "And, two, to bring with you the following: The most recent PHA contracts with the following unions: 1, Building and Construction Trades Council of Philadelphia and Vicinity; 2, Labors International, Local 3332; 3, Painters District Council 21; 4, Fireman and Oilers Union, Local 473; 5, The United Brotherhood of Carpenters Metropolitan Regional Council of Philadelphia and Vicinity; and 6, AFSCME District Local 33, Local 934. "If you fail to attend or to produce the documents or things required by the subpoena, you will be subject to enforcement proceedings as set forth in the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter, Section 24 241." And this is signed and attested by the 15 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 Chairman of the Committee on Law and Government and the Chief Clerk of the City Council of Philadelphia. This was duly served in person and we have a signed return of service.

Now, the documents referred to in the subpoena are the precise documents that Mr. Greene referred to in his letter which arrived during the first hearing, the letter which stated that the PHA has already entered into agreements with these unions, that every union referred to in the subpoena was the same union referred to in Mr. Greene's letter. All I asked for was the documents that Mr. Greene himself was talking about, so there should have been no problem at all in either identifying them or presenting them. Incidentally, let me also mention that we've been assisted by Councilman Nutter's presence and Councilwoman Blackwell. Councilwoman Blackwell, as you know, is a majority leader of the City Council. And so we have more than a full quorum, even though we have a continuing quorum that opened the meeting. Councilman Ortiz. 16 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117

Are you going to refer to the letter from Mr. Greene?

Yes. I wanted to do two letters together, the first letter and then the second letter.

Then I will follow.

Mr. Kearney, do you have a copy of the letters we received from Mr. Greene?

Yes.

Would you read first, the first letter we got the day of the hearing and then read the second letter that was received? And identify the stationary on which it appears, and also begin each letter with the way it was addressed.

The first letter is dated March 25, 2003. It's on Philadelphia Housing Authority stationary. It says at the top, "By facsimile, Councilman David Cohen, City Council" --

Does it state the office represented?

Yes, it does. It's the office of Carl R. Greene, Executive Director of the 17 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 Philadelphia Housing Authority.

Go ahead.

"By facsimile. Councilman David Cohen, City Council, City of Philadelphia. City Hall, Room 588. Regarding Resolution No. 7 030117 and the subpoena for Carl Greene. "Dear Councilman Cohen, I am writing with respect to Resolution No. 030117, which was approved recently by City Council authorizing City Council to conduct hearings, 'to investigate the failure of the Philadelphia Housing Authority and four of its local unions,' to negotiate new contracts. m. It is our request that the hearings authorized by Resolution 030117 be stopped and the subpoena for Carl Greene be withdrawn. "Section 2-400 of the Philadelphia City Charter limits the City Council's authority to, 'authorize inquiries and investigations,' to matters, 'in aid of its legislative powers and 18 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. ' "Although Resolution No. 030117 states that the purpose of these hearings is to investigate the absence of a new collective bargaining agreement between PHA and AFSCME District Council 47, Locals 2186 and 2187; AFSCME District Council 33, Local 934. Collectively, Locals 2186, 2187 and 934 are referred to herein as AFSCME and the Fraternal Order of Housing Police. "It is PHA's position that any issue relating to the above referenced issues is not within the jurisdiction or authority of the City Council to resolve or take action. As a result, pursuant to 2-400, the City Council has no authority to conduct the hearings identified in Resolution 17 030117. It also has no authority to demand the appearance of any witnesses, including Carl Greene as part of its investigation. "None of the employees of PHA represented by FOHP and AFSCME are employees of the City of Philadelphia. Likewise, PHA is funded almost exclusively by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. PHA receives minimal funding from the City of Philadelphia. 19 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 "In addition, any issues surrounding collective bargaining between the PHA and its employees is not within the jurisdiction or control of City Council. Such issues are governed by the Pennsylvania Public Employee Relation Act. "Furthermore, any dispute regarding collective bargaining between the PHA and its employees is within the inclusive jurisdiction of the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board. Aside from the City Council's lack of authority to investigate or take action relating to collective bargaining between PHA and its employees, a public hearing is not the venue to conduct such an inquiry, as reflected by the Pennsylvania Sunshine Act. "Pursuant to Section 278(A)(2) of the Sunshine Act, neither negotiation sessions nor the discussion of negotiation strategy must be held in public meetings. "In St. Claire Area School District versus Saint Claire Area Education Association, the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court held that the Sunshine Act was never intended to compel the negotiation of collective bargaining agreements in public. 20 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 "Finally, as a practical matter, the hearings authorized by Resolution 030117 are simply unnecessary. PHA has been and is continuing to negotiate in a responsible and good faith manner, particularly in light of the fiscal projections under which it must survive in the future. Its good faith in bargaining with the unions that represent its employees is highlighted by the fact that the PHA recently entered into new collective bargaining agreements with both the Building and Construction Trades Council of Philadelphia and Vicinity and AFSCME District Council 33, Local 3934. "Based on the foregoing, we respectfully request that the City Council and the investigation purportedly authorized by Resolution 030117, in addition, at the very least, we respectfully request that the subpoena issued to Carl Greene be rescinded. "Thank you for your cooperation and prompt attention to this matter. " With a carbon copy to the Honorable Nelson Diaz. 21 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117

Do you have my reply?

What law firm does Mr. Woolly represent?

He's listed as being part of the house counsel. We're going to hold that while Mr. Shapiro gets a copy of that. Now, did we get a second letter from Mr. Woolley?

Yes.

Would you read that? As soon as the other letter comes, we'll read that one. This letter was in response to my reply in which I rejected Mr. Woolley's request. It said the hearing will go on. We expect everybody to come. And we then sent letters to each member of the Board, two of whom are here, but they may not be here in their PHA capacities. Councilwoman Blackwell may be here as the majority leader. And, as I said, Joyce Wilkerson is here in her position as Chief of Staff.

Would you read my letter? It's now been discovered. We stalled long 22 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 enough for Mr. Kearney to find it.

This letter is on the stationary of City Councilman David Cohen. It's by fax to Mark Woolley, Acting General Counsel, Philadelphia Housing Authority, South 23rd 7 Street, Philadelphia, dated March 25, 2003. 8 Regarding Resolution No. 030117 and subpoena for 9 Carl Greene. 10 "Dear Mr. Woolley, your request to 11 withdraw either Resolution 030117 or the subpoena 12 issued to Carl Greene pursuant thereto is hereby denied. It is completely within City Council's prerogatives to investigate the failure of PHA to negotiate contracts with any or all of its unions. The PHA Board is made up of City officials and/or their appointees. City Council has the right and duty to determine whether City officials are properly discharging their duties, whether they be duties conferred by the Charter, State or Federal law. "It is essential that Mr. Greene obey the subpoena that was issued by City Council. Sincerely, David Cohen." 23 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117

And to that letter, in addition, would you read the communication sent to the Board members? Again, they're in, apparently, Mr. Shapiro's control. Now, we'll read those letters to you as soon as they arrive. To me, this raises an this important question. It may be that PHA is unique in that maybe the Executive Director, and not the Board, runs the show. But in every case I've ever known, an Executive Director is subject to the orders of the members of the Board. And in this case it does not seem to me that that's been happening. So since two of the members are appointed by the Mayor and two by the City Controller, and I believe the Chair is selected by -- or the fifth member representing attendance is selected by the other four. If that's not the case, Ms. Wilkerson, I'll ask you to correct me on the appointment structure. Since that's the case, it seems to me that Mr. Greene is responsible to this Board; and the Board, in turn, is responsible to the appointing authorities who are the Mayor and the City 24 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 Controller. One thing we've got to learn is, who runs PHA. Does it run by itself? Does Mr. Greene make the decisions or does the Board? I don't think the City is so rich that we can have a Board that has no duties. And I think the duties of the Board -- and that's what we're going to also be exploring. Because of these hearings, we're going to find out who really runs PHA and who's responsible and what the responsibility of the Board members are to the appointing authorities. Having said that, and awaiting the letters, I'd like to ask Mr. Cronin, do you want to say a few remarks? Because I have some questions I'd like to raise with Ms. Wilkerson, and I believe there may be other Councilmembers, with respect to the City's role in this matter. Mr. Cronin, would you please identify yourself for the record.

Thomas Cronin, president of AFSCME District Council 47.

The Chair recognizes Councilman Ortiz.

I just don't believe 25 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 this. I do not believe that Mr. Carl Greene has had the audacity to reject coming here. Not only that, but the contracts that you asked for are supposed to be public documents. They're not private. They've already been negotiated and signed. For him to have the audacity not to come here, I think, is really galling and disrespectful of this legislative body. I cannot remember in the history of this Council any official, any official -- because I had public hearings on PHA and every official of PHA came down, brought records, brought details, and we had ongoing hearings on PHA. And for Mr. Greene to say -- not only that, but to say that we should drop the investigation to end our hearings, what is he, imperial? What is he, a king? Does the Mayor and the Board not -- are not they their bosses? He can be fired by City officials, can't he? (Applause.)

In all of my years in Council I have never seen a letter as arrogant, disrespectful as the two letters that I have here from Mr. Woolley. I want to know how much money PHA pays Ballard Spahr and all of the other law firms that they have. 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 This is really disrespectful, that Mr. Greene cannot come to this Body and face this Council. We're not asking him to negotiate the contract. We're not asking him to do any such thing. All that we're asking him is what is going on in PHA with the workers. All that we're asking him is to clarify and clarification of policies. Representative Washington just told me that he did the same thing to the State. So he figures he can do it to Council. He can do it the State. He probably can do it to Bush, except they might set one of those smart bombs right into him. Let me tell you something. This is not allowable, Mr. Chairman. And Mr. Greene better get his butt over here. (Applause.)

Mr. Chairman, I suggest that we give him a certain amount of time, maybe hours, to appear before this Council. 21 Subpoena? Damn the subpoena. He better be here 22 because we asked him to be here. And he owes a duty 23 to the citizens of the City. We should not have to 24 subpoena a public official to come before a legislative body. 27 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 (Applause.)

I have had enough. We've been here already a few times. Our time is as valuable as theirs. But it isn't Ms. Wilkerson who can answer the questions. It is Carl Greene who can answer the questions. Ms. Wilkerson can only fire him if she so desires later on. (Applause.)

But it is him that has to respond to the legislative body of this City. And if he doesn't want to respond, then he can go back to Detroit. (Applause.)

Let me note the presence of Councilwoman Tasco at this hearing. Have you concluded, Councilman?

Yes. I think that's enough. (Applause.)

Before Mr. Cronin, I would like to complete the reading. Mr. Kearney informs me we have the two missing documents. First, the letter that I wrote to the Board members, copies of which went to the 28 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 Mayor and to the City Controller, the two appointing authorities.

These letters are on the stationary of City Councilman David Cohen. The one that I have is addressed to Nelly W. Reynolds, Commissioner, Philadelphia Housing Authority, 8 South 23 Street, Philadelphia. And as the 9 Councilman said, this letter went to Chief of Staff 10 Joyce Wilkerson, Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell, 11 Commissioner Debra Brady, Commissioner Patrick 12 Itting (ph), as well as to the Mayor and the City Controller. March 26th, 2003. Hand delivered. "Dear Ms. Reynolds, regarding subpoena duces tecum" --

Duces tecum in Latin means, bring with you these documents.

"I am writing to you in your capacity of the Board of the Philadelphia Housing Authority. "As you may know, on February 20, 2003, City Council enacted Resolution 030117 authorizing Council's Committee on Law and Government, 'the failure of the Philadelphia Housing Authority and the four union locals; AFSCME District Council 47, 29 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 Locals 2186 and 2187; AFSCME District Council 33, Local 934; and the Fraternal Order of Housing Police, to negotiate new contracts.' "The Resolution authorized the Committee Chair to issue subpoenas duces tecum to compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of documents in furtherance of this investigation. "Acting in my capacity as Committee Chair, on March 21st, I issued a subpoena to Carl Greene, Philadelphia Housing Authority's Executive Director to appear before the Committee, along with certain named documents on Thursday, March 27th at 5 o'clock in Room 696, City Hall. The subpoena was duly served on Mr. Greene. Yesterday, I received a request from Mark Woolley, acting counsel to PHA, to both rescind the Resolution and to withdraw the subpoena to Mr. Greene. In this request, Mr. Woolly purported to analyze City Council's power to conduct the investigation and found Council's authority wanting. Mr. Woolly's analysis is completely without foundation and an insult to this legislative body. "I have informed Mr. Woolly that I fully expect his client to appear as instructed in the 30 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 subpoena. The Philadelphia Housing Authority Board is ultimately responsible for the work of Philadelphia Housing Authority and its employees. As a member of that Board, you should not tolerate Mr. Greene disrespecting City Council or a subpoena issued by one of its duly authorized Committees. "Please notify Mr. Greene that you will insist on his appearance before the Law and Government Committee on March 27th, at 5 p.m. in Room 696, City Hall, along with the requested documents. "Thank you for your prompt cooperation with this request. "Sincerely, David Cohen."

To which came a response, which Mr. Kearney will now read. If you thought the first letter was disrespectful, note the change in the way the letter is addressed.

March 26, 2003, David Cohen, Council City, City Hall, Room 588, Philadelphia. This letter is on Philadelphia Housing Authority stationary from the office of the Executive Director, Carl R. Greene. 31 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 Regarding Resolution 030117 and subpoena for Carl Greene. "Dear Mr. Cohen, I am writing in response to your letter dated March 25, 2003, denying our request that you withdraw Resolution 7 030117 and the subpoena issued to Carl Greene which orders his appearance in Room 696 of City Hall on Thursday, March 27th, 2003 at 5:00 p.m. "Contrary to your contention and pursuant to our research, we do not believe that the subpoena issued to Mr. Greene is enforceable. I am therefore advising Mr. Greene, as his attorney, not to comply with the subpoena and not to appear at the hearings authorized by Resolution 030117. "The Philadelphia Housing Authority is not an agency of the City of Philadelphia, and its employees are not City employees. Rather, the PHA, is organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and exists to develop, acquire, lease and operate low-rent housing programs. The PHA receives its funding from the Department of Housing and Urban Development, as well as from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. PHA receives minimal funding from the City of Philadelphia. 32 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 "Section 2-400 of the Philadelphia City Charter limits the City Council's authority to, 'authorize inquiries and investigations,' to matters 'in aid of its legislative powers and function.' Because the operations of the PHA and, in particular, PHA's negotiations with its labor unions, are not within the legislative powers and functions of the City Council, it is PHA's position that the investigations authorized by Resolution 11 030117 and the related subpoena to Mr. Greene are improper. "Based on the foregoing, in addition to the reasons stated in my March 24th, 2003 letter to you, I have advised Mr. Greene not to appear at the hearings scheduled for Thursday March 27, 2003 at 5:00 p.m., in Room 626 of City Hall. We, therefore, respectfully request that the City Council end the investigation purportedly authorized by Resolution 20 030117. "In addition, we respectfully request that the subpoena issued to Carl Greene be rescinded. "Very truly yours, Mark Woolley, Acting General Counsel." 33 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 With a carbon copy to Honorable Nelson Diaz, Honorable Joyce Wilkerson and Honorable Jannie Blackwell.

You will note in the second response, I'm no longer Councilman Cohen; I'm just Mr. Cohen. So the arrogance of Mr. Woolley is very clear. Representative Washington.

What I was going to say was, since the State has a part in this -- at one point Representative Dwight Evans was looking into how maybe the State could take over the Housing Authority and operation of it. (Applause.)

All right. I think we're ready, Mr. Cronin, for your statement. We now have a clear record. Ms. Wilkerson, you know one of the questions will be, from the City's point of view, who runs PHA and what the authority is, as you understand it, to be divided between the executive Board and the executive director and the Board. Mr. Cronin, please proceed.

Thank you, sir. 34 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117

You will follow Mr. Cronin, just so you'll know the time element. Go ahead, Mr. Cronin.

I'll be sensitive to her time, so I'll be very brief. Let me say this, that I just have a very brief statement, and then I want to make a couple of comments about what is going on here today. The Philadelphia Housing Authority management negotiating team has been resistant on even compromising with respect to its proposed pension cut backs, despite the fact that we have made a reasonable counter-proposal, even offering to waive an entire year's salary increase in order to maintain the current level of pension benefits. This week we were told that no changes will be made to the PHA's pension proposal because the majority of other unions already accepted it. In other words, even if we wanted to negotiate on the terms of the plan amendment, we now have no opportunity to do so. In addition, we have asked PHA to clarify terminology it used in the proposed amendment. For example, we requested clarification 35 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 as to the meaning of the, quote, total covered payroll, end of quote. Total covered payroll, which is used in the proposed amendment, but not defined in the basic plan document. No response from management has been forthcoming. No response from management has been forthcoming. This means that we don't even know what PHA's management proposal actually means. And we have a pension lawyer, a specialist sitting with us in these negotiations, and he doesn't even know what it means. So that's my brief statement. But let me, if I could, Chairman Cohen, say a couple other things. We were here not that long ago and I think that myself and the other unions in District Council 47 and the other locals testified and I know that the police union testified and was responsive to questions that the various Council people had. And we appreciated that opportunity. It is clear to me as we go through this process, and we've gone through this process now for almost a year -- this a year's extension -- that we are -- I guess people would hope that we're going to just die and go away 36 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 or fall into line like some of the other unions, for whatever reason, they have done. I will assure everybody in this room that we are not going to go away. (Applause.)

I was hoping that Mr. Greene would testify, would come and testify, be able to able to answer question and that perhaps if we could get this pension proposal off the table we could have a decent shot at wrapping up a contract and getting on to the next one. But he has declined to appear before this Committee. Unless I'm wrong, I don't see any press here. Am I wrong on that? Is there print or electronic media here? They don't appear to be here, which is obviously disappointing to some of us, I guess in the union. So what the press generally says and what they seem to need is, they need to have an event, an occurrence, a happening before they will show up. So I'll tell what we're going to do. (Applause.)

This is not a threat. This is a concrete promise. Today Mr. Greene had an activity at Richard Allen Homes. For some reason, 37 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 we were told there were scores of police and barricades that were put up at Richard Allen Homes. My guess is that they were for us. That's okay. We weren't there. But since Mr. Greene won't come before this Committee, won't honor a lawful subpoena -- and since the police are here, they can make note of this, because I see several friends back there -- since he won't appear before this Committee, tomorrow, we will go to him. (Applause.)

So I'm putting everybody on notice, including my friends in the Civil Disobedience Squad and the Police Department, that you can count -- again, this isn't rhetoric -- you can count us being there in full force to confront Mr. Greene. We will be there. If he won't come to us, we'll go to him. (Applause.)

And let me further state that -- and I'm sure the press will show up for this. I'm sure they will. And since, again, people expect us to fall in line -- and let me make this real clear, because this is just as concrete as what I'm telling you is going to occur tomorrow. The 38 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 battle ground will not stay, men. If it can't be settled at the negotiating table, it will go into the legislative arena. It will go into the courts. It will continue, if it can, at the negotiating table and it will definitely be in the streets. (Applause.)

We have all kinds of elections coming up in this City in a short while. Well, let me tell you -- people say, well, what are the issues? And the members say, they what they want to know what the issues are. Well, this is an issue. As I said before, the last time we were here what we see, what we see as a labor union -- and I know what other union see -- is the whittling away of our healthcare benefits. That is clear. As clear as I am sitting here and you're sitting there. The whittling away of our healthcare benefits and more and more people without healthcare and more and more people that are, quote, gainfully employed have to pay more and more so it wipes out any wage increase that they might have. This is the fact, really, at PHA for anybody who wants Personal Choice. This is what's going on. Again the movement is not to just to be content with trying to 39 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 deprive people of their healthcare, but now trying to go after their pensions and that's exactly what the PHA proposal means. So, again, those people that are willing to give up 6, 7, $8,000 out of their pensions, what measly, little pensions they get, and this guy is trying to take it away. We won't stand for that one minute. I am telling you, it won't go away. (Applause.)

You know, we don't drive around in fancy cars. We don't live in luxury apartments. We don't have the big healthcare. All we want is just a little something, just a little something for ourselves and our families. And if we have to fight to get it -- pardon my language -- but, damn it, we will and we will show you that we can. So he won't come here. We'll go there. (Applause.)

Any questions you have, I'll answer them.

We'll hold the questions at the moment. I understand Tracy Jordan is here. Did you want to say something briefly 40 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 before Ms. Wilkerson? Mr. Jordan, you're President of the Housing Police?

Yes, President of Fraternal Order of Housing Police. First, I want to thank the esteemed Members of Council for having us here and trying to help us work out these problems that we have. Unfortunately, I always seem to follow Tom. He's pretty strong. But he pretty covered everything I had written down on my notes. Except I thought, he probably could have used some stronger language. Mr. Greene is a piece of work, no doubt. I didn't want to come here and character assassinate or, you know, do name calling or finger pointing, but look at the disrespect. He just says that, I don't have to come here. But as you remember at the last meeting, he said that his attorney was out of town. But he has at least three attorneys in the room. I don't know why they can't answer questions, because Mr. Jarin was going to answer questions last time. And I want to speak in reference to all this letter writing go back and forth. All he had to was sit down with the unions. What's up with 41 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 this letter writing campaign? It's just a total disrespect of not only you, but of us. (Applause.)

Yes, Mr. Greene is an outsider. He is from Detroit. And it seems like he's on a campaign to come here and destroy PHA workers. He might be building some beautiful buildings, spending a lot of money, but he's not giving it to the employees who are doing the work. He doesn't look good unless we do it for him. (Applause.)

He has a lot of degrees. He's been around. But he knows nothing about people. I have a family. And most of the people here have families and we don't have very much to look forward to. As you can tell, there are increases in gas and water and electric. There's a war going on, which makes it even more questionable about what the financial situation is going to be with social security in the future. But now he wants to attack the pension. It's ridiculous. It's reprehensible -- I'll take Jonathan Saidel's words. But Mr. Greene and some of his executives, they don't have a pension like we do. Why is that? Why 42 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 does Mr. Greene, who has been working here going on five years, who is pretty much a transient because he's gone from town to town, why does he get to leave town with a bag full of money and we end up with nothing? (Applause.)

The letter that he sent, it had some truth but, of course, it's full of falsehoods, just like his PR campaign. Mr. Greene spends a great deal of money on PR. Why is that? Why does Mr. Greene spend close to a million dollars on public relations? Why does he do that? We're not a Fortune 500 company. What is he advertising? We have homeless. They need houses. They provide it for them. Homeless people know where to go. Go down to PHA, sign your name, you're put on a list, get a house. He's not selling anything. So why spend such a great deal of money on trying to build up PHA's image? I really don't want to sit here and take up a great deal of time. It's just something that I know myself and members of my execute Board, we battle constantly over some of these issues. We're very passionate about a lot of these things because 43 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 we're in it. It's us. It's our future that they're talking about. And I don't want this individual to wreck our future and then roll out on a golden slide, like all the other big executives of Fortune 500 companies, which we are not. Enron, WorldCom, all these big companies. Mansions. Luxury cars. Why does Mr. Greene need three cars? That's paid for PHA. Why is that? Why does he have three cars. Why do the executives --

He has three cars?

Yes, he has three cars.

He has three cars.

Three cars.

Ms. Wilkerson, is that right?

I don't know.

What for, morning afternoon and evening? (Applause.)

Well, as you can tell, I had plenty of questions for Mr. Greene and I really wish that he was here. I made numerous attempts to meet with him throughout the year. He wouldn't. Now I see why. He's above meeting us little 44 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 underlings. He must be from another world. I just can't understand why a guy like this could ever come to Philadelphia and stay here so long. He should be ran out of here on a rail. Do you understand what I'm saying? (Applause.)

I also want to thank the members of the unions for coming out. I know you have other things that you need to be doing too, but this is very important. And I want to thank the Councilmembers again. Thank you. (Applause.)

You know, one of the things I'm known for is being a partisan Democrat. And a large D, Democrat. I've been a Democrat because the Democratic Party has a program and a policy that's for -- in the words, stands for ordinary people, for the folks who live in the neighborhoods, for working people, for union people, for poor people. And it just seems like a terrible thing to have a City so strongly Democratic with a Democratic Mayor that doesn't act at all like a Democratic City ought to act. (Applause.) 45 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117

It's really shameful that this kind of a meeting takes place in the City of Philadelphia where we ought to be a model of how the Democratic Party works on behalf of minority people, on behalf of women, on behalf of all citizens. And to have to go to a Democratic city committee meeting, as I did about days ago, as a 9 Democratic ward leader -- and I've been a ward 10 leader of the Democratic Party very proudly for 35 years, but I've got to tell you, I wasn't very proud of the fact 10 days ago to go to a meeting and to find the place besieged by people demanding the right to work without discrimination. People who felt that unions were discriminating against them. That's not why unions exist. They exist for the opposite reason. And a Democratic Party government has to show that it's democratic. Why is it that when Democrats are elected, so many of them seem to turn Republican as soon as they take office. And that is a question the people of Philadelphia may have to answer very soon, because this is a year when every issue is going to be before the people of Philadelphia in the election that takes place in the May primary and in the November election. And I 46 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 certainly hope that by the time of the November election the Democratic Party is going to cleanse itself of these unwholesome practices that frighten working people and make working people feel that it is the enemy, instead of the friend of working people. That's one of the major issues before us. Having rid myself of that feeling -- because it's a terrible feeling to be a Democrat and to feel my party, the party I've worked for for so many years, the party you've been working for for so many years, has turned its back on us, and is acting toward us like we're the enemy, when we're the people that installed that party into power because of its promises made to us. We're going to be working very hard to enable the Democratic Party to redeem itself. That redemption is going to turn Philadelphia around so that it's going to be a model City. When we say it's Democratic City, we're going to get to be proud of it. Ms. Wilkerson, excuse me for that oration before, but I just had to say that. We've known you for a long time. We know you're not totally your own boss because you work for people and you have an attorney, so we will respect your 47 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 rights. If there's anything you want to say first, we're going to permit you, but Councilwoman Blackwell wishes to be heard. Councilwoman Blackwell.

Thank you.

Tell us if you're here on a double purpose or a single purpose. We'll respect either one.

Thank you. I don't suppose that I cannot speak for double purpose. As we spoke about our last hearing, I succeeded Governor Rendell on the PHA Board. I fought to be on that Board because I believe in housing for everybody, from those who are homeless to those who want Philadelphia Housing Authority units and conventional housing and all the way up the line. So I fought very, very hard to be on this Board. And I'm very proud to be on the Philadelphia Housing Authority Board for all the possibilities it can bring. And obviously I'm proud to be a member of City Council, and the majority Chair and the majority leader in finance Chair. Having said that, at the last meeting 48 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 the Chair called on me. Councilman Cohen asked me to make a statement. At that time we said that we would try to meet to see if we could be helpful. Obviously, it didn't work or we wouldn't be here today. But I do want to report for the record, Councilman Cohen, that we did try to meet. We met with Rodney Little. We met with Tom and Mr. Jordan and Tom Cronin and Cathy and other members who are here to try to discuss. After a full briefing -- when we left here, I called Mr. Greene, asked him for a briefing, which I received, so that I could at least be literate on some of the issues. We did meet in the Caucus Room upstairs last week and had a discussion. The union members, Mr. Little and several others, about six members and I had three of my staff there to try to see if there was any way that we could be helpful in resolving the issue. Albeit, we were not helpful, although we tried. I did want to report to the Committee that we did try to meet our obligation and our responsibility. We wanted to be helpful. We've been through this pension fight before. I've been through this with so many of you in the room and we're sorry we weren't successful, but we're still committed to 49 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 doing all that we can, myself as the PHA Commissioner, as well as a Councilperson, to be successful. I still believe that there is a solution to every problem. As Lu used to say, if we all work together, everybody can win. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (Applause.)

Councilman Nutter.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the accommodation. I know that you have many questions, but we had talked about this hearing and I mentioned to you that I had a pressing engagement at 6:30. So I appreciate you taking me out of order. I just have a couple questions based on some of the statements and the letters, as well as the prime issue that brings us here today. And I wanted to ask Ms. Wilkerson, Chief of Staff Wilkerson, a couple questions. Ms. Wilkerson, based on some of the back and forth with the letters and also some of the testimony that we heard earlier, I just want to refresh my recollection with regard to Mr. Greene and his tenure at PHA. How long has Mr. Greene 50 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 actually been here? Do you remember when he started?

I don't remember. My name is Joyce Wilkerson. I'm Chief of Staff to Mayor Street. I believe Mr. Greene has been here approximately five years now. Five years this spring.

He came sometime in '98, if my recollection is correct.

March 1998. I've been advised it's March 1998.

And I seem to recall that -- technically, does Mr. Greene actually work for PHA or -- I seem to recall there was an arrangement made wherein he would actually have a multi-year contract with PHDC; is that my recollection?

I'd have to check on that. I think initially there was some arrangement. There was some residual arrangement that involved PHDC. I don't remember the details of that. And I don't know that that's still in place.

Okay. I think 51 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 initially it was for the purpose of trying to have a multi-year arrangement that provided some amount of continuity and ability, but I think PHA cannot engage in multi-year contracts and so the arrangement was to do a contract through PHDC. Do you recall that?

I don't remember the details of that. I'd have to get you something.

Do you know whether there is any contract presently with Mr. Greene and PHDC or does he actually receive --

I believe it's a contract directly between the Housing Authority and Mr. Greene, but I can get you the details on that.

Does the contract have a term?

I believe it's a year to year contract.

And what is Mr. Greene's salary?

Mr. Greene's current salary is approximately $179,000 annually.

I'm sorry. I couldn't hear the rest. 52 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117

It's approximately $179,000 a year and then there are provisions for bonuses depending on performance. It's a contract that is substantially lower than housing authority directors for housing authorities of comparable size.

Can you provide to us through the Chair a complete and signed copy of the contract, any amendments or addendums or other components of that particular contract, as well as any listing of other benefits? I heard the issues about the cars. I don't know anything about that, but if there are any car issues, housing issues or other components, other contracts, I'd appreciate it through the Chair if we could receive those documents. Now, with regard to the present issue, when we were here, I think it was 2 weeks ago or 10 days ago, the issue with regard to the pension proposal, can you tell us for the record and I think you -- I don't think -- I know you're also a member of the PHA Board?

Yes.

You're still Vice 53 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 Chair?

I'm Chairman of the Board of the Housing Authority.

What is the proposal with regard to the pension?

When I came here I spoke with the Chair and indicated that I was willing to come as in my capacity as Chief of Staff to the Mayor. I'm not prepared to talk about the negotiations that are ongoing.

I understand. I apologize. I wasn't aware of that conversation. I respect your conversation with the Chair. I don't wish to talk about the negotiations, but I was wanting to just better understand what the proposal is. The proposal itself is not a secret, is it?

I'm not prepared to engage in a conversation or a discussion or testify with respect to the terms of the negotiation, the positions of the parties.

Councilwoman Tasco.

Can I have a point of order, please, Mr. Chairman? I am not a member of the Committee. I am just a member of City 54 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 Council who came in to hear what's going on. I have a question. Since the other unions have signed the agreement and they're not in negotiations, could you tell us what you signed with them?

I believe we're making available to the Committee copies of the contracts with the other unions. I am not in a position to cite chapter and verse, all the terms and conditions that were agreed to in those contracts.

No contracts have been made available to the Committee.

We're going to make those available today. I've directed that they bring those contracts here and make them available.

Thank you.

Councilman Nutter.

Well, Mr. Chairman, again, I know that there was -- we know from the Chief of Staff's testimony that there was a conversation between Chief of Staff Wilkerson and yourself with regard to the capacity in which she is testifying, and I think she's also laid out what she's prepared to discuss or not discuss and I 55 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 respect her prerogative in that regard. My questions were in this area were around the terms the proposal. It will be difficult for me to ask further questions about the pension issue if the Chief of Staff is not in a position or prepared to continue that discussion.

May I suggest, Councilmen Nutter, that you ask the questions and Ms. Wilkerson will make her decision as to each question. I believe your questions are appropriate and she can answer them if -- I understood you wanted to know in general whether or not --

Well, I'll get to that, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

All right. Why don't you ask -- I don't want Ms. Wilkerson to be in a position where she is violating the instructions that the attorney gave her.

I understand.

Mr. Chairman, I came out of respect for this Body. You represented to me that you were interested in having me come in my capacity as Chief of Staff and I'm here in that capacity. And I would ask that that commitment be 56 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 respected at this hearing.

Mr. Chairman, let me ask this one last question then. Ms. Wilkerson, with regard to the pension issue, in your capacity as the Chief of Staff, are you aware of any discussions, ideas, or proposals that would result in any proposal to have the terms and conditions of the PHA pension become applicable to the City of Philadelphia pension?

What I can tell you is that I serve in my capacity as a PHA Board member in a way that's consistent with traditional Board members. I have a fiduciary obligation to the Philadelphia Housing Authority and that's distinct from the role that I play as Chief of Staff. It's something that gets played out. It's a conflict that's, at times, hard. As the Councilwoman can tell you, we've even had to seek guidance from HUD from time to time in an effort to keep the roles distinct. And in appreciation for the fact that it is a separate authority, its own corporate entity. And that kind of provision is also something that exists with respect to just a whole host of issues, and there is nothing that seeks to drive a 57 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 consolidated position. That has not happened around any issues, any labor issues.

Madam Chief of Staff, you are rapidly attaining -- you're one the best. (Applause.)

I know you said something --

What I don't want to do so talk specifically about these negotiations. There is a separation.

I understand. You don't want to be over in negotiations. I'm not going to get you to talk about negotiations, so I'm not trying to talk about negotiations. What I am trying to understand is, on the pension issue -- and I know you have a dual capacity here -- so what I am trying to understand is, in terms of whatever the proposal is on the PHA pension, what I want to know is on the City side of your dual role, has there ever been a discussion or a meeting or a conversation or a suggestion or an idea that the PHA pension proposal may become an idea or a suggestion or a proposal to be utilized on the City pension 58 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 system?

Let me be more succinct. No. 5

Okay. Well, then based on that answer I would say if it is being proposed for PHA for whatever reason, is there a reason -- and I have to believe that it's related to cost or how the pension fund is performing. Is there a reason why it would not be proposed for the City pension? I mean, the shorter version of the question is, if it's good enough for PHA, which is a smaller system, why wouldn't it be utilized for the City systems, which is a larger system and ostensibly there would be commensurate savings?

I am not prepared to really talk about the City's pension fund. They are a completely different pension fund. They're virtually no terms and conditions that are the same. The health of the funds is completely different. The time of vesting is different.

I understand. I'm just trying to understand the distinctions between, you know, if one idea is good over here for one system, then is it good enough on the other side. 59 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 One last question.

As you know, the City's pensions are -- the terms and conditions have a lot to do with the City Council as opposed to --

Is there a Board over the pension for PHA?

PHA has a Pension Board.

Is it separate and apart from the PHA Board? Is there any overlap?

I believe there is no 12 overlap currently. I can get you a document.

I have a document. It appears to be a nine-member Board?

I don't remember right off.

Are there any members of the union on the Board?

I don't know who's on the Board right now.

The document I have says, Philadelphia Housing Authority Pension Board, nine-member Board. Michael Leadhead, Michael Crofton, Anthony Accioni (ph), James Jones, Helen Ferris, Carl Greene, Jerry Meadows, Keith Caldwell, 60 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 Sam Staten, Sr. Now, what unions are covered by the Philadelphia Housing Authority pension? Don't try to avoid it. I don't bite. You might as well come on up.

Mark Foley is one of the lawyers who represents the Housing Authority.

Again, I'm looking at -- I know the City pension system well. I know how many reps there are and all four our municipal unions represented on the Board. So I'm just trying to understand the representation issue. Please identify yourself for the record.

I'm Mark Foley of Klett, Rooney, Lieber & Schloring, and counsel to the Housing Authority.

Speak directly into the microphone.

I have been involved in the negotiations for the Housing Authority.

I know we're not going to talk about negotiations, but I am trying to understand, how many unions are there at PHA?

There is AFSCME District Council 47, which is Mr. Cronin's union, and there 61 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 are two locals within that union, 2187 and 2186. There is AFSCME District Council 33, which is Mr. Matthews union. There is the Building and Construction Trades Council of Philadelphia, which is headed by Mr. Gillespie and all the constituent trades within that group. There is also the Fraternal Order of Housing Police, which is Mr. Jordan's union. And I believe -- there's one other union that is that negotiates with the Building and Construction Trades Council and that is the Fireman and Oilers. And they have a historical quirk; they have their own separate collective bargaining agreement. And I believe that is all of the unions at the Housing Authority.

Who appoints the members of the Board?

I don't remember that right off. I know that there's a resolution that prescribes the membership. I'd have to provide that resolution to you.

Let me ask one last question. James Jones, General Manager, Human Resources, 2133 Arch Street; is that a PHA person?

Yes. 62 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117

So what I see on this list is a nine-member Board, seven of whom work for PHA. And you have a Michael Crofton, Philadelphia Trust Company, and Sam Staten, Sr., for Local 332. I asked you how people get on and we're not exactly sure at the moment how people get appointed to the Pension Board. Is there any particular reason why the constituent unions or their representatives of the bulk of the work force are not on the Pension Board?

My understanding is that it has been that way for quite sometime. I don't know the origins of that.

So we're just talking about tradition?

Well, I thought the Councilman's question was, how did that come to be, and I really don't know the answer.

But you also don't know how people get appointed to the Board? Does the PHA governing Board appoint people to the Pension Board?

I'm trying to be responsive to your question. There is counsel to the Pension 63 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 Board, and that is not me. So I don't know the answer to a lot of the questions that the Councilman is asking.

Okay. My last question, I promise, Mr. Chairman. Chief of Staff Wilkerson, can you provide to the Committee a listing of all of the attorneys who work on behalf of both the Housing Authority Board and the Housing Authority Pension Board, what their roles are, terms and conditions of their work, or what it is that they've been assigned to work on and the dollar value associated with their contracts? You can provide that to the Chair?

Yes.

Thank you. Mr. Chairman, thank you.

Councilwoman Tasco, please.

Good afternoon, Ms. Wilkerson. I just want to ask you about process. I'm going to try to respect your role here as Chief of Staff, although it's very difficult to separate those roles out. The Pension Board is appointed by? Who appoints the Pension Board? 64 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117

They don't know.

I was going to provide the Committee with a copy of the resolution.

Oh, did he ask that question earlier? I know we have the list. I just want to know.

There's a resolution 9 that identifies -- I think some are positions as of right, but I don't remember off the top of my head the exact --

Is it the Pension Board that determines what the pension negotiations will be? Who makes that determination of what the proposals will be? What are their duties? What is the duty of the Pension Board? What are the duties of the Pension Board.

I'll provide you with a document, so I'm not trying to recall from the top of my head what the responsibilities are. I'll provide the documentation that identifies the roles and responsibilities of the Pension Board.

Who negotiation the contracts?

The contracts are 65 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 negotiated by the Housing Authority through its executive director. The contracts are approved by the Board of Directors.

Of?

Of the Housing Authority.

What role does the Pension Board play?

The Pension Board really plays no role in the collective bargaining negotiations. The Board administers the funds, deals with the investment decisions, processes claims, conducts audits, things of that sort. Sort of the normal things a Pension Board would do.

So they have no 17 role in negotiating or had no role negotiating the contract that has been signed by some of the unions in other negotiations that are going on with the other unions?

That's right. Yes.

So it is the executive director of the PHA along with the labor unions that negotiate the contracts and then the Board of PHA ratifies the negotiations? 66 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117

The Board approves contracts. The contracts also, I believe, have to go to HUD for HUD's review and approval.

So with the exception of these locals that are here today, the other contracts have been signed and approved by HUD?

Yes.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Ms. Wilkerson. Mr. Woolley, is that the correct spelling?

No. It's actually Mr. Foley, Councilman.

Oh. Sorry. You're not Mr. Woolley?

I am not Mr. Woolley; I am Mr. Foley.

Ms. Wilkerson, on this letter dated March 26th, I'd just like to get your impression. Do you believe this Council has the right to bring PHA and question the policies of PHA as it affects the citizens of Philadelphia? You're taking too long. A yes or no 67 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 answer. It's either yes or no. 3

I think that there probably are matters that the Housing Authority is involved in that the City Council can explore with the Housing Authority.

Do you believe City Council has a right, a duty, to look into the public policies of PHA as it affects the citizens of Philadelphia and their employees? I understand that they get their funding from the federal government. The Board is appointed by City officials. It is City officials who monitor, supervise and run the agency. Do you believe -- and it's just a simple yes or no answer -- that this Body has a right to look into the public policies of PHA? Yes or no. 18

I gave you my answer.

No, you didn't give me your answer. You said that there are certain matters -- I said, do we have a right as a legislative body to look into the public policies of PHA?

I think there probably are a lot of areas where this Board has the 68 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 authority to explore the policies.

You cannot select and choose. I mean, we either have or we don't have the right.

That's my answer.

What was your answer? I'm sitting right in front of the witness and I can't hear her because she's not speaking into the mike. Please speak into the microphone.

My answer is I believe there are areas where this Council probably does have the right to investigate the practices and policies of the Housing Authority. That's my answer.

Do you believe that an attorney of PHA's can tell this legislative body, fully elected by the people of Philadelphia, that we have embarked on something that is not within our legislative powers and functions? And not only that, he respectfully requests that the City Council end the investigation authorized by Resolution 23 030117. I have never, ever encountered such an arrogant statement from a lawyer from a public agency. 69 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 (Applause.)

Not even the Mayor of this City has ever told us end one of our hearings. And an attorney -- is this approved by the Board? Is this the policy of the Board of PHA?

This is legal advice.

I didn't ask that. I said, is this the policy of the Board of PHA? Does the Board of PHA say this body has no jurisdiction or no power to investigate public policies of PHA. Has anyone taken a position on that?

The Board has not taken a position.

I think you should. I think you should as a Board. (Applause.)

I want clarification from the Board of PHA whether this Board believes that City Council has the right to look the into public policies of PHA and its effect in the employees and citizens of the City of Philadelphia. This is not acceptable. (Applause.)

Let me put the 70 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 question a little bit different from the way Councilman Ortiz asked it, though I felt his questions were very appropriate. Tell me, who is the boss? Who gives whom direction? Does the Board tell the executive director what to do or does executive director tell the Board?

The Board of the Housing Authority sets the policy governing the Housing Authority. The Housing Authority also operates within the framework established by the federal government. And so the federal government provides the vast majority of the funding to the Housing Authority. The federal government audits the Housing Authority. The federal government, for example, audits the personnel practices of the Housing Authority and provides certain framework within which the Housing Authority operates. So PHA is responsive to any number of different authorities. State law also is something that regulates the operation of the Housing Authority.

The attorney who wrote on behalf of the Board, was it Mr. Woolley? Mark Woolley.

Mr. Chairman. 71 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117

Tell me who directed him -- who gave him instructions? Did the Board tell him, let City Council know that we think they don't have authority? Did the Board reach that decision?

The Board didn't take a position on that issue.

The Board did not?

I think they should.

Well, I not only think they should, but what's the purpose of having a Board? (Applause.)

I want everybody in the audience to know I have and I think all the members of the Council have a high regard for the witness. She's worked in City Council for many years. She did an outstanding job. Now, when you work for somebody you have to follow their policies. When she works for the Mayor, she may have to follow different policies than when she worked for the City Council. But what we're trying to do is not embarrass you. What I'm trying to do is find out who makes the decisions for the Board. For PHA in 72 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 this area. Your answers are accurate. I can understand sometimes the Housing Authority may have full power to do and instruct the Board as to what to do or instruct the executive director. But in this case, where PHA is being asked to appear here, who had the authority to tell Mr. Greene or Mr. woolly that they had the freedom to write these letters to Council?

I don't want to --

Now, that would be in your jurisdiction as Chief of Staff.

With Board hat on. I don't want to set Mr. Greene adrift. He has kept the Board apprised. The union did appear at a PHA Board meeting and presented the union's position at the Board meeting. I did know that Mr. Greene was not going to be appearing here, so I don't want to imply that Mr. Greene was acting completely outside the purview of the Board. There was no Board resolution, for example, saying the Housing Authority will not appear in City Council. That did not happen. But I personally was aware that the Housing Authority was not going to be coming here to testify about the negotiations and support that 73 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 decision.

Well, tell me if this Committee decides -- or the Chairman of the Committee as authorized by the resolution decides that the Board members should be subpoenaed, because I just think it's awfully important for us to know who sets the power, and we have to know is it the Board or is it the director. Because if the Board agrees with the director, despite the fact that I know each member of the Board very well over long periods of time, I may find that, in addition to requesting that Mr. Greene be disciplined for discourteous conduct toward the City Council and disrespectful conduct, it might involve members of the Board, but I just don't know who is responsible for this action. Did the Mayor authorize this?

The Mayor is not involved in this. The Mayor actually directed me to come today. But for that -- we don't want to have a donnybrook with City Council. The Housing Authority has tried very hard to work more closely with Councilmembers over the course of the last five years than it has historically. So what we don't want is a donnybrook. We think that PHA is a very 74 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 valuable partner, particularly in the neighborhoods of Philadelphia, and we value the relationship that the Housing Authority has developed with the City. We think it serves the citizens of Philadelphia. We provide a better housing product. We're coordinating on social service issues. The Police Department --

Please. Please. Everybody be in order. I think what the audience is saying, they think the City Administration ought to put its money where its mouth is. (Applause.)

Because you might be right in theory, but certainly the way in which it's been reported that PHA is acting is not as if it wants to treat people the way the City Council thinks people ought to be treated. And, therefore, that's the reason we extended the courtesy of inviting Mr. Greene to come and we got this very terse letter from an outside attorney. I think it was Kenneth Jarin, if my memory is right. The very first communication from an outside firm saying, I'm out of town. Telling us, oh, he's got important business out of town, much more important than City 75 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 Council's business; therefore, nobody could come. We ate that. We didn't like to eat it, but we ate it. We then went on and politely invited Mr. Greene. When we get a letter -- maybe because somebody was worried about our questioning you about phase -- this time from a house counsel apparently, saying that he's not going to come. And then we did what we finally had to do, which was the subpoena. It is not pleasant in government to be subpoenaing people that we'd like to regard as colleagues, working together with us for the betterment of the City. But when they try to tell us to butt out, that we have no business making a study, that they are imperial in their own right and make their own laws, that makes it pretty difficult. So we then subpoenaed. And then to get this kind of letter, two letters from Mr. Woolley, I don't know whether I've ever seen the man -- and I'm told he's in the room here -- does he want to come forward and explain? (Applause.)

There's only two bodies that can separate me from my being a Councilman; one is the Lord, who has the power to do 76 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 it at any time, and the other is voters. But Mr. Woolley did it in the second letter. I was no 4 longer Councilman Cohen. I was just Mr. Cohen. I had no title. It was not as if I was Chairman of this Committee, because he never referred to the committee. He just referred to Mr. Cohen. Taking away my post. He's a little premature.

Councilman , I think that --

Really, the behavior of PHA at best has been abominable.

I would hope that this would not destroy what we've been trying to create as a very productive relationship. I think that the collective bargaining process presents probably a very unique situation that is actually between the union and management and that relationship is a relationship that is probably unique. I can't think of very many other issues where the Housing Authority would assert the kind of position that it's asserted in this instance.

When will Mr. Greene be here, ready with the documents? When would he come here with the documents? Tomorrow, Monday, 77 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 Tuesday?

I think we might have them now.

And if Mr. Woolley comes forward, we'd like to know the answer?

Councilman, I had asked somebody to run back to my office to bring you, as Chief of Staff asked us to do, to bring copies of the contracts. And the copies that were in my office have my scribbling on them, so we'll get some clean copies and we can get those to you first thing in the morning.

That might handle the duces tecum part, but how about the basic subpoena part?

The other thing I wanted to just amplify in terms of what Joyce had been saying, is that we treat and consider the collective bargaining process to be something --

That you can exclude City Council from?

Well, I think what I'd like --

You can from the 78 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 process. You don't have to exclude us. We stay away from it. But when City employees complain about the way they're treated during the process, then we have a very strong and legitimate interest in finding out what's wrong with that process.

And I respect the Councilman's view. My own experience is that the best way to settle collective bargaining agreements are for the parties to sit and work through the issues and we've been doing that. (Audience reacts.)

Not successfully, because aren't you a year late? (Applause.)

Councilman, we have worked through the process with two of our unions already. The process is continuing.

But Mr. Foley, I respect your opinion about your powers and your views, that it would be better to leave you alone. That's your view. But we're asking you to respect our view, that it's important that we get involved to the point of making sure that there is a process ongoing. The content is within PHA and the union's 79 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 powers. But we want to make sure that contracts get signed on time. And we want to know if they don't get signed on time, whose fault it is. We will be as bitter and as complaining toward the union, if they are at fault, as we are with you. But we don't have any authority over the union. They are not related to City, but we believe we have authority to determine why an agency with the important duties of PHA has failed to come to an agreement with its employees. And, secondly, we want to know because -- I will state this now as my opinion. It is my opinion that what is going on in PHA today is an effort to see how far the City Administration can move in the direction of terminating the pension system for all employees in Philadelphia. (Applause.)

It makes no sense to me that the City would permit PHA employees to suffer a different fate from all other employees. So you are using PHA as a testing ground to see how far you can get by. You have apparently intimidated, scared, or wrongly convinced other labor unions to give up their rights. I note that a 80 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 number of the unions involved are unions closely allied with the person reporting the press to be very influential in the City Administration currently. He's the head of the Redevelopment Authority, the building trades unions. For the life of me, I cannot understand how a union that fights so hard for prevailing wage rates would permit any one of its affiliates to agree to a diminution of pension rights. (Applause.)

And so at this point I don't believe that that occurred. That's why the subpoenas went to the documents. We've got to see that in writing and deal with the union. The union fights very hard for the high wage rates. And I want to know, if it happened, why did they change their position with respect to PHA employees? The only thing that makes sense is that usually in agreements between people, there are two sides. And this may be the other side, that in return for support from the unions, maybe the unions are taking a position which may not be in the interest of labor movement. I don't want to reach that conclusion. But tell me, does it make sense to impose -- to take 81 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 away pension rights of PHA employees and let everybody else's pension rights remain the same? Of course it makes no sense. The PHA employees are now guinea pigs to see how far can this Administration get with diminishing the pension rights. Now that's my concern. So that's the reason we're so interesting in knowing about these contracts. And these are contracts that were put forward by Mr. Greene or by Mr. Woolley. I don't know who decided it ought to go in the letter, but it's in the name of Mr. Greene, though the letter is signed by Mr. Woolley. You have said in that letter that this is proof of the fact that cutting pension rights is okay with unions, and that's an absolute disgrace. It couldn't be okay with any legitimate union, could it? Would any legitimate union agree to say that pension rights are going to be capped by given year, whether it's 2003 or 2005 and that continuous work thereafter means nothing? You're destroying the whole pension system. And if Philadelphia does it, it's a bad sign for the whole nation. (Applause.)

This isn't Bush Land. 82 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 This is Philadelphia where I've so proudly asserted at so many meetings, Philadelphia is a labor city. (Applause.)

We always respect labors' rights. Are you trying to tell me I've been wrong all these years, that Philadelphia is a City that takes advantage of being Democratic, while it actually destroys workers' rights? Is that what you're trying to tell us? We can't believe that. Therefore, we want this to come out in the open and we want any effort to hurt pension rights to be made known publicly to everybody in the City. (Applause.)

I like what Ms. Wilkerson said when she said PHA wants to cooperate with us, but I don't see any signs of cooperation except by kneeling and surrendering all of our rights. And to give up everything you have in the name of cooperation, to me isn't cooperation. It's self-execution. And workers are not going to execute themselves because they have themselves and their families to support. And it's a disgrace that the City of Philadelphia is doing this. If in fact that's the case, that's what these hearings are for. 83 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 Is this the case? And we needed the documents. We were ready to apologize to PHA today, had Mr. Greene come and said, this is wrong. We were joking when we wrote in the letter that unions agreed to give up their pension rights. So you see our frustration. We just can't understand how the City of Philadelphia can let itself be in this position. I kind of joked -- and Governor Rendell said it. He said the Mayor sometimes is his own worst enemy. I said in a different way. I said, I think Mayor Street ought to stop being the campaign manager for Sam Katz. Because that's what's happening here. (Applause.)

I think it's terrible. That's our dilemma. We thank you for the documents if you get them to us. We wanted to have them today so we could get an answer today. But we'd like to have them. We've got to have Mr. Greene here to answer, and we need an answer. Councilwoman Blackwell, I felt very content with PHA when I learned you and Joyce Wilkerson and the others were on the Board. I've known all of you well. I think very highly of you. 84 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 I thought for the first time, like Joyce Wilkerson said, I thought PHA was in excellent hands. But if Carl Greene is your boss, then I think I would want to reconsider whether he'd be the kind of boss I would want to work for. (Applause.)

But if you are his boss, then I think you have the power, your Board has a power, to act as a Board and to correct the situation. And then we can recess these hearings and all go home and have a good dinner. That's our problem.

Councilman, I'd just wanted to add, in terms of process, to make the Committee a aware that federal mediators, people who are skilled and experienced in the collective bargaining process, are involved at the request of the unions. And we've met with them and we're continuing to talk to them and be at their direction and suggestion. And so in terms of process --

That's on negotiations. We applaud that. It has nothing whatever to do with our demand for Mr. Greene to appear here. He's been appointed by the Mayor, by 85 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 the former Mayor. He has a contract with the City of Philadelphia. He's doing City work and he's trying to say that City Council has no power whatever. And we have to absolutely reject that. When he gets a subpoena from us, we expect him to come in and apologize, apologize for his action and the action of other PHA employees in denying our authority. And from there we can go on.

I think the concern is driven by the process. The collective bargaining process, it's a delicate, sacred process. The parties, the unions, and the management, they get together; they talk; they try to have discussions. And my experience is that it's difficult to get contracts in this setting.

Mr. Foley, for 30 years -- I think my labor experience, Mr. Foley, is longer than yours.

It is. And that's why I thought you would respect that process.

For 30 years I was counsel for Local 107 of Electrical Workers. I spent much time in negotiations and arbitrations with them. I think I know the field. We're not 86 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 interfering at all with negotiations, mediation, or arbitration or whatever applies, but we are determined, as a City Legislative Body, to carry out our duty, and we resent deeply the effort of PHA to use the negotiating process to deny City Council the information it needs to conduct City business and we're not going to permit you to do it, no matter what the cost may be to the City. (Applause.)

I just wanted to say that we'll get those contracts to you. Clean copies. We'll get those to you first thing.

I wish you would raise again with Mr. Greene the question of coming, because I am going to be instructing the counsel for the City Council to immediately begin court action on the subpoenas, unless we receive word that Mr. Greene is going to be honoring them quickly. And we're going to be pursuing as vigorously as we can. I'm going to be sending out all kinds of alert information to all the workers in every union in the City, telling them my view as to why this has occurred, and that this is the effort of the City to jettison the whole pension system. That's what I 87 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 think is happening. (Applause.)

Now, is Mr. Woolley in the room? I would ask him to come forward for the purpose of answering one question in his letter. Would you come forward? You've heard my characterizations of your letters, so I'm not going to repeat them. In your letters you say the City gives minimal funding. Can you explain what you mean and how much is minimal funding? You use that phrase in two letters. What is the amount of the minimal funding that the City expends?

I did not tally the amount.

Well, how do you know it's minimal?

Because through the amount of money that we receive from HUD and our operating, as well as our capital fund, the money we receive from the City typically involves our social services programs, which in the scheme of things is a small percentage of what we -- 88 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117

I'm not interested in your calculation as to whether it's a small percentage or not. I'm interested in actual dollars. I would also like to know what portion of the Chief of Staff's time is spent. I'd like to know the portion of the Councilwoman's time. They get salaries from the City. That's money invested in the City. I would like to know -- and there are many other City services made available. I would like to know what the total cost of the contribution by the City is to public housing in the City of Philadelphia. (Applause.)

We will get that information for you.

I will want to know, who picks up the trash, how that's paid for; how are the water bills paid for that the City bills everybody else for; how do they bill PHA and what do they get. I would like to know the cost of sewage, the cost of gas, if gas is the energy used. I would like a complete accounting because my understanding of minimal funding is quite different from yours. In my judgment, the sum is quite large. You spend a 89 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 lot of City money. You get a lot of City support, and most important of all, you serve the largest single portion of people Philadelphia of any landlord. You're the biggest landlord in the City of Philadelphia. More people depend on PHA for housing than any other person. So don't try to trivialize the role of the City of Philadelphia in your agencies. We would be remiss if we didn't thoroughly investigate you if you were a private agency. We would be totally derelict of duty if we let you run your own show without checking on you as we're doing now. And everything that's happened is proof of the fact that our checking on you, if anything, has long been overdue. (Applause.)

Can we have an answer on Mr. Greene? Is he going to come? Are we going to proceed? I'd like to have an answer as quickly as possible because I will immediately -- we're going to recess this after Mr. Little testifies. Rodney Little, the Vice President of the Fraternal Order of Housing Police is here and I want to recognize him and I'll just ask him to be a bit brief. After that we're going to terminate it. But 90 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 I would respectfully request that I would like to have by tomorrow at noon a statement from the City with respect to whether Mr. Greene is going to appear together. He doesn't have to present the documents if you are going to present them separately or whether he's not. And if not, please take notice that the City Council attorneys will be instructed to prepare papers for court beginning tomorrow afternoon if we don't hear from you. (Applause.)

Whatever the time it's going to take, it's going to have to take. Whatever the impact on the people of Philadelphia will be, so be it. Because you're making that decision. We're not. So we leave to you the decision of whether we can begin the development of a cooperative relationship or whether we've got to get to the core of all of the questions we've raised today. Thank you for coming, Ms. Wilkerson, Mr. Foley and Mr. Woolley. Mr. Woolley, my request from you is, sir, a complete tally of all of the funds for the last Fiscal Year that can be attributed to the City 91 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 of Philadelphia, including that portion of the time spent by Board members who hold other positions because when they get the money they're only getting money because they're doing City of Philadelphia business. And if they're not doing City of Philadelphia business, then we've got to take that money that's paid to them away from them. (Applause.)

And my counsel informs me that when we talk about money, it includes in kind contributions, in addition to cash, just like the finance campaign committee reports. They have to list in kind contribution, in addition to cash. That's what we would like. Is that clear, Mr. Woolley?

Yes, it is, Councilman.

Thank you. Mr. Little.

Thank you, Councilman.

Identify yourself by name and then proceed.

My name is Rodney Little, Vice President, Fraternal Order of Housing Police. First, let me recognition to City 92 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 Council members for allowing us this golden opportunity to come before you to raise our concerns and issues. Also, we want to recognize some of the tenant Council leaders, basically tenant Council 7 presidents in public housing who are behind both 8 unions in regards to our fight. Some of them had to 9 leave. But let's give them a round of applause. 10 (Applause.) 11

And also to our members, we 12 want to thank you for coming out in this process. 13 First, let me say I'm going to take off 14 one hat as a minister and I'm going to put on a hat 15 as minister of defense. You know, because my 16 7-year-old could have answered your questions better 17 than what you just heard. 18 Now, Mark Foley is a pathological and 19 habitual liar. (Applause.)

The process in which he's talking about is PHA sitting in one room and we're sitting in the other. That practice has been for the past 5 negotiations where they come and just throw down a paper and say, this is my proposal. 93 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 And they don't want to entertain any counter proposals whatsoever. But I must necessarily express very emphatically that a great man, Martin Luther King, once said that injustices anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. And PHA has exemplified injustice all over this City, and that's why we're here, Councilman, to raise our concerns and to engage in -- and like I say, right now, I'm in the military. I'm about to go to war. And you think that I have to go away and fight for a country and then come back where I'm losing close $7,600 a year in terms of my pension, something that I have worked and am striving hard for, for my kids. I refuse to sit up here and lay down. (Applause.)

You have these outsiders coming in to this City -- and I don't believe that Mark Woolley votes yet. I don't know if he has his voters' registration card. But what I'm saying is, I'm a taxpayer and they have blocked us out of the process in terms of making decisions in public housing to the point where we can't even attend -- as a direct result of these City Council hearings, we can't even attend the commissioner's Board 94 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 meetings. And that is a public process. Even today where we are allowed to take union days -- and I'm the Vice President. They have gall to say, no, you can't take off tomorrow to engage in no kind of union business whatsoever. We went on the radio show that Carl Greene has on Wednesdays, and he had gall to have Internal Affairs stop down here -- and you might as well say the lock-up process -- which he engaged and had us arrested, so to speak. Because we called the radio show and asked specific questions pertaining to contracts, pertaining to police. Yet he talks about he has no money. Now, you have $700 million that was given to him by HUD for move to work. You have over a $175 million in bonds here in Philadelphia. Not only is that process going on, he's also just allowed the individual workers in public housing to all be fitted for uniforms, and not only are they going to be fitted, they also enter into a contract with a cleaning company to clean the uniforms for over a million contract a year -- excuse me, 2 million. And I'm saying, he talks about he has no money for the union, but yet he can come in, Mark Woolley can come in, and they 95 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 borrow money from out of my pension to create a deferred Comp for them. And they probably are getting a 2 percent interest on that money. So they alluded to, oh, Mr. Greene lost money this year. But I'm sure he made a lot of money last year and the year before that. And not only is he continuing to make money, because he's still allowed to borrow money from my pension to put the money back in his. But yet, they want us to sit up here and say that, oh, its business as usual. That we have no rights to sit up here and question those individuals on the Board. No way whatsoever. Now, we asked that, yes, let us allow representation from the union bodies to be on the Board, but they refused to even address that. We're saying that, you're spending my money, and I'm taxpayer. I have a right to know where my money is going. I have a right to say where it can go and how I'm going to spend it. I'm just here to say that as minister of defense, we're going to hold court on Broad Street. So look out because here we come. (Applause.)

The hearing will stand in recess until the further call of the Chair. 96 3/27/03 - LAW & GOVERNMENT - RES. 030117 I'll expect to hear by noon tomorrow from Mr. Foley. (Council adjourned at 7:15 p.m.) - - - 97 C E R T I F I C A T I O N I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of March 27, 2003, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of the same. RE: COMMITTEE ON LAW AND GOVERNMENT ___________________________ Lisa C. Bradley, RPR and Notary Public