Would there be anything wrong with an amendment to say that there will be special consideration given or that this provision has no application to the passage of candles during religious ceremonies? Because I've never heard of any 85 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING fire resulted during religious ceremonies.
Councilman, with all due respect, I haven't heard of any candle arrests yet either.
I have not heard of any fires that were a direct result of people passing them either. But I assume that there are some national statistics since it was placed in the Code. Locally in Philadelphia, I'm not aware of a problem.
I'm concern because -- I'll accept your word about common sense, but some day there might be others in a important position that may be busy when common sense is handed out and may not get their share.
I would suspect the Supreme Court would hear about that if they shut down a religious ceremony because candles.
The representative from Licenses and Inspections has indicated to me, who is the primary enforcing arm of this, that they only do things like this on a 86 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING case-by-case basis. We are not aware that anyone has ever been issued a violation for this.
Well, I was wondering whether the Department would propose am amendment. I don't want handcuff them. And I don't know of every religious ceremony, but I think there ought to be some provision indicating that there will be special consideration given to use of lighted candles during religious ceremonies. You know, that it may be permitted under certain circumstances?
Well, there are some things in the Code that are placed there -- well, you're bringing up the instance where a variance would be granted or on the Fire Department or the Department of Licenses and Inspections would grant an exception for a particular instance. We do this occasionally for the Chinese New Year where they will use strings of fire crackers for a marriage 87 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING ceremony.
What do you do like the fireworks down at the Vet? They're illegal but the get permits to do it because professionals come in and --
Can't we just amend the code to say "Under certain terms and conditions," and then administratively Licenses and Inspections can specify the incidents where this will be allowed so we don't have to get into legislation. My concern is if you require permits, then you're just adding another level of bureaucracy to the Code.
You could do something like that saying that "where approved by the Department."
And then the Department itself can administratively as opposed to creating another -- 88 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING
It would be a matter of them sending us a letter and saying that "We generally do this on these occasions. We would like permission to do it throughout the year." We would talk to them. We do this on other matters and issue them a letter of approval to do it.
It's in the Jewish religion that occurs mostly during our Passover ceremonies. And in the course of seven days we light seven different candles and during Hanukah, which is yet to come. There are other religions I know, I think the Catholic religion does it at some occasion and other groups do too.
And I think they're all very careful and they're all aware of the danger
Can we get a recommendation maybe from Mr. Haigler from L&I as to --
I'd feel better 89 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING if you inserted the language because we're not looking to create a problem for. We're looking to avoid a problem.
I think Councilman Clarke raises the mechanism. We may just want to hear from Mr. Haigler in terms of what L&I would like to do with this in concert with what Councilman Cohen is saying. He clearly wants this to come from the department and have them with a comfort level. And I agree with Councilman Clarke, we may not want to overly complicate it legislatively and just leave it to the Department. I think that gives the discretion that Councilman Cohen is trying to get to.
Otis Haigler, Jr., Legislator of Regulatory Affairs Manager for the Department of Licenses and Inspections. As Chief Bailey indicated, there are mechanisms currently in place to deal with this on a case-by-case basis. If it's brought to our attention that somebody wants to use candles in a service or a particular activity, we could administratively handle that. One 90 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING way to do that is through a variance of general application through the Board of Safety and Fire Prevention. The person can go and get a permission request from the Board. They would present exactly how they are going to do the activity and what safety measures they're going to put in place to handle any situation that might arise. The safety measure could be simply placing proper fire extinguishers in proper locations so that if something were to ---
Would they have to do that on every individual event? I think what we're trying to get language that administratively --
Excuse, Councilman. Can't we just delete this sentence, the candle part?
Mr. Chairman, first of all I think the discussion got away from what the ordinance says. We're not talking about the use of candles. The ordinance only talks about passing lighted candles from one person to another. 91 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING What I would like to understand is two things, and we may be able to deal with this rather readily. Is that ever done very commonly except by the celebrants of the service?
Many times -- and not to be an expert in the Catholic faith, but it's my experience that at certain things like at weddings you could have in there where you and bride can light a candle, but there are other ceremonies like there's evangelical parts of the Catholic religion that has candles as a main part of what they would do in a ceremony. I mean, you could light candle and I could pass it to him and he would pass it to her. So you are passing candles. I've been at peace rallies where they passed candles, and I've been at other things where they passed candles.
I mean, if that's an issue, one relatively easy fix, and Chief Bailey alluded to it also, would be -- this is on of Bill 030776, and it's item F-308.3.5 about the middle of the page. At 92 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING the end of that sentence, it would be, I think, meet the intent if we just put a comma there and said "Except with approval of the Department."
Well, we don't want to create the need for getting permission to do so.
Councilman Nutter actually passed me language that said, "Except as provided in accordance with regulations determined by the Department of Licenses and Inspections."
Councilman Mariano, I have a couple more issues. With respect to multi-family dwellings, are there additional restrictions on the conversion of single dwelling to multiple-family dwellings? Because with unemployment growing, there seems to be an increasing need for family units to incorporate other family units, and so many 93 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING single-family homes are being required for the living conditions for two families. Say, the children that become unemployed by the likes of the Wal-Mart. Is anybody here favoring Wal-Mart? But in line of the Brookin's Institute finding, and I'm concerned about that. Again, there, I think we have to use some common sense.
Adoption of the 2003 International Codes will be adding no new requirements for establishment of multiple-family dwellings or duplexes.
And actually, that's a requirement of zoning. You would have to go through the zoning process in order to do that type of conversion. So we're not amending anything as far as this package.
Right. We're not advocating anything to do that, and this package has nothing to do with the Zoning Code. 94 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING
There is one provision referring to trash. And I wanted to know, Section PM 3033.1 in Bill 030774, you're requiring that each resident unit be prepared to deal with some trash. I'm not sure what that means. We have some condo trash problems in which the Administration and the Council don't quite see eye to eye, and I just wanted to make sure that it doesn't in any way impact on that situation.
This is all current language. The only reason that that section 14 appears in the code is to do the editorial fix in the exception to get rid of the term "Use Groups" and call it "Group R3," but we're making no amendments to that provision of the current PM Code.
Any other 95 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING questions?
Thank you very much. Good morning, gentlemen. I'm please to see more and more L&I is seeking to bring City regulations for family child care providers in compliance or making them more consistent with state regulations. And to that end, in your testimony, you mentioned in one paragraph that modified provisions for family child care facilities to comply with State Administrative regulations. What does that mean?
There are two of the subcodes that have virtually identical sections in them, the Building Code and the Fire Code. In the Fire Code, it's Section 22 F-410; in the Building Code, B-420. Actually, the Department of Labor and Industry heard very clearly from the day care advocate community and modified their original 96 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING proposals. And the current administrative regulations that are in their final stage of becoming effective as we sit here have relinquished all of their more stringent provisions and their confusing language, and they have now basically established the same definitions as are found in the model codes and in fact have expanded the opportunity from physical standpoint -- again, it doesn't affect zoning, but in terms of the building requirements, family day care can now be established up to 12 children with the family day care provisions.
And we have made no 21 changes to what the State has proposed. It appears as new text in our two ordinances because it is new and expanded in the City of Philadelphia and restates a number of provisions, such as for the fire extinguishers 97 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING and egress that we've had in the current code.
And I might add that in the preamble to the Administrative Enforcement regulations that's to be adopted by the Department of Labor and Industry, they make mention that they had heard from over 8 witnesses' statements from the child care 9 community regarding this issue as well as some 10 legislators regarding this hissing issue, so 11 we wanted to make that known that your efforts 12 have been addressed, heard and addressed. 13
They've been 14 fighting in a positive way for a long time to 15 make those two worlds consistent because 16 they've served as barriers for a family child 17 care provider, so this is a major development. 18 Thank you. 19
Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Cohen has another question?
One more question. I don't know whether it applies to 98 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING these bills or whether there would have to be a different procedure use, but there's been a lot of questions raised by developers when we query them as to why is the cost of construction as high as it is in the City compared to suburbs. And they say, well, in the suburbs there is something they call a residential rate set by -- I don't by whether it's by law or by labor by whom. But is there such a thing and are you familiar with it? And is there any work being done in Philadelphia to bring about the inclusion of the so-called residential rate?
I think we're talking about the Davis Bacon Law. There's a Davis Bacon in the United States. And just let me answer it and Mr. Wismer can say. From what I understand, there's Davis Bacon and there's a little Davis Bacon. That's set by predominately the type of construction work. In your case, we're talking about residential that's done in the area, if it's union or non-union. If most of it, like 80 percent of it is done by union, the Davis Bacon and the 99 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING prevailing wage becomes union; if not, it becomes non-union. I think the problem in Philadelphia the way I see, this is just my opinion, having some experience in this industry, is Philadelphia really doesn't have a construction rate. Therefore, it's hard to go for a residential prevailing rate. In the suburbs it's easier because most of the residential work is done non-union. In Philadelphia, the residential work is done by union. And I will tell you from my experience in the construction industry, contractors, much like other people, never make enough money and they have to blame somebody. They can't blame the people the buy the material from because union or non-union pretty much pay the same price for material, depending how much you're buying. And at this point in the part of the country, it's organized labor. That's the way I see it as the Chairman of this Committee. It's a great question, Councilman. Dave, if you want to take a shot at 100 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING that, go ahead.
You're exactly correct, Mr. Chairman. It relates to labor rates. And our adoption of these Codes or maintenance of our current Codes makes no difference. The Codes in no way address or deal with any form of labor rate or charges for construction. And I've heard -- in fact, a few years ago, I Chaired a committee of developers and architects looking at the issues of the effective codes on the cost of construction. And to a person, everyone on that cast group is not the Code itself that drives up those costs; it's other related issues. It may be rates. It may be the funding overlays. Some of it has to do with zoning provisions, but the technical codes relating to construction are not the issue.
I was wondering or not in Philadelphia there ought not to be -- or maybe there already is -- some kind of process whereby we can get the answers instead of just having the questions in that area. Somebody ought to find out how do we compete 101 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING with the suburbs and new buildings; is there anything to this residential rate? Instead of having, Well, maybe it's this, maybe it's that. Is there any procedure, is there any department that you're familiar with in L&I or in any other area that deal with this issue?
See, but Labor and Standards -- if I may. Labor and Standards just enforces what we make as rules. So we can set the prevailing rates here, but we have to go by the Constitution of the United States, as you know, and by the State of Pennsylvania and the laws we have in Philadelphia. Look, I'm going to go out on a limb here. This isn't organized labor problem; this is the contractor's problem. And as far as this goes, this Code, this Code makes it easier and clearer. There's been a lot of 102 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING hard work put into this Code. It's simple. We can take someone right out of Drexel University and say, "Look, you don't know anything about the electrical business, you don't know anything about the plumbing business; he does and I do. But you know how to run a business and you know numbers. You bid on this job." There's a formula, you buy a CD, you put it in, you mark everything off, somebody goes out and measures and they figure it by square footage and they sit down and my overhead may be a lot lower than his. We can do something. We have to sit down as a Council and industry and talk to these people. I think there has been some talks. Councilman Cohen, you're absolutely right, lower rates costs for housing for the people that need it in the City of Philadelphia, I'd be willing to help you with that anytime.
I want to say four months ago we adopted a policy locally to some degree, a large degree actually, put us 103 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING in a more competitive situation where they passed a resolution that authorized or allowed any market rate purchase of land from the Redevelopment Authority for that developer to negotiate whatever rate they can get from the particular union, as in past practices, the Redevelopment Authority required that any land disposed by the Redevelopment Authority be prevailing rate. So now, if an individual developer purchases a parcel of land or utilizes the Redevelopment Authority to purchase the land using its powers of condemnation, if they pay market value for the land, they're no longer required to pay prevailing rates to those individual contractors. They have the ability to negotiate, as in one case in a development in my district, a B scale rate for labor and it makes it more affordable.
It's definitely a good deal. My last thing on this, from my 20-some years in this industry -- longer than that since I was 18, I'm 48, so do the math. 104 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING People want to make money. These contractors invest big money in these things. So besides what Councilman Clarke said about the RDA, they're in it for the money. They're not in it for like you and I Council People are to try to help people, they're in it to make money. It's to business with them. It doesn't make it right. They have to make -- and what they think what they have to make is a lot more than what you and I would think they have to make. There's a lot of little things that go on like the Councilman just said about RDA. Community development corporations can purchase land from the City at a very cheap cost and they can work at a sub-union rate. It's been done. It's been in the Norris Square area, it's been done in other places in my district. That's what has to be done. But it's definitely a need for housing. And it's easy for the papers to blame the building trades because they blame them for everything, but at this point, I've got to tell you from an insider it's not totally the building trades. Thank you, 105 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING Councilman. Any other questions on this?
Mr. Mariano, before finishing, I did submit the testimony on all the bills and then we won't bother reading that into the record.
Councilman Nutter has read it all several times, and he will explain it to us later if we really need it. Right, Councilman?
If I just may, that's why we have one guy from St. Joe Prep on every committee, because they do all the reading tell us all about it. (Laughter.)
I have three what are really editorial amendments. Two of them are to Bill No. 030776, the Fire Subcode Bill. The first is on . And on appears Section F-1417, and below that Subsection F-1417.1, in both cases that 106 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING section number should be 1418. There is already a 1417. That was a typo. On of the same bill, at the top of the page is a continuing paragraph. In the fourth line of that paragraph, the third last word appears as "used," U-S-E-D. That should be "user," U-S-E-R. And finally, on Bill No. 030780, the Administrative Code Bill, on , nearly halfway down the page is section A-802.2.1.3. In the fourth line of that section in the middle is a reference to Section A-302.1.1. That should read A-302.1.2. I apologize for those errors, but on the other hand, out of such a big package, three is not too bad.
Mr. Chairman, I would also like to note that I will be offering amendments on all bills. I think your Clerk has actually circulated the bills. They essentially allow any property owner or developer or individual who has 107 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING already pulled a permit application or had construction drawings done, not to be subject to this new legislation; they would be subject to the old legislation.
Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, my name is Gray Smith. I'm a architect practicing in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and New Jersey. I'm located in Philadelphia. I had the honor of participating in 1998, '99 and 2000 on two of the national committees that the International Code Council and BOCA and all of its predecessors had put together to discuss amendments to various Codes. It's a very exciting operation, and to participate in helping to develop national codes to protect our citizens is quite an honor and the professionalism of it is at the highest level. I have some simple statements to make today about very complex issues which are 108 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING before you. Each of these Codes that you're considering today is about this thick (indicating). So it's not just the ordinances, it's the codes themselves that are important so the complexity is monumental. And those of us like myself, as an architect who deal with them every day appreciate the process that goes into developing them, and then on a local level the utilization of them. And when this these ordinances and amendments are adopted, it will be a great day for the design and construction industry in Philadelphia because we will truly be in the 21st Century in this aspect of our management of our City. We will have virtually the same codes as we have state-wide. Right now there are 2300 different code systems in the State of Pennsylvania. And ours will be the same as everybody else's. Not only that, it will be approximately the same as that in New Jersey who uses the same body of model codes as well as the rest of the states that surround us. So those of us who practice with codes on a daily basis will be designing everywhere from 109 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING essentially the same set of books rather than from hundreds and hundreds of different books. And I'm glad to see Philadelphia is even I'm beating the State with respect to adoption of these Codes. The only one slight concern I would have is the permitting process, which for those of us who have to deal with it and some of your constituents have complained about it, the Code permitting process, the Building permitting process in Philadelphia right now is still somewhat medieval and difficult, particularly if you have to spend the two to three hours it takes down at the concourse level to run that gantlet. The new permitting process I'm really not familiar with, but it is mandated to some degree by State regulations and it will be what it is. And hopefully in the profession have to deal with it, lawyers, contractors, engineers will help a role to play in helping streamline that process. But more important today, what I wanted to say was the amount of work that went 110 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING into this development certainly by Chief Bailey's office and his efforts, and he's been involved in Codes for years, and I very much appreciate that. But most important, however, I want -- and I believe I speak for the entire architectural profession in this region. Passage of these bills is a testament to Dave Wismer's incredible work for the City of Philadelphia over the last 37 years. Dave has been the Code guru for Philadelphia, for L&I, for the profession of architects and engineers, for contractors, for lawyers. Anybody who has a Code question, Dave can answer it. He's truly a national treasure right here in Philadelphia. His role on a national level with the BOCA organization, with the International Code Council has been absolutely sterling and honorable. And what he's brought back to Philadelphia is more valuable than any salary or pension that he may ever receive to all of us.
And I would like the record to show today an overt appreciation for the work that Dave has done over the years and particularly the work that 111 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING he's done in bringing us tot he 21st Century with respect to this code system, this family of Codes that we're getting ready to use in Philadelphia. And I just want to applaud him myself because I deal with Codes every day and happen to be a kind of a nut about Codes. And to see the system in place will be quite rewarding for all of us who have to deal with it on a local level. So thank you, Dave. And thank you for considering it and giving it the passage that I'm sure it's going to get.
Mr. Chairman, I have an obligation that's now 15 late, so I'd like to recorded as voting yes on the bills, as amended.
Thank you, Councilwoman. You may leave. 112 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING
S-T-R-U-P. I'm the current Vice President of Philadelphia Chapter 8 of the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers. We thoroughly endorse everything that is being put forward. Councilman Clark, I believe it is?
The one comment that I had, and I do endorse your recommendation. There as has been to be a dividing line between the adoption of the new Codes and existing, but there definitely should be a timeline set, whatever is agreeable so that the new Codes do actually take effect at a timeline and given some consideration to existing permits that are adopted.
I have been contacted as Chairman of this Committee and they explained all that, so we understand. We 113 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC HEARING just can't cut those people off, but when we do this, there is a point where they have to comply, and it's short. It's in your amendment, right, Councilman?
He has an amendment ready, so I think you will be happy with it.
But overall, the professional societies, we believe, stand behind David and everybody else in endorsing the new Codes be adopted.
Thank you, sir. Any questions for this witness? (No response.)
Seeing none. That looks like it. That will close the public hearing for the second time. - - - - 114 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC MEETING COMMITTEE ON STREETS AND SERVICES - - - - Wednesday, December 10, 2003 - - - - Public meeting conducted by the Committee on Streets and Services, held in Room 696, City Hall, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on the above date, to consider action on the following: BILLS 030772, 030773, 030774, 030775, 030776, 030777, 030778, 030779, 030780, 030781, 030782. PRESENT: COUNCILMAN RICHARD MARIANO, Chair COUNCILMAN DARRELL CLARKE COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN FRANK DICICCO COUNCILMAN MICHAEL NUTTER 115 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING
We'll go into the public meeting. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke for a motion on Bill 030772.
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion for an amendment to Bill No. 030772. (Duly seconded.)
It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor of the amendment, say aye. (Aye.)
It passes. The other two Council People left their votes, Reynolds Brown and Krajewski. Back to Councilman Clarke.
Councilman, I just want to make sure. The amendments to the L&I editorial amendments are only to three bills, am I correct? Two bills?
This is actually 116 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING on 030772.
030772 is fine. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to motion that Bill No. 030772, as amended, be reported out of Committee with favorable recommendation and request for a suspension of the Rules as to allow first reading at the next Session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
A motion has been made and seconded. All those in favor? (Aye.)
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to a motion for an amendment to Bill 117 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING No. 030773. (Duly seconded.)
There's been a motion made for an amendment of this Bill 6 030773 and it's been seconded. All those in favor? (Aye.)
Seeing none, the ayes have it. The bill is amended. Councilman Clarke.
Mr. Chairman, I think Councilman Nutter had a question.
Mr. Chairman, I just want to make sure we put on the record that the amendments that Councilman Clarke is making reference to, these amendments were circulated to all Members. All Members of the Committee have the amendments that we're proposing.
Thank you, Councilman. You're right, they have been circulated and everybody has them. 118 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion that Bill 030773, as amended be reported out of Committee with favorable recommendation and request for a suspension of the Rules as to allow reading at the next session. (Duly seconded.)
There's been a motion and seconded that Bill 030773, as amended, with a suspension of the rules be favorably passed. All those in favor? (Aye.)
Thank you, MR. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion for an amendment to Bill No. 030774. (Duly seconded.)
It's been seconded, an amendment to 030774 has been 119 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING seconded. All those in favor? (Aye.)
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion that Bill No. 11 030774, as amended, be reported out of Committee with favorable recommendation and request for a suspension of the Rules as to allow reading at the next Session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
Bill 030774, as amended, with a suspension of the Rules has been seconded. All those in favor? (Aye.)
The ayes have it. 120 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to make a motion for an amendment to Bill No. 030775. (Duly seconded.)
The motion is to amend Bill 030775. It has been duly seconded. All those favor of this amendment? (Aye.)
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I make a motion that Bill No. 19 030775, as amended, be reported out Committee with favorable recommendation and a request for a suspension of the Rules as to allow reading at the next Session. (Duly seconded.)
Bill 030775, as amended, with a request for the suspension of 121 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING the Rules has been seconded. All those in favor opposed? (Aye.)
Seeing none, the bill, as amended, passes. Councilman Clarke.
Mr. Chairman, I believe there are two amendments on this particular bill -- actually three. I'll read one and I'm assuming that Councilman Nutter will read the other.
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion for the three amendments that have been read into the record in the public hearing to Bill No. 030776. (Duly seconded.) 122 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING
Bill 030776, there's a motion to amend it with these three amendments. It's been seconded. All those in favor of these three amendments? (Aye.)
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion that Bill No. 030776 be reported out of Committee, as amended, with favorable recommendation and a request for suspension of the Rules. (Duly seconded.)
Bill 030776, as amended, with a request for a suspension of rules has been seconded. All those in favor of this bill, as amended. (Aye.)
Seeing none, 123 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING ayes have it. The bill is passed. Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to make a motion on an amendment to Bill No. 030777. (Duly seconded.)
The amendment on Bill 030777 has been seconded. All those in favor of the amendment to this bill? (Aye.)
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion that Bill No. 20 030777, as amended, be reported out of Committee with favorable recommendation and a request for a suspension of the rules as to allow reading at the next Session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
The motion is 124 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING that Bill 030777, as amended, with a request for the suspension of Rules has been duly seconded. All those in favor, say aye. (Aye.)
Seeing none, the bill, as amended, with suspension of the Rules is passed. Councilman Clarke.
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion for an amendment to Bill No. 030778. (Duly seconded.)
A motion by Councilman Clarke for 030778 to be amended. All those in favor? (Aye.)
The bill is amended. Back to Councilman Clarke. 125 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to make a motion that Bill 4 No. 030778, as amended, be reported out of Committee with favorable recommendation and request for suspension of the Rules as to allow reading at the next Session. (Duly seconded.)
The motion has been seconded for Bill 030778, as amended, with a favorable recommendation and suspension of the Rules. All those in favor? (Aye.)
Seeing none, it passes as amended. Councilman Clarke.
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion for an amendment to Bill No. 030779. (Duly seconded.)
The motion was for Bill 030779 to be amended. It was duly 126 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING seconded. All those in favor, aye. (Aye.)
Seeing none, 030779 is amended. Back to Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to make a motion that Bill 12 030779, as amended, be reported out of Committee with favorable recommendation and request for suspension of the Rules as to allow reading at the next section of Council. (Duly seconded.)
It has been seconded. The motion is Bill 030779, as amended, with a request for suspension of rules be voted out with a favorable recommendation. All those in favor? (Aye.)
Opposed? (No response.) 127 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING
Seeing none, it is passed, as amended, with a suspension of Rules. Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to make a motion on two amendments, one as read into the record by the Department, and editorial amendment, and one that has been circulated by this body, to Bill 11 030780. (Duly seconded.)
It has been seconded, and the motion is Bill 030780 be amended by two amendments. All those in favor? (Aye.)
Seeing none, 030780 is amended. Back to Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, MR. Chairman. I make a motion that Bill No. 25 030780 be reported out of Committee, as 128 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING amended, with favorable recommendation and a request for a suspension of the Rules as to allow reading at the next Session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
The motion has been duly seconded. Bill 030780 with two amendments and with suspension of the Rules be favorably passed out of Committee. All those in favor? (Aye.)
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion for an amendment to Bill No. 030781. (Duly seconded.)
It has been duly seconded, the motion to amend 030781. All those in favor? (Aye.)
Opposed? 129 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING (No response.)
Seeing none, Bill 030781 is amended. Back to Councilman Clarke.
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion that Bill No. 8 030781, as amended, be reported out of Committee with favorable recommendation and request for rules suspension as to allow reading at the next session. (Duly seconded.)
As been heard, the motion is on Bill 030781, as amended, with a favorable recommendation, be voted out of Committee a favorable recommendation. All those in favor, aye. (Aye.)
Seeing none, it's passed favorably. Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, MR. Chairman. I'd like to make a motion for an 130 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING amendment to Bill No. 030782. (Duly seconded.)
The motion has been duly seconded on Bill 030782 to amend that bill. All those in favor of this amendment? (Aye.)
Seeing none, Bill 030782 is amended and. Back to Councilman Clarke.
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion that Bill No. 17 030782, as amended, be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and request for Rules suspension as to allow reading at the next Session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
The motion has been duly seconded that bill 030782, as amended, be voted favorably out of Committee with a suspension of the Rules. 131 12/10/03 - STREETS - PUBLIC MEETING All those in favor? (Aye.)
None. It passes. This concludes the public meeting. Thank you very much. (Council adjourned at 11:30 a.m.) 132 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 December 10, 2003, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of the same. RE: COMMITTEE ON STREETS AND SERVICES _________________________ Lisa C. Bradley, RPR