What the needs will be and how many trees will be taken care of --
I mean, presently, I think you trim 9200 trees. Can you tell us how many you're going to trim, how many you're going to spray, how many you're going to remove, how many you're going to plant, and all of that will be a part of this program?
And show us what the funding levels are associated with it?
Great, thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. 3036 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010
Thank you, Councilman. And you also requested the need, if you know what we're doing, and then an estimate for what the need is.
Yeah, exactly. So if we have where we are now and where we need to go, then it makes it easier. And can you do that in two days, Director?
Okay, thank you very much. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Mifflin, I wrote a letter to you on the 9th of March in reference to a situation in the northwest where 44 trees were going to be removed, and the funding was going to come from a private source, and that funding was withdrawn for one reason or another. From what I understand, the 44 trees were termed "hazardous." 3037 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 Now that the funding's not available, the private funding, these 44 trees that were termed "hazardous," what's the plan that you have? Again, you haven't responded or called in reference to this letter, but I'm concerned about these 44 hazardous trees. When's the Fairmount Park Commission going to remove them since they're hazardous?
These trees were -- are not imminently dangerous, and they will not be removed immediately. They will be placed on the list of removals by the Fairmount Park Commission, and my guess is that they will be removed over the next two to three years.
Can you imagine receiving that letter? It's agreed that a tree is a dangerous situation or you wouldn't be removing it -- or it's possibly dangerous. And then you get a letter and you open the envelope and it says, Yep, you have a dangerous tree in front of your home but we're not going to get to it for three years. How do you think the constituent feels when they walk out of their door or people up and down the street and they look at this tree 3038 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 that the Fairmount Park Commission said, Yeah, it really needs to be removed and we'd like to do it yesterday, but it's not going to happen for three years. Do we monitor that tree over the next three years and go back to see if it's in -- I know I wouldn't feel very good knowing that my park commission sent me a letter that said, Yeah, we need to take your tree out but we're not going to get to it for three years.
I'd rather -- honestly, I think you ought to be candid with them, but to me, to tell somebody it's going to take three years to take a tree out that's dangerous, to me, it's unnecessarily stressful to them, or whatever the word is that I'm looking for here.
Mm-hmm. I think, as you, I assume, well know, and I've worked closely with your office in this matter, we've certainly had dialogue on this particular issue. This was a fairly unique situation where a resident wished to -- I'll use the term 3039 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 "adopt and improve" a three-block area, which did include as many as 43 trees for potential removal and replacement. It was determined by the Fairmount Park Commission, as well as other independent experts, that it would be beneficial and in the best interests of the street if we removed all of those trees and planted new ones, as opposed to going in on a piecemeal basis. It's not often that we have this opportunity. I personally looked at these trees and, obviously not every one of them needs to be removed tomorrow or the next month. And that's why I feel comfortable that over a two- to three-year period of time, we'll remove these trees at no danger, if you will, to homeowners. But these trees are mature, they're not growing any longer, there was an opportunity to plant. Many of the trees do have structural defects, and they've had these structural defects for probably eight or ten years, would be my guess, and this was an opportunity to make an improvement. So there's a meeting scheduled, as I'm sure you know, on April 10th in the community. We 3040 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 plan to be there and we plan to explain what our process will be in addressing these trees and other trees in this community. I've had subsequent conversations with the community recently, and I'm told we'll be receiving support from the community association on our plans in concert in working with them and in helping to beautify this Chestnut Hill community. Most people realize that it is a phased-in -- or it's something that cannot be accomplished in one fell swoop. And we were only doing that because of this donation.
Again, not to beat this to death, but earlier when I asked you the question, are you satisfied, you haven't come and asked for additional operating or capital funds, you said that you were able to do what you're doing with the funding that you have. A private source wants to remove 44 trees, everybody was hot to go get them, that contractor was there and ready to do the deal, but now, all of a sudden, the private funding evaporates and now it's not a serious problem anymore. 3041 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 You used the word "hazardous." Well, if they're not hazardous, then could you please come up with new word? Because all you do is create complications for us when your people refer to tree as "hazardous," and then all of a sudden, the funding isn't there and it's not hazardous anymore. So if you want, call it "a diseased tree" or a tree to be replace based on -- it's the wrong species, but when you refer to a tree as being "hazardous," the average resident takes you for what you're saying. "Hazardous" to me isn't good.
Mm-hmm. Yeah, what we're doing is, we are assessing each tree of those 40 trees, placing them in priority order, and they will be removed, as is dictated, by priority. But I do take your comment seriously.
Thank you very much. Do you want to follow up, Councilman 3042 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 Nutter? And then Councilwoman Miller and then Councilman Cohen.
Madam Chair, this is not a follow-up, it would be a full turn. So I think Councilwoman Miller is before me.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Councilman Nutter. Commissioner, I think Councilman Nutter may have asked this question, but I missed the answer. If the roots of the tree begin to uplift the sidewalk, whose responsibility is that to replace the sidewalk?
Okay. I would suggest -- you said earlier that you probably need to educate the residents --
-- of Philadelphia. Well, I think you need to educate City Council, too. And I would request -- at 3043 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 least for myself and I'm sure there are other Councilpeople that are interested -- that we have some type of session where you can explain to me and to us what a dangerous tree is, what an imminently dangerous tree is, what a hazardous tree is. We need to know this. I have no idea. For me, this whole issue of street tree removal and maintenance is extremely frustrating. And I agree with Councilman Nutter on most of the points that he made. And certainly if there's a 5,000 tree backlog of some sort -- then I think I read in the paper that for the Republican National Convention, Fairmount Park will be removing trees in parks, those trees that have fallen due to the hurricane? Is that -- did I read that correct?
I don't believe that -- I mean, I didn't see this comment or quote. We're not -- there's not a connection between the RNC and removing trees in the park.
So if that's going to happen, that's not your project.
But that's 3044 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 because they're dead; it has nothing to do with the convention.
Okay. Well, I'm pleased to hear that because we have lots of people that will be here and living here year-round that have issues with these trees outside of their homes.
But I am going to request that we have some type of a special session with pictures or film or whatever that will help us understand.
Because certainly in my district, you know, we also have the trees that are on an island, and I know that they're a lower priority than the trees that are actually on someone's sidewalk, and I need to get more information.
All right, thank 3045 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 you.
I think all these questions indicate that Council is ready to seriously deal with Fairmount Park and trees in neighborhoods in a real way, unlike -- well, we've had battles over the years in trying to come up with funds, but I think that if you provide them with what it really takes to have an ongoing program, we know now that we just fight to survive, to stay ahead of the curve, but if we knew realistically what it really takes to have a nice-looking city, neighborhood trees that looks nice, then it becomes us and the Administration as to how we make it happen. I think that's what's at the core of all of these questions. Thank you. Councilman Cohen?
Thank you, Madam Chair. Just to give you a sense of relaxation, I'm calling upon your horticultural expertise. Recently I've had numerous complaints about something that looks like a tree but really, I'm told, is not a tree. That's these weeds that seem 3046 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 to grow up and it seems to be a relatively recent phenomenon. They grow up, become as large as a small tree, they grow frequently on open lots. They -- the communities feel endangered by them because they don't know what goes on in the back, and nobody seems to take responsibility for them 'cause they're not a tree but they're a weed. L&I doesn't seem to have much of an answer as to what to do except to deplore their existence, as do other agencies. Tell me, is it a plant? Is it your responsibility?
We decide if it doesn't belong anywhere else, we always put the blame on the Fairmount Park Commission and put the responsibility there. Because it grows, it's got life, and it even looks nice on occasions, but it's a real danger and an eyesore and a threat, and people want to know how do they get them cleared up, because they convert empty, vacant lots into dangerous spots.
Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Well, 3047 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 without a specific address or specific knowledge of your reference, I --
I suspect you're referring to weed trees, or often they're referred to as "volunteer trees" that are generally fast-growing, soft wood, weak wood, like ailanthus, perhaps a sumac or something along those lines, that will grow out of a crack of a building or a sidewalk or a railroad, siding or --
You know, this is what I'm envisioning that you're referring to.
Well, the first thing we do is identify the owner of the property. What may be a problem vegetation to some people may be, in fact, designed landscape of the owner. If in fact they're causing a harm to property or potentially to individuals, then it will be referred to the appropriate department. And if it's on Park property, obviously, that's ours. If 3048 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 it's on private property we, do our best to notify the homeowner. If it's on public property, it's sometimes --
On Godfrey Avenue, from 20th Street west to 21st Street, there used to exist a big factory.
It ceased operating many years ago and then it was demolished about five or six years ago, and it's a big vacant block-square lot. People have to walk along there, and last summer was the first time it became real clear, became a menace to the community because, suddenly, these things sprouted up from nowhere -- at least nothing had been planted there before, and it clearly wasn't planted.
And there were several alleged attacks that took place.
Because nobody could see. They grew so high it was like a wall.
Well, I know that all of the departments take very seriously their responsibilities when it relates to the health and safety of our citizens. If it is something that -- it's not uncommon actually for the Park Commission to assist another agency. It might be -- if it's abandoned warehouses, PIDC or some agency like that might be involved in something. And we have provided our expertise to PIDC or an agency in removal of that material. Particularly if it's blocking a sidewalk and pedestrians are then forced into the roadway or something, we'll often --
It's in the area where the factory existed on the land, you know, that was made vacant after they demolished the building.
Well, I've noted this 3050 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 location and would be happy to provide an inspection and get back to you specifically.
All right, thank you. We'd like to find out, but in talking with other Councilmembers, I find they have similar spots.
And we're concerned about them and also had found great difficulty in having any agency accept responsibility for it. But if you would report back, that would be very helpful.
I want to talk about -- in your budget, have you included money for the improvement of (inaudible, off mike). 3051 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010
This is a Capital Budget item. It is in our budget, Councilwoman. I honestly don't know this morning the status of that. I know that the estimated amount of work exceeded our budget and that we were seeking additional funds, either looking within our budget or phasing in the work. And I -- my staff, who is not here this morning, working with the CPO office, actually is more intelligent about the details of that status of that project than I am this morning. I would be happy to -- I know your interest in this and would be happy to get back to you with the details on that. It is in our budget, though.
The other thing is -- I won't repeat any of the questions, but you know how I am interested in trees.
And there are a lot of them in my district and so I support the comments made by my colleagues around the trees. 3052 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010
Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilwoman Brown and then Councilman Nutter will be next.
I simply want to underscore Councilwoman Donna Reed Miller's request to provide us on paper, if you can, what constitutes various different types of trees in a particular stage. And add to that, if you will, trees in alleyways, who's responsibility for the -- I see you shaking your head, saying no. And that would be helpful to know so that as we get calls from constituents, we can inform them on what the facts are. And if the fact is a tree in an alleyway is your responsibility, that would be helpful, so include that kind of information as well.
Sure. We'll -- I think the dialogue with Councilwoman Miller was suggesting that we have some sort of an 3053 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 educational session where we could provide as much information as possible, and I would be delighted to host that --
-- quite frankly and take questions at that particular time, but we would provide sort of an outline of what are the existing responsibilities and our resources. And then, as I say, if we miss something, we'd be happy to respond to that.
Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Nutter, we're ready for you.
Mr. Mifflin, I have just a couple last questions. I understand that the issue of the bike 3054 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 path out in West Philadelphia, the Overbrook section, may have been raised earlier. I had had the pleasure of a short conversation with the recently-promoted and esteemed Cathy Paster, as well as Stephanie Craighead from your staff about this. Can you give us any update. And if you did already on the record, don't go back through it. But has there been a resolution or an agreement recently in that particular matter? This is a proposed bike path that supposedly will be able to go all the way from City Avenue out to the Airport, as I understand it?
That's correct. My answer was fairly general in nature to Councilman Cohen who, apparently, is also aware of some of the community issues. And what I said was that I wasn't personally aware of what those specific issues are. I'm familiar with the project, we certainly support the project. It's been years in planning. If we've missed some individuals or some community groups in our planning process, we'll certainly go back and --
Well, some of the 3055 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 issues, as I best understand it, involve the prospect of taking down upwards of 25-some-odd mature trees in the Morris Park area. And there are continued concerns about the existence of such a wide and accessible bike path, given the mountain bike and ATV vehicle situation out in Morris Park already, and aren't we in fact just providing an even more enticing, and at some level potentially dangerous, new path for some people? And also, I think there's a proximity to homes as it relates to this particular path and increased parking activity that would come from people trying to use this facility if they choose to make that trek because they're going to park somewhere, get on their bikes, make the run, and come back. And I don't think the neighborhood was necessarily prepared about that -- prepared for those kinds of eventualities. Lastly, you made mention of any groups that maybe had not been contacted about some of the particulars of this project. And, unfortunately, I have to inform you that one of those entities is myself. Apparently no one from the Park thought it important enough to have any 3056 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 serious level of conversation about this, and most of the information I've received actually comes from my constituents out in the community as opposed to from within the government. And as you can imagine, that's a problem.
Mm-hmm. Well, let me first apologize if your office has not been informed of this project. And it's not a defence, but my only comment would be that it's been so long in the planning stages that perhaps it was assumed that early on, your office was. I can't comment beyond that. But we'll certainly ensure that you're brought into the loop, and we'll give you a briefing at any time at your convenience so that you're fully knowledgeable of the project. Secondly, just -- and again, I am speaking from experience, but they're general comments, that increased activity of ATVs or mountain biking, I don't see as a direct correlation to a paved recreation path. Most of those activities are off-road or off-path activities that are inappropriate -- and illegal in the case of ATVs -- and should be dealt with independently of any capital project. 3057 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010
But, Mr. Mifflin, let me -- at the same time, I mean, you couldn't deny the interest by an ATV rider, notwithstanding their off-road capabilities and for whatever it is that those vehicles were created. You can't deny that it would be intriguing to some young person, or not so young person, who likes to ride ATVs through the park, through people's yards, and out on the City streets, that right in front of them, they would have a 12-foot-wide paved path that could take you from Morris Park and City Avenue out to the Airport. I mean, wouldn't it just be intriguing?
Well, I -- I -- I understand your comments. Yes, I could see where it could potentially be intriguing to an ATV or to get into more of the interior of the park, using the path as an access. I guess my thought was that, you know, the use of ATVs are banned in the park, and we ought to be able to enforce that ban.
I think we do a credible job with the Philadelphia Police Department. ATV use in the park, admittedly, is not something that 3058 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 we have presently a total control over. There seems to be more and more use of it, not just in Morris but in pocketed areas like Tacony Park, Hunting Park. Regrettably, it seems to be on the increase. I've actually been working with the State on this matter, legislatively looking at ways in which we can help that situation. So I'm confident in the future that we will have, you know, a solution. But your point is well taken, that there are constituents who are not pleased with either the location of the path or have some concerns that this path will lead to other types of inappropriate behavior.
All right. I mean, the funding source of this is ISTEA. That program 3059 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 has only been around for a few years, so I mean, maybe conceptually it's been around for a while but, I mean, somebody had to do something to go and get --
It's probably been six years since this was -- the idea first came, and I confess to not being familiar this morning with who was initially --
Well, maybe as we anticipate a briefing or a meeting you can do the research.
Okay. I read in the paper the other day that the Park Commission is going to make sure that the lights on Boathouse Row are bright and shiny and ready for the Republican National Convention. You know, I only wish that we had gotten one of these conventions about 20 years ago. There is so much stuff that just has to be done in anticipation of one of the conventions, that I just really wish that they had gotten here a while ago. The City would be such a much better place to live in. In the story, it indicated that under 3060 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 contract, the lights are checked or replaced twice a year. Now, was that accurate?
We do this in-house, so your first statement -- if I understood what you said about a contract, we don't employ an electrical contract or anyone outside of our own workforce to --
And was the statement in the paper that it's a twice-a-year process --
I think what the paper indicated was accurate in that approximately twice a year -- in the spring and in the fall -- we'll do pretty much a wholesale replacement of the 8 to 9,000 bulbs. And that seems to be --
Both the Park Commission 3061 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 and to some extent the residents of the houses, to the best of their ability, will make some minor improvements -- replacements of bulbs.
Do you get calls from time to time either from citizens or from officials about the lights on Boathouse Row and their various stages of brightness?
And do they conflict or are they in synch with the twice-a-year replacement schedule?
Do you get all of the calls around about the time you're going to do your replacement, or do you calls in the in- between times?
I can't categorically state that they do conform, if you will, to those twice-a-year times. We've just found, quite frankly, Councilman, that, you know, the life of the bulbs in this environment, which is a fairly exposed environment, the system now is 11 or 12 years in age, some of the channeling and the 3062 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 fixtures themselves have deteriorated. Many -- fortunately, to an extent, the houses, for the past ten years, have put on additions, have made improvement, and removing the lights and replacing the lights hasn't always been as effective as we would like. We've just met with the -- with Peco's subsidiary, Exelon, I believe. We are considering -- or we asked them, rather, to submit a proposal to us on a re-lamping, using more sophisticated, state-of-the-art, longer-life, lower-wattage, but as voluminous bulbs that are to be on the market within the next six to nine months, I'm told, we're hoping this will be a test site for us. In design, we believe that we can make some modifications to the existing fixtures so as not to require a total installation, which was, by the way, done with private funding. And I believe the article indicated that we were going to re-lamp the houses for the NCAA Women's Final Four and not the RNC. The plan, of course, was to have it ready for the summer, but we're doing it sooner.
Very good, very 3063 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 good. Last two questions. I received a letter from a French group concerned about the Park Ranger Corps, and I understand that you may have made some comments about the rangers. How many rangers are there?
Okay. And do you 9 expect to have 24 in the FY '01 budget? 10
Okay. The Ranger 12 Program is stable and funding is in place? 13
Well, it is for '01, 14 Councilman. Beyond that, there's some fund- 15 raising that needs to be done and accomplished by 16 the Ranger Board. 17
What's the City's 18 support for the Ranger Program? 19
Okay. Lastly, are 22 you familiar with a memo wherein I asked for some 23 information regarding what's commonly referred to, 24 I guess, as "JFK Plaza" and some anticipated restoration work over at JFK Plaza as a result of 3064 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 damage?
I actually just saw that memo in the last four hours, so I am vaguely familiar with it, yes.
Very good. It's my understanding that the Park's estimate on the damage to JFK Plaza as a result of skateboarding is approximately $1 million. Is that your understanding from the memo?
You know, I did see it and I had some questions regarding those numbers. I'm not disputing that there's been some damage to the plaza. I just don't know how those numbers were established, quite frankly.
Okay. If you could check on that and on any other park facilities like the Art Museum or other facilities within the jurisdiction of the Fairmount Park, if you could begin providing estimates on the level of damage and restoration and replacement and the work that may be needed, I would greatly appreciate it.
I would be happy to do that. Is that in relationship to the skateboarding? 3065 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010
Are there any other questions for the Fairmount Park Commission? (No further questions.)
The next department is Public Property. (Public Property witnesses come forward.)
Good morning, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER PEREZ: Good morning.
Councilman Cohen, do you have questions for the Commissioner of Public Property?
I would like to recognize you. 3066 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010
Good morning. COMMISSIONER PEREZ: Good morning, Councilman.
Since the last hearing, a number of us in City Council have been talking a great deal about public access, and the Public Access Coalition has been very active in pursuing the cause. And we went over your testimony and I have one question first that I wanted to as that wasn't clear to me. In your testimony -- not in your testimony, in your reply to some of the questions that you submitted on March 13th, I think it's on , the next to the last page of your answers, if you have it. In talking about what would be needed to develop a public access station, you say, "It should be noted that the projected operating costs for Philadelphia public access programming would exceed the $500,000 maximum amount that City Council could direct the franchisees to contribute, pursuant to the current franchise agreements." Now, I'm not closer on what that means. Is there a $500,000 payment that the franchisees 3067 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 would have to make once the City started a public access system? COMMISSIONER PEREZ: Councilman -- and for the record, my name is an Andreas Perez, Commissioner of the Department of Public Property, and with me today is Mr. Vince Costello, Director of the Communications Division. I'll ask Vince to respond to that.
Councilman, going back a number of years, in the City's original request for proposals for cable TV franchises, the City mandated that any applicant will commit anywhere from 75 to $125,000 per year to fund the Public Access Corporation. That is going back to 1982 and, again, through the process of 1984 --
Wait, we can't hear you, Mr. Costello. Is the mike working?
Once again, going back to the City's original request for proposals in 1982 and then again in 1984, the City mandated 3068 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 that any TV franchise applicant would be required to pay anywhere from 75 to $125,000 per franchise area per year to fund public access. Now, there's a few dates that I think are very important for us to remember and to wonder whatever materialized with that payment. Council selected the franchisees in October and November of 1984. The Federal Cable Act, the Cable Act of 1984, was passed in November of 1984. What that act did actually is, it did a number of things: it deregulated the industry, but what it also did is, it capped all payments to the municipality or to any other groups associated with the cable TV process to 5 percent of gross revenues. Now, the point that I'm trying to make is that prior to that act, the City had anticipated that up to $500,000 per year would be contributed to the Public Access Corporation, and 5 percent of gross revenues would go into the General Fund of the City. As November of 1984, that $500,000 went away. After that and until this time, all monies contributed to the Public Access Corporation or to any other entity 3069 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 associated with cable TV would come from the franchise fees of the City. You will recall --
Would you repeat that again, the last sentence? You said since that date, what happens?
Since that date, if the City would decide to go forward with public access --
Yeah. The City would bear the financial responsibility for public access. There would not be a separate pot of money, as envisioned back when the original RFPs were written. Since the last period and as we committed to you, we have been recreating and updating a lot of the work that we had done back in the early to mid-1980s -- looking at staffing plans, job descriptions, projected salaries, maintenance costs, floor plans for an access facility, site plans, and all of the things that go into actually running that type of operation. 3070 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 In preparation for a meeting with the public access advocates, we would like to have all of that information in place so at least we'll have a discussion point and a starting point for a discussion. But I did want to try as best I could to clear up the financial issues.
Mm-hmm. Well, that's not been in accordance with any previous statements that have been made about that fee that the cable companies were supposed to be paying the City for public access. I would want to, you know, examine that study and study it.
But in any event, it's always been clear that there would have to be some cost to the City.
And we are very anxious to try to work with your department to set up a model for, say, a single -- what you would call it, "a studio" where we could have a pilot program because of various concerns expressed, and it would seem to make sense to start something on 3071 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 a very simple basis. Would your department be the department that we would work with? We'd like to be assured of cooperation with your people. Your people seem to have the experience and they've had the history of it. I was going over material. In -- 9 this bill that created a public access facility 10 for the City of Philadelphia was actually passed 11 in December of 1983, in the last few weeks of 12 Mayor Bill Green's administration. Mayor Green 13 signed the bill. It was a very inclusive bill, it 14 contained a very detailed set of bylaws. It 15 provided for the execution of a simple articles of 16 incorporation, which were placed on the desk of 17 incoming Mayor Goode. In his first week in 18 office, I believe, it was on his desk. The bill 19 was signed, I believe, about December 27, 1983, as Bill Green was waving good-bye to the people of Philadelphia from the Mayor's Office on the second floor. Now, that's a long time for the people of Philadelphia to wait for something that had been established by ordinance and, therefore, we'd 3072 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 like to get moving, develop a practical approach to it, put in safeguards to deal with concerns that people may have, and rather than going into great detail, a series of questions and answers here, I would like to say, would you be willing to meet with representatives of Council and maybe their staffs to work with them in trying to develop a model or helping them to develop a model? I like what you said, that you're trying to develop it, and we would like to encourage, that to see what it would cost to get started on a simple basis, and then we could have something to present to the whole Council and to the Mayor. We would hope to do it in a very cooperative way. Would that be all right with you, Commissioner? COMMISSIONER PEREZ: I would certainly have no objection to that. What Mr. Costello made reference is actually reexamining all of the assumptions of the old model and trying to figure out how that would work today if we were to implement this. I don't know how far along we are 3073 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 in our analysis, but that analysis would be incomplete without a dialogue with the advocacy groups and yourselves.
Well, I would like to have some representatives of the advocacy groups working -- 'cause they have experience and they have ties with groups in other cities and can get information for us but, I would like to do it on a really cooperative basis with everybody to see if we could to put some meaning into it. COMMISSIONER PEREZ: Certainly.
We have many important issues coming up in the next few years in the City, and it would be great to have a model public access where issues could be discussed, you know, from all points of view. COMMISSIONER PEREZ: Yes.
All right. Well, thank you, thank you very much. COMMISSIONER PEREZ: Thank you.
Thank you. Councilman DiCicco, I know you have an 3074 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 appointment, so I'd like to recognize you.
Thank you. I have just one question for the Commissioner. You and I have had a couple of conversations over the last year or so concerning the ventilation island ducts, or whatever you call them, on South Broad Street. I've not yet been able to determine from you whether or not they're going to be reconstructed. And, you know, we're doing a streetscape improvement, which began about a week ago, on South Broad Street. And the condition of those islands is deteriorating to a point where they're actually very dangerous can. Could tell me for the record what, if anything, we're going to be doing about it? And one of the reasons we're doing the streetscape improvements now, as opposed to a year from now, is because the Republican National Convention is coming, and Broad Street's going to be the main thoroughfare. COMMISSIONER PEREZ: My understanding is that in those locations where the vents are installed, they're installed expressly for the ventilation of the subway system. And by 3075 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 consequence, SEPTA's responsible for maintenance and/or replacement. The part of the answer that I don't have for you is what SEPTA's planning to do, if anything.
Yeah. Well, I thought our conversation was that we determined that they were the responsibility of Public Property. I mean, I got bounced from SEPTA to you, and then I thought that you had indicated to me that it was -- COMMISSIONER PEREZ: And that's the perennial problem with that kind of question. It happens with the vents, it happens with some of the transit stations. Because we were original the owner pre-SEPTA. We were the original owner of the land that the easements that were granted, but the Department itself hasn't directly done that kind of work for many, many, many years.
So, again, if I understand you correctly, they're in the center of Broad Street. COMMISSIONER PEREZ: Yes.
These are the 3076 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 median strips down the center. COMMISSIONER PEREZ: Yes, correct.
That's the principal reason why SEPTA gets capital funds through Public Property.
So I need to go back to SEPTA again, okay. COMMISSIONER PEREZ: Yes, I believe so.
Thank you. Are there any other questions of the Commissioner? The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioner you responded to a question that I had asked about in a letter to the Council President on March 13, 2000. This is regarding who is responsible for cleaning what in the Center City concourse system. Commissioner, did you happen to -- as I best understand this map, the area where you come out from under the concourse, either from having taken the el or at 3077 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 least the trolly that takes you up in the area of Dilworth Plaza and those steps there and then there's the kind of the overhang -- COMMISSIONER PEREZ: Beyond the Post Office?
And you can avoid getting wet if you -- yeah, that whole area there. The map seems to indicate that -- is that our responsibility? COMMISSIONER PEREZ: I believe that's true.
And were you over that way today in anticipation of today's hearings? COMMISSIONER PEREZ: No. I had gone over shortly after, you know, your last inquiry to lock at its condition.
Well, as of today, unless it's been perfectly placed by someone else, it appears that the same trash that was there on Monday is still there today. And can you tell me why there is always that -- what would be the right phrase? Maybe an acidic, putrid smell that emanates from that section of the concourse area. 3078 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 Why does this always smell like that? COMMISSIONER PEREZ: The area takes on a dank odor anytime --
Dank. Is that -- that's D-A-N-K, is that correct? COMMISSIONER PEREZ: Mm-hmm, D-A-N-K.
That's dank. COMMISSIONER PEREZ: Whenever it rains, it --
It's got a danky smell to it. COMMISSIONER PEREZ: Yeah, following a rain. We do have a custodial program, and it does cover portions of that area, I believe all of that area. It's been fairly easy to take care of once SEPTA closed down or began closing down their system, with the exception of that particular intersection where we go west from Dilworth Plaza toward the ticket office and the Post Office and 3079 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 turn left or head south toward the el entranceways and eventually come above ground at the close pin stairwell. There is no physical enclosure there and so whatever happens at night, we have to clean up in the morning. There really shouldn't be a condition where something's been left unattended. Those lapses do occur from time to time. We have, you know, ways to correct it, including financial penalties to the vendor. We also have managers whose responsibility is to go looking for those problems and follow up on them immediately.
Is there supervisor personnel checking on what the workforce is doing? COMMISSIONER PEREZ: Yes.
Okay. COMMISSIONER PEREZ: Yes, City supervisory personnel, not just contract personnel.
So your response is that the underground concourse is cleaned overnight, from 10 p.m. to 6:30 p.m., six days a week, Sunday through Friday. 3080 3/22/00 - WHOLE - BILLS 000003-000010 COMMISSIONER PEREZ: Those are the portions that we are responsible for, yes.
So essentially you clean every night. COMMISSIONER PEREZ: Yes.
Except from Saturday into Sunday? COMMISSIONER PEREZ: Yes.