You have grants revenue, purchase of services, and an NTI page for L&I .
So you have $34 million in your budget for NTI activities, and you're telling me that if I wanted a fence I can't have one? Even though we have an ordinance that says if I make a request and if the Commissioner deems it needed, you'll provide one? And naturally, I wouldn't send you a request that wasn't valid.
This is a new problem for us. We assumed that we could do the same thing with the NTI bond money as we could do with General Fund demolition money. It turns out that as a 1795 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET result of that information that Bob got that very possibly -- I'm not sure that -- I don't know what Patricia Smith's base of knowledge was for making that statement. So we'll have to look into that further and get back to you.
No, I think I'd like to understand that right now. We're in an L&I hearing, you've got $34 million in your budget for NTI activities, you're telling me that I can't have a fence if I make a request. I need to know why I can't have a fence right now.
The explanation that I was given is that if it's not specifically delineated in the list of things that you can do with the money, that it can't be done. So for some reason fencing wasn't put on the list.
Well, in the NTI program budget and statement there's a provision in there for the creation of a fencing committee. So clearly, someone must have thought that fencing was going to be an issue if not a programmatic initiative in the program since they conceived or anticipated the creation of a fencing committee. Why would you have a fence committee as a part of 1796 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET the NTI Program budget and statement if you weren't anticipating putting up fences? My suggestion is, why don't you make a phone call, see if you can get Ms. Smith so she can explain why we don't have a fencing program? I have many other questions. Who is responsible for trees on vacant lots or the taking down of a tree on a vacant lot?
Presently, Councilman, our specification calls when we demolish a building for the removal of a tree on the lot. And also --
Is it a complete elimination or removal of a tree or is it down to a certain point?
I believe creating a stump. I would have to read the spec. I believe it's like a couple feet that the stump remain.
Can you tell me why we would leave a stump on a vacant lot under that circumstance and not remove the entire structure?
We remove a dangerous condition. Code calls for us to render the tree safe. The stump rule --
Well, if kids are 1797 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET playing on a vacant lot, a stump can be very dangerous to them or to some other person who is on the lot. And since at the moment we're apparently not planning to fence them, I don't understand why don't we remove everything. It's not like we take the building down to three or four feet high. Is it a cost issue?
In the past, the goal with our specification was to remove the dangerous tree from falling onto properties, and we felt that if we got it to a stump, which I forget how many feet the stump can be, that we accomplished our goal of removing dangerous condition. And that's what our goal was to stop a tree from falling onto a vacant property.
I understand that. But given the equipment that's usually out at these sites, I guess what I don't understand is, I mean, between either a backhoe, a front-end loader or whatever, once you get it down to the or foot range, if you ran the piece of equipment into it, it would pretty much take that stump out of there. I think if you're going to clear a site, let's leave a clean, clear site with nothing on the site. I don't 1798 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET understand.
I know. I've had a few experiences with trees. Is this a cost issue or an equipment issue or the contractors don't have their own stump grinding equipment?
The people that we use to remove dangerous trees are demolition contractors, the same people that are on our emergency list that are pre-certified by the Department. And they're mainly the people that take down the trees for us and they're not tree removal experts.
But they're the only ones that tend to want to do the tree removal because of the dangerous condition and the proximity of homes. 1799 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET
At the same time, we're trying to encourage people in many instances to take the lot adjoining their property. And if they ever decide to try to do something on the lot, plant, benching, seating whatever, that person's not going to move the tree stump. They certainly don't have the resources. We're in there to take care of a wide variety of things. But you're saying that at the minimum, if there is a tree on a vacant lot, when the building comes down, they're at least going to take the tree down to this or foot limit?
Councilman, just to follow-up on that. These rules and regulations that we're talking about and the policies that we've followed were all pre-NTI. They were pretty much eliminating the obvious dangerous condition and not thinking about much about the future use of the lot. The whole NTI thinking has changed, and you're absolutely right when you talk about wanting to give the lot to the person next to door.
Right. I think a part of the program is the anticipated reuse of this thing. 1800 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET
So we don't want you to think we're dropping that. They're very valid issues and it's something that we will follow-up on that make sure that your concerns get addressed.
Let's talk a little bit about zoning, zoning disputes and resolutions. We've an opportunity to work together on a number of occasions regarding some changes to the Zoning Code on the automatic stay based on appeal and a number of other things. Not to get into the --
Councilman, I'm sorry to interrupt you, sir. To update you a little bit on the fencing, we have people looking into to make sure that my interpretation of what I heard at the meeting was correct, if we can or cannot use bond funds to provide fencing. So the Administration has people looking into that now to make sure that my interpretation was correct that day.
I appreciate that. Thank you. Councilman Cohen, I think, pretty well exhausted the issue of billboards and their legality and illegality. We don't have to necessarily need to go back over that territory. What I would like 1801 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET to get a better understanding of is we have certain situations where people are quite persistent in either violating the law or scamming the system and so they go to court -- I mean, they apply, they get turned down, they go to zoning, they lose at zoning, they appeal the loss, as is their right, Common Pleas Court, Commonwealth Court, Supreme Court, you know, the Hague, the UN, they go wherever they go, but they lose. I've been left with the impression over time that we're either left in a situation where we hope they ultimately stop doing whatever it is that they're doing or they take away whatever they put in place which was illegal in the first place. But that when push come to shove, we don't necessarily take the next step of either removing what it is that they do not have a legal permit for or legal zoning or stop them from doing what they've been doing which they have the legal right to do. So if someone put up steps that were illegal and they've exhausted every appeal possibility, would we go in and remove or abate that particular condition and then bill them for it as a final action because the owner or the applicant has refused to come into compliance with the law and they don't have proper 1802 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET zoning to do what they're doing?
There are many cases, for example, businesses that come into existence without legally going through a process where we have notified to cease operations. And the police have the right to arrest anybody that crosses our cease line, so to speak. And we put nightclubs and other type businesses out of business using that authority. In the area of abatement, where it's reasonable, where the steps would be something that were within a reasonable cost for us to abate, we might do something like that. It's a case-by-case analysis of what the effect of whatever is illegal.
Could you tell me, if you know, how many court orders we sought to force someone to do something in the past year?
Thank you. Tell me a little bit about your 1803 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET involvement -- it's mentioned in the testimony, which is what attracted my attention, your involvement with the CLIP Program.
We supply inspectors. The whole idea there is that there's a violation notice given by an L&I inspector to clean up a yard or do some other property maintenance thing. And there's a time limit given, usually a 10-day period, and the person is warned that if they don't do it that we will abate that condition ourselves and bill 12 them and lien their properties. When we first started doing this, our compliance rate was somewhere around 34 percent when we initially started the program. Now, I guess about a year and a half later, we're in the high 90s for compliance which make those original abatement dollars seem like very well invested money. So we're very happy with the CLIP Program, and it is the program that's absolutely necessary in the next neighborhood. The whole idea of creeping blight, if we don't address that next neighborhood and stop the creeping blight, that it doesn't make any sense to treat the blighted areas because we're just going to have to move to the next area if we don't stop the creeping blight. 1804 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET And that whole issue of the people who have the power to move out of a block, do so. And they leave the people who only have the option to lock their doors and stay there.
Where do you anticipate expanding your operations to next?
We actually supply the manpower for the violation part of that program and for some of the clean-up, but the actual administration of it is with the Managing Director's Office. I know that the success of that program has everybody excited and everybody wanting to move it outside of the original areas.
Well, not move it out. Let's make sure that we're clear. I'm very happy that it is where it is and it should continue to serve the neighborhoods where it started as a pilot program. But I think this is one of those situations where you don't need three to five-year longitudinal analysis to figure out whether it's working or not. Sometimes things just work. And the opportunity to expand into other areas, I think, is something that has attracted a fair amount of attention. 1805 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET
I don't want you to look at that time and thing that anybody was dragging their feet. There were a lot of problems around violations and about where people would be, about getting the right equipment. It took a little bit of time to get the right equipment in the hands of those folks so that the, if you will, the pilot program that we were running took a little bit longer than we think anyplace else will take.
Okay. Now, have you seen over the past couple of years any decrease in the cost, given the significant amount of work that will be available, any decrease in cost of demolition? Or is it, in fact, increasing?
That's a great way to be known. 1806 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET
That's a great name to have. My children will love to say, "My father is Mr. Demolition," I guess. The cost is going up because of the environmental concerns is the biggest reason. The cost to -- just with the contracts that we let with the asbestos abatement to identify where the asbestos is and then the cost to remove it has greatly, greatly increased our demolition. Also, if you remember, a couple years ago the Philadelphia Police Department Licenses and Inspections in the District Attorney's Office did an enforcement activity to determine that the contractors were leaving the proper fill in the holes or in the cavity created by the demolition. And apparently, that's driven up the cost of demolition. So that's the two main reasons. The cost of asbestos with the environmentals and what's being left in the holes in the demolition cavities is a lot better for the community and the surviving lots. And with that, Councilman, landfill costs have increased greatly. That's roughly -- the removal of debris is roughly 45 to 50 percent of the cost of demolition. 1807 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET
Okay. While we're waiting on the information regarding the fencing issue, I did want to mention to you that this is the NTI program statement and budget as adopted by City Council on June 2002. And on attachment 7, there is a section under the heading of management of vacant land, No. 2 is titled, "Fencing of Vacant Lots." "The City will establish a committee to review requests for fencing of vacant lots. The committee will meet quarterly and will include a representative from each of the following organizations, City Council, City Planning Commission, Philadelphia Horticultural Society, Managing Director's Office, and Office of the Mayor. The City will support the fencing of vacant lots only if, one, fencing is a component of a broader community-based plan; two, there is an articulated and reasonable purpose for fencing; and three, there is a strategy for stewardship of the land which can be sustained over time." Now, would that leave you with the impression, as a reasonable person, that fencing is a component of the NTI Program? 1808 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET
All right. We'll wait for the rest of the information. Thank you Commissioner. Let's talk about enforcement of complaints. One, is the Department's philosophy still presently that enforcement of the Philadelphia Code is primarily a complaint-driven process, or do we ever have people who are out, not so much looking for violations, but certainly a part of their job is to see what's going on out in the community and try to address problems at a lower level before they escalate into something else.
Yes, we do, Councilman. We are being proactive in a few areas. Right now as we're speaking, we have high-rise building program in effect, and tomorrow evening we look into code enforcement of nightclubs. And this is not due to the tragic accident in Rhode Island, this is an ongoing thing that we do yearly.
I understand. Tell me a little bit, though, about the kind of your more average residential community where people are doing all kinds of things and don't 1809 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET necessarily fit into any particular program, just the usual -- maybe this is a part of, you know, "The Usual Nonsense That You Have To Deal With Program."
No, I'm talking about the kind of stuff that Philadelphians often engage in, in either not taking care of their property, rental properties, rooming houses, party houses, all the stuff that people engage in on a regular basis that may not fit into a specific category. It's called "Life in the City."
I understand. We look in the properties more or less multi-family dwellings, R2 program. And they'll look into every issue when they're looking in those area. When we're into an area, we just don't target just the reason why we're there. If our inspectors see different issues that involve a yard, trash, or things of that nature, they'll look into writing violations on it. For the most part, being our City the way it is, we have a lot of issues in reference to the yards and property maintenance issues that without complaints, we wouldn't be able to normally 1810 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET see.
Well, I'm not suggesting that people should stop complaining. I mean, often it is the only way that you're going to know what's going on. On the other hand, there are just kind of things that are out there, and I guess I'm just wondering do we have people who are out on the street whose job it is to kind of seek to basically maintain a certain quality of life regardless of whether someone complains or not. I mean, I know that Councilman Rizzo has mentioned a number of times here and I've had the experience, I mean, whether it's the Water Department, the Streets Department, any of those guys. I mean, if I see a inlet that has caved in, I mean, I'm not going to drive past it and hope somehow someway that the Water Department is going to miraculously find out about it. I've called you guys about a house that seems to be under distress. I'm not an engineer, but I've learned enough from you guys to know that maybe there's something going on out thre. If I'm seeing it, other people have to see it. Whether it's ingrained in the culture or it's a part of a local neighborhood inspector who has a certain area 1811 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET to keep track of that you basically say, "What are the standards of the Code? What are the quality of life issues here? And I'm calling these things in and we're getting some action taken on them before either citizens start complaining," or you get some call from some whacky elected official like myself.
This doesn't totally answer your question, Councilman. We do have a pilot program that we just started with our construction inspector trainees looking at areas of City.
You know, we got as many pilots around here as US Airways .
I realize that. What we're doing is seeing what the return on the investment will be to put our construction inspectors out on the street specifically looking for illegal construction. And the areas that they're looking at, it's a combination of industrial, residential, and commercial strips that they're go out in advance of any type of complaint, go down the alleyways, follow trucks, looking about loading docks and see if we can find any indication of construction activity and we will it follow-up with violations and license checks. So we do want to be proactive 1812 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET in a lot of areas. We do need to be able to document what the return on the investment is and that's why we're meticulously looking at this specifically for construction permit activity at this point in time.
Councilman, we also have a great rapport with the Police Department and Fire Department. Unfortunately, I mean, they have many more ayes than we do. And we've given them instructions -- we now do promotional instructions to the Police Department from corporal on up to explain to them and give them a little initiative into what L&I does. It gives them a better idea. We have also talked to the Police Department in looking into training. Whereas, the Health Department shares their knowledge with the Police Department; we're looking into ways to have L&I inroads with the police officers to give them an idea of what to look for as far as simple proper maintenance or quality of life issues. We do get an enormous amount of referrals from Police Department and from the Fire Department on different issues that are just not life safety issues. There are property maintenance issues we get from the police 1813 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET and there are quality of life issues we get.
I want to follow-up on Councilman Nutter's -- I had this question planned, but Councilman got to it before I did. But I do want to comment on being proactive. Every time we -- not every time. But many times when we report a dangerous condition or clean and seal request, we get the impression in many case it's the first time that L&I ever heard about it. And that proactive approach, I would greatly appreciate the fact that people are out there looking for the things that constituents see. The majority of the work in most Council offices, District Council especially, are constituent service requests. I would love to the see the day, and Councilman Nutter mentioned we don't want to have people stop complaining, but it would be so nice to be say to a person, "Yeah, that's in there," in some type of database. It was reported on a certain date. A history. Because I think it's embarrassing for a Council office to have to get back to a person and say, "We reported that" 1814 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET and not "Well, it's been reported a year ago, six months ago, three weeks ago." It would be so helpful -- and I know your constraints with your computerization. But being proactive is so important. And I don't think we do enough of that. I described a job that I would like to see some day, and I've been talking about this for three years everybody says it's a great idea. Nothing ever happens. I would love to see a person, whether it's a L&I person inspector or Streets Department person, to see the same things that I see, that Councilman Nutter sees, the broken inlet, the stop sign that's bent over. Why should a constituent have to call about a stop sign that's knocked down and has been on the side of the road for six months? We need a person that works for this City to go out there. And then I'm told, "Well, that's every City employee's responsibility to report damaged inlets or stop signs or speed limit signs that are missing or any condition that lends towards a dangerous city." I would like to see, whether it would be a responsibility of L&I with the proper funding and staffing, that we put people out into a Councilmatic 1815 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET district. I understand that we have in the Streets Department a plan of all the street signs of everything that's installed. I see posts in the street, no sign attached to them, but there's a post. There was a sign there. There had to be something. For years I've been looking and I've 9 reported this sign that's there, a post, with 10 nothing attached to. Do you think that that's a 11 possibility that L&I could be doing more than just 12 looking for those things that you're now responsible 13 for, to have a job -- again, I'm not asking you to 14 try to do this with the existing budget and the 15 existing personnel numbers that you, but do you 16 think L&I could do more than just look at the issues 17 that you're responsible for and that we could have 18 like a super-inspector that's out there looking at 19 all of these various issues and reporting them. 20 Because people call, we call as members of Council to Water Department, Streets Department, L&I. It would be, I think, very efficient and very effective to have some professional eyes maybe out of risk management, I don't know, to be able to help with some of these things. But, Commissioner, the 1816 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET suggestion that a constituent gets is that house that's been filled with trash for a couple years when they call that it's all new to us like we don't know anything about it. Can we get the history from L&I on a particular address?
Well, the day you wish for is today. You have been able to do that for a while by virtue of the Hansen System that we have in effect. The Hansen System, when a complaint comes in, the Hansen System assigns it a number, and we give the person who calls that number. So when that person calls you, you might ask them what the complaint number is, what is the L&I number that they were given because that's the number that will allow us to track that particular complaint. In addition, when the complaint taker brings that address up on the screen, the complaint taker can see all of the complaints now. We had the same problem in L&I as the police had. All of our different call takers would take information and be sending people out willy-nilly without having any sense of the fact that two days ago there had been an inspection there. 1817 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET So now we can see all that. We can say, "Mrs. Jones, you called on such and such a date." I've mentioned here before that our inspections are invisible. A lot of time people don't know that L&I has been there. And we try not to go anywhere near complainant because we don't want to light the complainant up. A lot of times the complainant doesn't want anybody else to know that they were the complainant. So the inspection takes place. People don't know it. Now they're going to be able -- now by calling L&I we can tell them that in 60 days they'll be able to go on-line themselves and see all that and make complaints on-line. What I see in the future is the technology is going to y take care of the quality of life issues. The handheld devices are two-way devices. They can report back problems also. We can send information. But I don't want to spread L&I into an area that the Streets Department already has responsibility for. We're responsible for property maintenance. We're not responsible for the signs. And it's not that I don't want to be responsible or L&I doesn't want to be, it's that there already is another department that is 1818 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET responsible for that. The handheld devices are going to really open L&I up to a lot more efficiency in reporting back what's going on, us sending information out, actually making assignments and giving them the history, giving the inspector the history of that particular location right on the handheld computer.
Commissioner, I understand. That's great, it's coming. But here's the situation. A constituent calls. They don't have the little number you referred to. They have an address 8224 Provident Road because they've never called before. We e-mail things over to you, but there's no tracking system. The Streets Department's got a system that works fairly well. They respond back because it assigns a tracking number. We send things over to your e-mail address, it's just like sending you an e-mail but it's just to a different address. There's no real, as far as we can see at our end, any way we can track the progress of any particular job. Here's what I would like to know. How can I as office go in put in 8224 Provident Road and see what L&I's history is on that particular case so 1819 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET I can say to someone right immediately on the phone, "Your complaint has already been reported three weeks ago." And we could even send them a copy of it. My point being is it's very difficult to get the history or be able to intelligently speak because every case that comes in, we're like starting at zero because we have no communication. And I know when I first came to Council I asked technology people could we have access to certain areas of the operating department so we could look for ourself. And I don't know what we have access to from our database to yours, but we could be helpful to you in being able to tell people the status of a particular issue because almost every job that comes in is like brand-new to us. We don't necessarily track it at our end, and we have no idea how many times or how many calls have come in in reference to that particular location. So I hope you're understanding what I'm trying to say here. But again, I don't see that level of sophistication today. And you indicated there is some new things so if somebody could stop over and show me how to work all this stuff, I'd love that. 1820 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET
I would like to invite you over, you and any Councilperson that's interested, over to L&I to see and get a demonstration of what we actually have now. What the person who calls L&I is talking to a call taker that has all the information that you're talking about that you wish that we had, we do have. And we're able to tell people that. And I urge anybody that is interesting in this to come over, see Hansen work, see the call intake that we've had for two or three years now. And we're building information. We had to start at ground zero. We couldn't take the corrupted data and put it into the system. So we had to keep building the Hansen system, but we've been doing that for a while, and especially on recurring problems we've got some pretty good records.
I think that's perfect. I think that what I need to do is have a sit-down with somebody from your organization and my organization so we can get the same page so we're not continually duplicating requests so we have maybe on-line capability to understand what we're dealing with here, because we send something over to 1821 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET you, we're at your mercy to get a response. There's times when I ask about a particular request that we made via the e-mail, there's maybe four that we get answers to and four more that we don't get answers to. So we need to develop a relationship that puts us in a position where we can manage our request to you because we can't, at least I don't believe we can at this point.
I'd like for you to have somebody contact me so I can get people together to kind of make my operation more efficient and give more support to yours. Councilman Nutter thank you for that long point of order.
Councilman, if I can make statement. As per the statement you read from the NTI ordinance that was passed, fencing will be done according to that. And the reason that I was out of the loop, our department, we're not mentioned in that. So that committee will be deciding where and when fences are provided, as per what you read to us about 20 minutes ago. 1822 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET
All right. So the bottom line on that portion is we will be doing fencing as a part of the NTI Program. NTI bond proceeds are eligible to used for fencing and in accordance with what's in the program statement and the law, because the law generally outranks even a program statement, as long as we do it in accordance with the law and the principles of the NTI Program, we can use NTI proceeds for fencing.
Thank you. Rental houses. Commissioner, I contacted you a little while ago about four properties in my district, 2436 North 54th Street, 5215 Church Road, 2030 Upland Way, and 2039 Upland Way. I would greatly appreciate it so I can respond to my constituents on those particular properties. It is our understanding from a variety of complaints and reports that these are single family houses that are rented to college students. We believe that there are more than three unrelated in the properties. I also want to give you some information that 2030 and 2039 were recently visited by L&I. 1823 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET It's my understanding that there was an inspector who is an L&I housing and fire inspector by the name of Ms. Daniels who was also there with a Stanley Robinson and a Lamar Cade. It is my understanding from the neighbors that Ms. Daniels found that both of these properties were in serious violation of the Philadelphia Code. 2030 was found to have nine beds in the property. 2039 was found to be filthy and in her opinion, at least, should possibly be condemned. It is my further understanding from constituents that Ms. Daniels' opinion was overridden by the other two individuals on site and that a determination was made that no further action will be taken on those properties. I have not seen the houses personally, but I will certainly take from good report from the constituents. And the letter that I sent you, I believe, was prior to these most recent inspections. These properties have been a problem in the community, specifically the two on Upland Way. I do not understand the dispute, if you will, or difference of opinion between the various inspectors, and given the neighbors' knowledge of what's going on over there, how the other two inspectors could overrule the other person. This 1824 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET kind of activity cannot be allowed to stand. And if there are these kinds of conditions, they need to be addressed. I don't know what's going on between and among any of these folks. And quite honestly, I don't really care. What I care about is that we get action on these houses, that neighbors not be subject to all of these wild and bizarre conditions, whether of a housing nature, of a behavioral circumstance, or a gross violation of the Zoning Code. And these fit in the "Life In Big City Program" category. This is the stuff that goes on out in neighborhoods for which there is no special program but need serious and direct attention.
I'll have your answer by this afternoon, Councilman, on both properties. But if I'm not mistaken, I s personally involved with one of them. And there was an issue whether or not the supposed tenants that didn't live there that did live there moved out. But I'll have a report to you by this afternoon.
I appreciate it. Commissioner, with the computer system that you have, and I know I've called to -- there's some number where you can get, it's kind of like 1825 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET your central -- it's not the wondrous central personnel that we heard about. But you have some kind of central place where, I guess, you can give an address and people can plug it into the system and find out violations. I would like if you could print out for us in some kind of order, first by council district and then maybe alphabetical by street, I would like to know of every violation against every property in the City of Philadelphia to see what the level of the backlog is, because I have experienced in many instances there are violations sitting in the system that are five, six, seven, eight years old. I have no idea what's happening with those violations. I have no idea where they are quote/unquote in the system. Not just sitting in the computer but where are they in terms of going toward any kind of enforcement action, or are they just sitting in some kind suspended file somewhere. So I'd like to actually be aware of what's going on out there. And maybe to narrow it down, lest your computer guy back there, his head might explode, why don't we start at least with the Zoning Code violations that exist throughout the City? 1826 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET
Yes, we can do that. That's what the conversation is here.
Great. Tell me about implementation of the School Inspection Bill.
We have been in contact with the School District through our chief of the fire unit, John Higgins. We're looking into the different issues that have to be addressed, how the inspectors are going to address them. We've recently also added the inspections that involve charter schools. So we've been working along with the School District to identify different areas that are involved in legislation.
So Deputy Commissioner Verdi, the bottom line on that is?
And you expect to have the necessary reports compiled in the time frames as laid out by the legislation?
Commissioner, hope springs eternal. I need something a little better than hope.
We should have all the information compiled. Again, as I said, John Higgins is working on that along with som high-rise programs. I'll get an update from him to see how far along we are with that information. Again, all the information, Councilman, that may take a little bit time to get coordinated, was the information that we're doing in a data basis now and have to do redundant work when the system comes on board in July. We have to make sure the database that we're putting all this information into is accessible by the computer system whereby you'll be able to get your own report at a touch of a button. So it's taken us a little bit longer to have this information laid out for us for the computer system.
Okay. Give me an update, if you can, on implementation of the Educational Housing District Bill. You may remember that legislation.
Councilman, I'll speak to our housing chief in relation to when the survey is going start and information that he has already compiled.
Okay. Thank you very much. Madam Chair, I'm complete for this round.
Thank you. The Chair at this time recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell. Councilwoman Blackwell is going to yield to Councilwoman Tasco.
Thank you. On pages 47-29, 47-55 and 47-62, there are a number of professional services contracts to be let for various projects. Would you tell me what your efforts to include minority and women business owners in these projects? You have on -29 there's a $2 million lot cleaning program.
Councilwoman, that's Managing Director's Office, I believe. That's in their -- that's for the Managing Director's lot cleaning program that we discussed earlier. It's 1829 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET not controlled by L&I. And it's also done by City employees. It's not done by outside contractors, Councilwoman.
Why is it in your budget and not in the Managing Director's budget?
A leap of faith would be that we have to write violations to allow them to clean the lots and that's why it's part of our budget.
We have to write the violations that allows them to clean the lots. Under the Code, we have to order the owner to keep the lot clean and free of debris and weeds and noxious growth.
But it was just brought to my attention, as I said earlier, these are under Class 200, not under personnel. This is professional services. 47-29.
This is refuse removal so that we're talking here -- I don't have the details 1830 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET on that, but I'm presuming what we're talking about is, again, landfill costs, things of that nature that the City has to purchase once that trash is removed so that we can remove the trash and debris. This would support the lot cleaning efforts. When they take that trash off, they have to dump it somewhere.
Councilwoman, do you mind just two minutes for the stenographers to change.
Oh, sure. - - - 1831 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET
Councilwoman Tasco, please proceed with your line of questioning.
Yes. -29, Item 205, I'd like to know what that money is for.
That will be handled by the managing director's office even though it's in our budget. We will not be handling that contract.
I think the answer was given previously. The way the Philadelphia Homeland 1832 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET Charter reads, Department of Licenses & Inspections has to do the inspection and we have to order the lot cleaned, and we're the only people authorized to do that under the Charter. So we do that, and then the City is moving in and cleaning up the lot, and that's where this comes in. So it comes into our budget because it's an abatement function. Because what happens is, under that abatement power that we have in L&I, we can then bill the owner of the lot for the cost of the refuse removal. We could not -- if it was just under the managing director's office, they would not be -- they would be able to remove it, but they wouldn't be able to bill the owner. So the charge is put under L&I, so that allows for a billing of the services that are rendered by the City.
So do you have minority contractors who can or women -- well, that includes all women too -- that would be included in this contract?
I don't have the details on that. I know that in the contracts we have in demolition, which they do refuse removal, we do have a significant number of minority and female 1833 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET contractors, and I would suspect there are people available, but you'd have to talk to the folks who administer that contract.
So you're saying the managing director is going to supervise this lot --
Okay. Fine. You have transportation abatement of nuisances, but also in Class 200.
Well, the transportation actually is SEPTA. We have a large -- and mileage reimbursement to our inspectors. That's a purchase of service, but it's not a contract, other than the fact that we buy SEPTA passes or we reimburse our people for mileage. So there is no participation there.
I think it's a standard rate that's negotiated with the unions, and it's 31 cents a mile at this point.
Okay. And the nuisance abatement? 1834 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET
Nuisance abatement is hazardous chemical removals, and we have contractors. They have to be certified to do that type of work because of the nature of the materials that they're removing. And we use them, we call them. And typically what happens is, we're paying for that. A lot of that work is, the fire department goes out and they find these hazardous chemicals or materials, and then we're actually paying the charge for having a certified contractor come in who is certified to handle those kind of hazardous chemicals and remove them.
Okay. Let's go to -55. What about your commercial off-the-shelf software license?
Well, there we're actually paying for the use of software, and that's just a commercial product that we're buying. It would be like Microsoft Office. In this particular case, the company is Hanson, and they produce a software product that we're going to be using on our computers. And we do have a minority vendor involved with the Hanson program. 1835 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET
Excuse me a minute. Okay. On -54, looking at Item 251, there's a $1.7 million item, departmental automation initiative. What does that mean?
That's the major contract that we're going to implement to get the Department fully computerized in the coming year. And the contracts have not been awarded yet, but we hope to have them awarded. The contractor that we've been using up to this point is Hanson Technologies, Inc., and there is a minority participation there of approximately percent in that contract. 15
Where are they 19 located? Where is Hanson located? 20
How do you spell it? 1836 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET
Well, women are considered minorities, although we're the majority. Excuse me a minute. Looking at -62, you have for year 2002 and estimated for 2003 repair and maintenance, stucco of exposed parted wall following demolition of adjacent building. Why are we doing that? Shouldn't the contractor do that?
If you notice, these are estimated obligations. In '04, we're no longer going to be doing this. Up to this point, we've had separate contracts for the stucco contractor and the demolition contractor. Under the NTI program, which will be funding demolition hence forth, the primary contractor will be responsible to sub out the stucco work, and he'll have the entire contract.
The reason for that, Councilwoman, is, it gives the contractor more opportunity to gain minority and MBEC and WBEC and 1837 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET handicapped participation, but more subcontracting opportunities that are in the bid.
Okay. I think that's it. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell.
Good afternoon. I assume that I'm probably the last, so --
Cheese and rice. So suffice it to say, I thought I would be last and wanted to say thank you all for all that you do. Our City couldn't run without you. Thank you. Thank you all.
Thank you. Councilman Rizzo, your light is on for 1838 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET you to be recognized.
Thank you, Madam President. Commissioner, I'm going to take advantage of you all being here to ask a question, and, again, it goes back to a safety issue. I'm dealing with an issue right now that involves a large complex, many hundreds of apartments, and I'm learning from the residents that this particular complex -- and I won't name it publicly here; privately I will. And I'd appreciate it if you know what I'm talking about, don't reveal it -- has no emergency lighting, exit signs, nothing. They're hanging their hat on the fact that they have dual service from PECO Energy that in the event they lose a circuit, that it switches over to the alternate circuit. Now, I think all of you know I did 33 years at PECO, and I can tell you many times these circuits do transfer almost instantaneously, but there's many times that they don't. How we can allow a multi-level many-floor apartment complex to have no emergency lighting or illuminated exit signs -- they lose the 1839 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET power in this building, there's no windows, it is as dark as can be. And the management company says that there is no requirement to do that because they have dual service. Well, I'm not sure that that is something you should allow to continue. So I'd like to comment on -- did I express the facts as -- is that an accurate description, that if a complex has dual service, that they don't have to have emergency lighting or illuminated exit signs?
They don't have to have an emergency back-up generator. There can be in this case -- in this room, you'll see different heads for emergency lighting. In the case of that building, the emergency lighting may be on the system, on the line system itself, where when it switches over, a certain amount of lighting happens in the hallways and the common areas.
Well, nothing 1840 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET illuminated.
Because certain signs are not electrified, but there are signs that are able to be seen in the dark. There's a different type of sign that's being used in different areas. It's an approved sign to be used in buildings. It doesn't have to be an illuminated sign. It has to be illuminated in the dark.
How do people find their way through hallways with no lighting?
Again, the system in the building may not be a back-up generator, but a switchover on PECO's line, which has existing the lighting on the emergency system. Just because if you go into certain buildings; for instance, the Municipal Services Building across the street, just because you don't see emergency lighting heads doesn't mean they don't have the system on an emergency lighting back-up.
Commissioner, I must not have expressed myself clearly. This particular building has no lighting for exit during -- no 24 battery back-up lighting. The dual circuit -- Commissioner, when a complex applies for electric 1841 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET service, there's two things they can do. They can have a single service or they can have a dual service. In the event there's an interruption on Service A, instantaneously a circuit breaker is supposed to close and restore to the service. It's supposed to happen like that. The building management company claims that they have to have no battery back-up because of the situation that they have dual service. I have tenants at that particular complex telling me right now that they have experienced interruptions of electric service, there is no lighting. You can't see your palm in front of your hand in this particular building. And they claim that they do not have to have back-up lighting because the Department of L&I doesn't require it because they are a dual service building.
Councilman, if you give me the address after our hearings, I'll be happy to look into it and get a report to you.
But do you know of any requirement not have battery back-up lighting?
No, not until I look at the situation. But, again, dual services are allowed, 1842 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET and if Dave wants to speak to it.
Councilman, in terms of providing the power for the emergency systems, there was a cut-off date -- I believe it was 1981. I can get you the exact date -- in which older buildings that had dual service, they're allowed to continue to have that dual service to supply emergency systems. That's not to say that they're not required to have certain lighting on an emergency service or exit signs. They would still need to have that. Just having the dual service doesn't make that building exempt from emergency systems. But they can use the dual service, as being an older building, to provide a back-up power source.
And I can tell you from experience that there are occasions when that transition from one service to the second service does not work as smoothly as a circuit breaker popping in your home and you walk up and reset it. It doesn't always work that way. And this building pre-dates that '81 date that you have mentioned, and I believe these folks that run this particular building are hanging their hat on that, and people 1843 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET that live in this complex have experienced interruptions of power and have been in a situation where they are in total darkness and terrified when that occurs. Not frequently, but it has occurred. And I think what we really need to do is to go back and look at how many buildings fall under that grandfather situation to see if maybe we ought to rethink that and put some emergency back-up, the battery-type, that at least give people the ability to exit a building in safety in the event of a power interruption. Who is to say that both circuits don't go? I mean, to have that back-up, have that rationale that because they have a back-up makes it okay, you could have -- you know, there's been many times both circuits have gone. Hospitals have two circuits, and there's been situations where hospitals have lost both circuits and had to go to their back-up generation equipment, where I don't believe this property has a back-up generation system.
That's a good point you make, Councilman. I think we'll have to look into it, as Dominic Verdi says, but I think they're 1844 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET misinterpreting what the intent of that 1981 cut-off was. Also, because of the 9/11 incident, there is code research and a school of thinking that regardless of having -- whether or not your primary power is in place, that buildings should also include battery-type emergency lighting and exit signs. Because in the event that you have a major failure in that building where all the external power is cut off, you still want to provide lighted egress paths. We may be seeing that coming into the codes locally as a result of the experience up at the World Trade Center.
I think most of us in this room, other than a few, live through the total interruption of power throughout the east coast back in the early '60s, I think it was, where we were without power. Dual services, three services, four wouldn't have worked. The grid that fed the electricity to this region was out. And I can imagine living in a complex like that trying to get out where there's no, even on the daytime, light from outside. 1845 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET So I would appreciate -- I'm going to work with you. I'll give you the name of this particular complex privately, because I don't want to alarm anyone that may live there and not be aware of this condition. But I think we have a bigger picture also to look at to explore how many situations like this exist in our city that may need to have, again, a good relationship to get this problem resolved with the property manager. Not running in and citing them, but working together to try to address my concern and yours, I can see that. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. MR. McLAUGHLIN: Thank you.
You're welcome. Councilwoman Tasco's light is on. Is she in the room?
Very well. Any other questions from members of the Committee? Seeing none, gentlemen, thank you very much. 1846 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET
Next to testify is the Board of L&I Review. Hello. Back again.
Good afternoon, Councilwoman Verna. Once again, I'm here as the Boards. My last time.
Councilwoman Verna, Members of City Council, I am here representing the Board of Licenses & Inspections Review. I am here today to testify on behalf of the Board and our FY 2004 budget request of $212,000, an increase of $2,446 over our FY '03 estimated obligations. This increase reflects monies to fund wage increases to our support staff. The budget we are requesting will provide for a full-time staff of three employees, as well as funding six Board members. In FY '02, the Board heard and rendered decisions in 702 cases. In FY '03, we are projecting that we will be hearing 1,030 cases, and we projected in FY '04, 1,111 cases. 1847 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET Currently the Board is hearing and rendering decisions in approximately 60 days from when an appeal is filed with the Board. Thank you, and I would be happy to answer any questions.
Thank you. Councilwoman Blackwell, do you have any questions?
We are. Councilwoman Verna, I am Richard 1848 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET Feldgus, administrator of the Department of Licenses & Inspections who overseas the Boards. I'm here to testify on behalf of the Board of Building Standards' fiscal year '04 budget request of $121,054, an increase of $2,103 over our FY '03 appropriations. This funding will support two full-time employees and four Board members. The role of the Board of Building Standards is to advise the Commissioner of the Department of Licenses & Inspections on requests for variances, as well as provide interpretations of the Building Code and make suggestions for standards and regulations dealing with building safety. The Board also reviews new and substitute materials and methods of construction and makes recommendations to the Commissioner to keep Philadelphia up to date and competitive with the latest building technologies. In FY '04, it is anticipated the Board will conduct 50 meetings and hear 275 cases. In FY '02, the Board heard 275 cases and has provided recommendations to the Commissioner on those cases. The time for obtaining decisions from 1849 3/5/03 - FY '04 OPERATING BUDGET the Board is currently 30 days. The Board also provides accelerated hearings to persons requiring quick turnarounds. A total of 49 accelerated hearings were conducted in FY '02. I will be glad to answer any questions at this time.
I don't have any questions. Councilwoman Blackwell?