Thank you, Madam President. Good afternoon and, again, thank you for your patience with us. I want to go particularly to, since Councilman Green, who is our technological Councilman of record, I want to know, how much has been expended thus far for your visionary consolidation plan? How much have you actually expended towards equipment, towards whatever investment in that plan you have? How much money have you spent thus far?
Well, I mean, I could relate to just we've been spending 255 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. based upon our normal Fiscal Year '9 and '10 Operating Budget. As it relates to spending particularly in consolidation, what we have been doing is routinely replacing hardware and equipment that is near failure or needs to be replaced for critical operating needs. We've also, as we've been consolidating, literally turning off computers, and as I mentioned in my testimony, we talked about turning off as many as 111 servers. In effect, that's out of 157 that I actually brought into the data center. So it's a very high percentage.
So what does that represent in outlay of capital, how much --
Well, right now I don't have any particular specific capital outlay associated with the bringing in of those servers. What we have done, though, to answer your question, is relative to the network, we have begun to purchase the replacement 256 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. for network switches that would allow us to have the high-speed network that we need.
I'm looking for a dollar amount in equipment. Do you have that?
I would have to get back to you on a specific dollar amount to answer that question.
What percentage of that equipment has gone to minority and female equipment providers?
I can't answer that question in terms of equipment providers. Our procurement process in terms of the purchasing of equipment --
How much have you expended in professional services and consultants?
Well, in the prior year, the budget was roughly, give or take, around 35 million in total in professional services across the City.
How much of 257 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. that has gone to minority, female and DBEs?
The Division of Technology target for this year is 6 percent. 7
What did you 8 actually expend to minority and female 9 companies in professional services last 10 year? 11
Let me see if I can 12 find that number for you, sir. 13 In Fiscal Year -- if we use 14 Fiscal Year '09 actual, which was the 15 full year, total contract was 10,863,489, 16 which 2,192,000 went to minority or -- so 17 that's roughly 20 percent in '09. 18
So wait a 19 minute. You said you spent 20 -- what 20 was the overall figure? 21
I'm referring to 22 the total amount of professional services 23 in IT across the City, across the entire 24 City. 25
How much was 258 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. that?
That was roughly 35 million for across the City, which I 5 did not have control of. 6
So out of 7 your procurement power, what did you 8 expend? 9
What I've expended 10 very specifically, as I said, in '09 11 contracts equal to 10,863,000, of which 12 2,192,000 was minority, which was 20 13 percent, and in 2010 we anticipate on 14 contract value of 5.6 million, minority 15 dollar value of 1.4 million or 25 16 percent. And going into '11, I project a 17 35 percent total, and very, very 18 committed to that number. 19
All right. 20 I wanted to put that on the record. I mean --
-- if you're doing good work, I want to hear about it. If you're not doing work, we need room 259 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. for improvement.
How much of 6 those companies were Philadelphia based? 7
That's an 10 important figure for my interest anyway. 11 Are we -- and my last question, 12 are we going after any of the stimulus 13 dollars as a municipality? Have we 14 decided yay, nay on that? I had some 15 information from a time ago, but I don't 16 know if that is yet checked. 17
Yeah. We did 18 actually propose for broadband stimulus, 19 of which the City didn't get any based 20 upon the criteria of need. And so we did 21 submit, but didn't win anything, and 22 we -- there is submissions going on in 23 effect right now for round two. 24
Are we 25 planning to submit as a municipality? 260 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc.
Yes, we are. We're submitting -- there is actually three areas. One is called computer labs, which we are providing effectively computers in rec centers and things like that. And so we are going to be proposing there. And then in other proposal areas, actually third parties are actually proposing, of which we're just simply supportive.
I'll leave that to my other colleagues or I'll wait until my second round. My concern is, do you think there's going to be three selections from Washington for Philly? So, in effect, we're competing against other Philly funds? 261 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc.
Councilman, Steve Agostini, Budget Director. The broadband initiative as described by NTIA, which is an agency in Commerce, had three different categories, and given that we're not awarded any dollars in the first round for reasons that we still can't quite understand --
-- we thought it was important to have a bid in each category so that we could maximize our ability. I think they're going to award on a per-category basis as opposed to look at our three and say, You've got three, pick one. They haven't done that yet, and based on conversations I've had with Commerce, it doesn't sound like that's what they're going to do.
Councilman, if I could also add, though, because you made the point about are we in fact competing against other Philadelphia entities, and 262 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. one of the things that I'm very proud of is, I think both in the first round and in the second round, we actually did a tremendous amount of community outreach. So we're trying to coordinate. To me it's not about the municipality winning. It's about the City winning and maximizing. So we brought together around 50 different agencies, non-profits, universities, and so coming up with these three proposals was a result of the group coming together and saying, What's the best way to maximize the win as a city. So I want to make sure that's very clear, sir.
Mr. Frank, what are the projected savings and/or efficiencies of the consolidation of IT services to the Division of Technology? 263 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc.
The savings will come in a number of ways. First of all, one part of the consolidation, as I started to talk about, is the physical consolidation of equipment and hardware, and that's really turning off redundant pieces of equipment that no longer are needed. We're right now in the middle of that process. So as an example, we estimate -- and this is just an estimate -- that we have something close to 1,000 servers or computers in the City. I mentioned before that just recently I brought in 157 of those into my data center and were able to turn off 111. Now, I don't have a calculator with me, but that's a heck of a large percentage. We estimate that each server we turn off on a full-year basis probably saves the City close to $3,000. So over the long term as we reduce the number of servers -- and what I'm hoping -- again, it's a rough count of about a thousand. 264 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. I would expect as we look forward certainly over the three- to five-year horizon, those number of servers would probably be cut by a third, if not more. So one is physical equipment and the savings associated with the purchase, maintenance and support. The second is software purchases, and we're talking about basically purchasing application software that was primarily done by each department, and now we're coordinating that centrally. So one of the things we're also doing is making sure that we're only purchasing software that we need. We're moving towards Enterprise licenses. And over the course of the years, we expect to be able to reduce specific software purchases by several million dollars. And then what we're also doing is looking at, which is a very important piece for me, professional services in contracting. One of the things that 265 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. dismayed me when I did come into government was the number of vendors and the variability of the pricing in the rates that we're paying for the same skills. So we've been working inside government to redefine our, what I call, our IT sourcing or procurement process so that we in fact can drive the cost of our contractor fees down significantly. We also expect over the course of time energy savings, which I can't quantify because of the fact that I'm reducing by orders of magnitude the reduction in hardware and things like that.
Well, with that being said, based on the consolidation of IT services and the $28.5 million you are receiving, what are the savings you expect to achieve over the five years?
One of the difficulties that I have inside technology is that we're remedially 266 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. correcting, let's just say, many years of things that we need to fix. So what I'm doing is reinvesting, if you will, savings back into the infrastructure. So relative to the specific budget itself that we've presented, we have some savings identified, but we also effectively need to continue to spend the money next year in order to rebuild our infrastructure. So I don't think we're going to see a net savings, if you will, to the bottom line. We will see savings in one category and spending in another.
Don't you think we should see some savings over the next five years in the Five Year Plan?
Madam President, I think it is a good question, and I think that over time we should be seeing savings in either fewer positions over time, which we should be able to quantify 267 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. after we've done the investments, which is where we've had the difficulty and the challenge. I think having greater productivity in the existing workforce would also be a savings. It may mean we need fewer people to do the things that we're doing. In terms of the costs of the hardware and the software, we may generate efficiencies with that as well. So I think it is fair to say that at some point over the Five Year Plan we should start to realize some savings. Until we are a little deeper into this, it will be hard for us to really put a number down and say, Yes, we have confidence in that number, and I think that's really been the struggle that we've had in terms of trying to identify a number.
Good 268 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. afternoon.
During Deputy Mayor Gillison's testimony, he stated that the Department of Homeland Security had upgraded Philadelphia from a Level 2 city to a Level 1 city. Due to this upgrade and the recent grant award, it is my understanding that Philadelphia will receive new federal dollars for cameras to protect vital areas. My questions are three. With these funds, how many new cameras will be installed and when will the project start and when will it be completed?
We're projecting roughly another 250 cameras with the grants currently in hand, but there is also obviously a continuing expectation that we will continue to seek more grant dollars.
We currently have 269 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. roughly 200, of which I think roughly 170 or 180 are operating. So then that would add another, as I said, roughly 250 on top of that.
We have 200 installed, of which around 170, 180 are operating, and then we hope to install another 250.
You said 17 200 have been installed, 170 are 18 operating. 19
If you recall, there was an article sometime back that some of these cameras had bags on them, and that's because we don't have the 270 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. infrastructure to actually connect those cameras to the network. And so what we're doing is -- that requires fiber. That's called fiber network, and so those cameras will be operating as soon as we complete that part of the network.
So with the new dollars that might come in as a result of us being upgraded from a Level 2 to a Level 1, how much will we get? Do you know what the dollar amount is?
Good afternoon, Councilwoman. My name is Joseph James. I'm Deputy Chief Information Officer for the Division of Technology. The recent grant we received was approximately $4 million. We received that last year, and that will be able to fund the 200, 250 cameras that we recently are planning to do in the next 271 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. round. The money that --
So is that in addition to the 200 that you've already installed?
Yes. The 200 that we have already installed was done by the City funds.
I think the intent is to get close to around 500 cameras in total.
Now, if you're having a problem with the installation and you don't have the fiber, are you going to use any of that money to deal with -- I have no idea about this stuff, but in terms of the fiber, how do you plan to -- you're going 272 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. to install the cameras, but they too will have bags on them and won't be working?
No. The plan for the additional funding that we recently received for the 200 to 250 cameras I mentioned, the way they're being laid out is to integrate into our existing fiber infrastructure that we built from the original funding. So what we've done is, we've built out a network or a spine of fiberoptic cabling so that we can expand upon the placement of additional cameras off of that spine, thereby reducing the amount of additional fiber we need and then accelerating the deployment of those new cameras and not have a situation where we have bagged cameras and then have to go back and fix them later.
So what's going to happen to the 30 that you didn't put in with the --
We're going to get them unbagged as quickly as we can and get them operational. So we have about 273 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. 30 that we need to get unbagged and online.
We're doing that internally with our own people right now. We're working that now.
Okay. And so can you use the $4 million to also address the data storage issue with the existing cameras?
That's the plan. As we expand, the additional $4 million will provide a certain amount of additional storage. It will expand our storage capability in total so that we're trying to build the storage on about 500 cameras that can support 500 cameras.
The additional funds that you have received, the $4 million, and you plan to put in 200 to 250 cameras -- 220 to 250, I guess my question is, have these locations for these cameras been identified? 274 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc.
Some of the locations have been identified. The locations that are being identified by Police and through the Department of Homeland Security has specific critical sites that they require that we put cameras around. So there's a mandate of camera locations that the federal government has already said we have to cover. They are historic sites and critical infrastructure sites. And then there's additional sites that the Police Department will be identifying for the placement of cameras.
Well, the other one, Mr. Frank, I just want to ask you, I had an interest in the Mayor's Commission on Technology since that Commission was a result of Council hearings and the Executive Order passed 275 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. by Mayor Rendell at that time. Have you given any thought to if you're, one, going to continue the Commission and then what kind of form do you think it might take? I know we had some conversation about this, and you may have your ideas about how it should work. I'd just like to have that for the record.
In the future, we do see the need to develop some sort of governance similar to kind of the Mayor's Commission on Technology as it existed in the past. I think some of the conversations have been we need to really broaden out the constituency and really focus on going forward, what type of leadership do we need and what do we need to do in the City. The historical programs of the Mayor's Commission on Technology, with the untimely death of Carole, who we all loved, what we wanted to make sure is that some of those very important 276 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. programs continued. So we actually are talking to other non-profit groups in the City, including the Black Data Processing Association and mPower, talking about perhaps they would be ideal homes programmatically for some of the programs. And what I would see in the future, whether it's called the Mayor's Commission on Technology, whatever, is we really need to look at this as kind of a planning body, I think, that would combine both stakeholders outside of government as well as government. But, again, in the short term, with her untimely death, I was most concerned about those specific programs that she herself had actually created and that -- so what we felt was, let's try to find them a great home from a sustainability perspective.
Well, the initial concept was to deal with the future and the information superhighway, because we started this back in 1999, was 277 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. the City going to be ready, and to develop the plans of how the City would cope with the new technology. So that was -- and I just think the program emanated as a result of whatever activity they were doing. But it was to be a planning committee and broad based and community based also with business, labor and community involved to talk about how Philadelphia would address the whole technology issue.
And I think that's consistent with what I believe we also need going forward. We're just having to reorganize and kind of rethink the Charter right now.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Sanchez.
Thank you. 278 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. Good afternoon. First, let me start off by congratulating your ability to at least on paper consolidate your department.
We're going to use you as a model for consolidation, so there's a lot riding on this. Okay?
We want this to really work. So I do congratulate you. I know that breaking down those silos. How are you operationalizing all these different units in the different departments and what's the communication back and forth?
It's a great question, and this sort of thing is almost like, if I can use the commercial world, kind of like a merger. We actually have IT people in 33 agencies, and some are small and some are large. 279 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. So let me just first say that consolidation isn't -- the hard part isn't about the technology. It really is about human beings and culture and how do we really move forward and build something sustainable for the City. So to answer your question, first of all, there's a couple of premises that we started with, and, that is, believe it or not, do no harm. In other words, one of the dangers with something like this is rearranging the deck chairs so quickly that people come in in the morning and they don't know what their job is anymore. So let me just say that one of the things that we've done in working with the department heads is basically saying that on day one, a group working in the department continues to work in the department and that the IT Director and those people absolutely have the 100 percent responsibility of satisfying that department head and those department 280 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. needs, even though they may shift on my payroll. So, first of all, number one, make sure that we maintain a stable environment during that initial transition, because there's a lot of emotion and fear as to, oh, my gosh, what's happening to me. Second thing that we're doing is starting a process of communication at many different levels and obviously having to recreate some governance that includes bringing IT leaders together, also getting stock of what our gaps are, what type of IT leaders we need. We've lost some because of retirement and others. And then I've started a process of just even informally coming in and talking to the whole teams, because it really doesn't have to be something scary. So a lot of the front end of the consolidation is really all about calm down, let's maintain what we're doing well and let's start becoming a cohesive team. 281 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. What we're also doing is -- one of the difficulties for me is to actually understand the great talent that we do have. I mean, you can look at a piece of paper and say, you have so many people, but the real question is, how do you get to know these individuals. So that's the other part of this, is kind of the education process of sitting down with the employees. We're also pulling together surveys and things like that, creating newsletters. So, again, it might sound trite, but the fact of the matter is is that we're trying to create a home for a future.
How is the decision-making? Ultimately as folks -- as you say, people have to maintain their systems. In terms of decision-making at those levels, how is that filtering up and back down?
Well, let me divide the problem into kind of small, medium and large departments. 282 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc.
I won't take it. Well, here's how it works: First of all, you maintain a governance structure at the department level so that the department head certainly of the larger departments run a monthly IT steering committee, which I sit at the table along with the other IT people. So, first of all, a very close connection with the department and setting priorities, and that's where it starts. And so my priorities are set by the departments' priorities.
So as it relates to areas where we had already made significant infrastructure investments, DHS Cares, Hansen, I know the Streets Department uses other technology, how are we working to interface those and are we going to be able to interface those?
The terminology in 283 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. my world is called architecture. It's kind of like what's the building look like. So effectively what I've actually been doing over the last year is trying to document what the heck our architecture is, how the leg bone connects to the shin bone, all these computers. And specifically for the purpose of when we come together, how will all these systems fit together. So a chunk of some of the investment that I talk about of certainly this year and then going forward is about putting in place some of the technology to make these systems talk together a lot better, and that really is the technical challenge for us. But it's a lot easier when you can look at it as a whole than the way we've had to do it, which is making decisions a department at a time. So, in fact, we're working with the Department of Licenses and Inspections and making sure that we can integrate Hansen. I've worked very heavily with 284 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. DHS and in fact Dr. Schwarz on how do we expand the use of Cares. So nothing is going away. It's how do we make this thing better.
So none of that interfacing has happened yet. You're still kind of assessing, figuring out what we're going to keep?
No. We're actively building. I mean, that's why -- some things are harder than others. We have a Streets interface working. We're working with L&I to interface the Hansen, because it's just more complex. Cares, we have been working with them. We are building systems.
I'll wait for my next round. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Jones.
Thank you, 285 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. Madam President. I think most of my questions were answered in the first round, so what I'd like to know is, as we start to move this technology piece forward and by way of the camera infrastructure, if I forget --
Yeah, Joe James to come back up. (Witness approached witness table.)
At what point -- I know you're corresponded with high-crime areas, and at what point will we have, based on the analysis of some of the hardest police districts, when will we have covered those critical mass areas in your projections?
Well, we started out the replanning for this year based upon the Police gave us a priority list of those districts they wanted us to focus our attention on, and we did the 286 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. top eight. There are actually elements to the project based by particular target areas. The plan the way we are moving at this point in time is that we're going to probably be around this time next year, depending on funding and everything being in place and weather conditions and so forth, to be able to finish out the top 20.
Are there 13 any corresponding drops in crime and/or 14 apprehensions based on the installation 15 of the cameras? 16
Actually, 17 Councilman, I'm really not that 18 knowledgeable from the Police side. I 19 think that's a question for the Police 20 Department. Anecdotally, they have documented many cases where the cameras have assisted in their ability to reduce the amount of crime in the area and actually in the results of certain crimes occurring been able to identify and -- 287 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc.
So we should wait for the Police Commissioner to see if that -- okay. And, finally, do you also handle -- you handle Council's infrastructure by way of our computer system as well?
Council is supported through an outside contractor, as you know.
So as you do these upgrades, is there a direct impact on our technology or lack thereof?
So you're going to advise us how to keep up or are you giving us input so that we're not speaking apples and oranges, if you would?
My hope is moving 288 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. forward along the line of the fact that we really are trying together to raise the level of technology across the City, is working with Council on a couple levels. First of all, I would like us to do a better job of educating and providing training and support to Council for the use of the technology as it relates to the upgrades and the investments that we're talking about. As --
I was just text and told because of my comments, my computers have been shut off.
There you go. Well, the bottom line is is that as we increase the speed of the network, as we put in place all that, you will feel a direct impact, and that would be almost immediate. As we put in these new application systems, they would be made available to you. Again, what I'm trying to say is that there's also a tremendous 289 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. opportunity working with Council and saying how do you best use these tools and what do we need to do as a division to help Council in making them most productive in using the technology.
Similar to what we talked about with the 3-1-1 system and understanding how that works, there are many departments that we rely on for information in order to do our jobs, particularly with constituent service requests. So it is important to us to keep up with you guys. And, finally, do you manage our website as well or does that happen through our consultant?
I don't think we do much creatively. I think we run it on our computer.
That's an 290 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. understatement. My 12-year-old grandson could probably be more interactive on Facebook than we are in our website. We need to be able to engage constituent service requests from that, and it just fails to meet standards. So we'll talk.
All right. They said my computer is back on. Thank you, Madam Chair.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Goode.
Over the course of the budget process, my colleagues and I will be talking about the Mayor's goal of reaching percent 25 DBE participation in Fiscal Year '11. 291 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. Also in the course of budget hearings, I actually will be pulling out live RFPs that are still open. The Division of Technology has two contracting opportunities that are still open; is that correct?
There is one for third-party IT assessment in addressing, advancing and optimizing the City's cashiering and payment processing infrastructure. Does that sound familiar?
And there's another seeking a qualified contractor to supplement support of its recruitment efforts for both permanent hires and staff augmentation.
For the first contract, there is a goal for MBEs 292 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. of to percent participation. It says and/or 10 to 15 percent for women business enterprises. For the second, the opportunity says the City is anticipating these services will be provided by a single individual pursuant to the Mayor's Executive Order 02-05, as denoted above in No. 4 - Evaluation Services. Along with other criteria, preference will be given to minority, women and disabled businesses for project associated with this notice of opportunity. In one contract there are specific goals. In the other contract I don't know what that language is supposed to mean. My question for one is, who set the range of opportunity, and for the second, why was there not a range of opportunity set?
I can't answer here directly the second question of why there was no opportunity goals set, and I would have to go back specifically to the 293 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. Deputy around that one goal of the to 15. My understanding is that that percentage was given to us, but I don't think that's a good answer.
My question 7 is, I guess how can that percentage be 8 given to you? You are the expert in your 9 contracting needs, procurement needs. 10 You know what goods and services you need. You are a longstanding professional in the field. Wouldn't you better know what the capacity is for participation?
You mean the possibility of what the maximum percentage possibly could be? Yes, sir.
In other words, is 10 to 15 percent a real number or is it a number that was just created?
I don't think that that number necessarily reflects the true opportunity. So I think that it probably is representing a lower number than is potentially true in the marketplace. 294 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc.
So what role did you play in creating that number and what role do you believe you should play in creating that number?
The role I believe that I should be playing is to set the standard actually to maximize the minority participation, which is why you see on a going-forward basis, particularly in line with the level of investment that we're now making going forward --
This is a contract opportunity that is live. It's still open.
Yeah. No, I understand, sir. And so what I intend to do, which is why you see the 35 percent, and also what I am doing is reaching out to the minority community proactively going forward in order to really try to maximize the potential of participation. I really have no really good answer as to, again, for those particular 295 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. percentages on those two contracts.
For the second one, which does not have a specific percentage range, are you familiar with that language that I cited?
Are you familiar with the language I cited that says the City is anticipating these services will be provided by a single individual pursuant to the Mayor's Executive Order 02-05 and as noted above in 4 - Evaluation Selection. Along with other criteria, preference will be given to minority, women and disabled businesses for the project associated with this notice of opportunity. To be honest, it sounds like someone wants to give the contract to someone. They want to say that they entertained the idea of offering diversity, but they didn't set ranges because they either want to give the contract to someone specifically and/or 296 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. they do not want to create subcontracting opportunities if they are available. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Let me just say one thing. First of all, relative, for example, to the staff aug contract that we're speaking of, the participation after the selection was 66 percent minority. So, again, I can't -- I don't really offer any good excuse relative to the wording on those pages, but what I will absolutely stand by is my commitment to maximize it, and by action, not words, going forward.
And I hear you, and my response to that is actually that's why when we set the goals on an annual basis, there's such a differential and we never hit the goal, because the goals are not real. And we were told the goals will begin to be real. So, in other words, for these contracts or for your department, there may be a goal of 297 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. percent and you may reach 40 percent because you're trying to do the right thing, and that's a good thing, but the issue is, why is the goal-setting fake? Because to some extent, it seems to be fake, and I intend to not just look at the goal-setting on an annual basis, but to look at live contracting opportunities that are still open to see who set the goal and why and whether it's a real goal.
Are 19 there any further questions from members 20 of the Committee? (No response.)
We 298 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. will now hear from the Records Department. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Good afternoon. Welcome. Please identify yourself for the record. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes. My name is Joan Decker and I serve as the Records Commissioner in the City. I have with me today Jeanne Reedy and also Carl Zimmerman. And, Council President, I will just summarize the testimony.
Thank you. COMMISSIONER DECKER: For FY2011, the Records Department is presenting a General Fund operating budget of $4,009,212, a decrease of $1,325,603 from the Department's FY10 estimated obligations. The entire reduction is due to the IT consolidation. Class 100 is allocated at 299 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. 2,845,219, an increase of 26,000 from the estimated obligations of class -- I'm sorry; estimated obligations of $2,819,219 for FY10. This reflects an internal transfer from Class 300. The number of budgeted positions in staff remains the same at 63. Class 200, purchase of services, allocation changes from FY10 estimated obligation level of 2,389,890 to 1,083,719 in FY11, a decrease of 1,306,111. Again, this is due to the IT consolidation. Class 300, materials and supplies, decreases by 26,000 from the FY10 estimated obligations level to $60,502 for FY2011, reflecting an internal transfer to Class 100. Class 400, equipment, allocation decreases by 19,492 from the FY10 estimated obligations level to $18,266 for FY2011. Again, due to the IT consolidation. Class 500 remains at the FY10 300 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. level of $1,456 in FY2010. And our mission is reflected in the testimony, in the written testimony. And as for the initiatives that we have started and which will continue into FY11, I'm sure you know by now that we are responsible for the Document Recording area, and in this capacity, we've implemented as many enhancements as possible to automate the operations. We currently conduct electronic recording. We have over 200 companies that engage in electronic recording with us, and that's an approximate level on average 46 percent, but that fluctuates somewhat and is sometimes higher. We have also implemented a number of other types of automation, optical character recognition, to name one of them. We will continue into FY2011 our Document Notice program, and this provides notice to a homeowner any time a deed or a mortgage is recorded within the 301 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. Department, we send a notice. To date, almost a little over -- approximately 850,000 letters have been sent to homeowners. And we recently received a telephone call from Mayor Bloomberg in New York's office. They believe that our program is very robust and comprehensive, and they asked us a lot of questions. They would be interested in replicating it there. So that has been very, very successful. Again, we have done as much as we can to implement convenient and easy online access to all of our data, our recorded instruments. Our public service really involves not only members of the public, but a lot of the businesses in the City and also through the country, and the initiatives that we have implemented helps them to do their business a lot more efficiently. We have implemented in August a fee increase of $30 in Document Recording area, and to date, that has yielded 302 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. approximately 2 million -- close to $2.4 million. If the current recording volume continues at its current level, we project a total recording volume of about 145,000 documents, and that would yield just an increase in revenue of $4.3 million. The Department's OEO goal of the City's goal of percent, we expect 11 in the Records Department to achieve 12 about 33 percent of our contracts will be 13 to minority businesses. 14 As for the budget impact this 15 upcoming year, I'd like to say that the 16 Department's budget has been reduced by 17 47.8 percent. The Department's FY2011 18 budget was reduced by $1,325,603, or 24.8 19 percent, from FY2010. Since FY2009, the 20 Department has been reduced a total of 21 $3,670,659, or 47.8 percent. 22
23 Commissioner, do you mind repeating that, 24 please? How much of a decrease have you 25 had? 303 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Forty-seven point eight percent decrease since FY09.
Can we have that in dollars and cents, please. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Oh, yes. Sorry. Has been reduced a total of $3,670,659, 47.8 percent. Since FY2009, the Department's budget has been reduced by class as follows: 22.23 percent in Class 100; 70.55 percent in Class 200; 69.04 percent in Class 300; and 87.31 percent in Class 400. For FY2011, the Department's budget is reduced 55 percent in Class 200 and 52 percent in Class 400. And when we were here last year, we did talk about some of the reductions that we took last year. Last year's reduction was approximately 30.5 percent, and these were reductions and changes throughout the Department in all of our units. They involve the decrease 304 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. in staffing as well as professional services, materials, supplies and equipment. We also were -- we discontinued and closed several units and we lost about staff positions, which also 8 included some layoffs. 9 And some of the projects or 10 initiatives that we were not able to do, 11 again, cut across the department, they 12 included some scheduled upgrades and 13 enhancements in Document Recording and in other areas within the Department. We had planned to do some upgrades, implement some redaction technology for sensitive information on public records and also enhancements -- other types of enhancements as well that we think would have helped the Department. And there were also significant reductions in materials and supplies and equipment that affected all the units in the Department. The effect of these budgetary cuts continues into FY2011. Existing 305 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. resources will be allocated according to our services that are mandated by state and local law, and they will be prioritized accordingly. So we will deal first with those that are state mandates, which mostly govern Document Recording, our Registry and Mapping area, as well as public records that are subject to the Pennsylvania Right to Know Act Law. And these changes affect both the external services that we provide to the public as well as some of our internal services. The challenges facing the Department in FY11 are many. Many of the routine maintenance of equipment is discontinued. Materials and supplies are severely limited, including those supplies that are required to provide types of materials, such as receipts and so on, to the public when they come into our department to access services. Should any Councilmember wish to engage in further discussion on any of these matters, we are more than happy to 306 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. meet with Councilmembers at your convenience, and I thank you for your continuing support and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you very much, Commissioner. When you talked about your decrease, I didn't realize that $1.3 million of your budget is being transferred to the Division of Technology. Is it not? COMMISSIONER DECKER: That's correct.
What services are you proposing to transfer? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Well, the services would involve any technology that is used to support document -- it's really almost in every area of our department, and that would include Document Recording, the Registry/Mapping Unit that map the legal descriptions that come into us on deeds and which we provide the land parcel coverage for all the properties within the City, the 307 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. police accident report, the applications for a variety of other types of police incident and fire reports, the Philly history, any kind of mapping support, and also we've just suspended some support.
Commissioner, from an operational perspective, what, if any, impact does this have on your operations, the transferring of the money? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Well, we would -- we understand that the systems that are in place will continue to be maintained. So the amount of the transfer was equal to the support of the systems that I mentioned and also to a certain sum of money in Class 400, which would be used for any equipment, any computer equipment, that would need to be replaced or supported. We would continue on the front lines to provide services and interact with the public, but we would not have that, in a sense, control of the 308 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. technology, because it's being transferred over to IT.
Commissioner, did you make a proposal to the Finance Department to raise the county fee per recording from $2 to $15, which would generate an additional $1.8 million? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes. Yes, we did make that proposal.
Was this recommendation accepted by the Administration? COMMISSIONER DECKER: It was accepted. This would require a change in state law, and at the time that we were discussing this, there was a concern that this might conflict with the interest in raising the Housing Trust Fund fee at the state level, so this was put on hold for a while until that can be successfully ironed out.
So it was accepted? 309 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes.
But there's nothing we can do about it at this point in time? COMMISSIONER DECKER: That's right.
So it's on hold? COMMISSIONER DECKER: That's correct, it's on hold. We didn't want -- the thought was not to conflict with the interest in raising the amount of fee to be collected for the Housing Trust Fund.
I thought we found $1.8 million. Okay. The Chair recognizes Councilman Greenlee.
Thank you, Madam President. Good afternoon, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Good afternoon.
First, I want to acknowledge all the years of 310 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. service you've had with the Records Department and the improvements that you've made down there. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Thank you.
Unfortunately, I still have to raise the issue that you and I have talked about a number of times of the stolen deeds, tangled titles, and I just have some questions on that. You say in your written statement that the Department will continue to send a document notice letter. Isn't it true that that is part of Bill 080424-A, which requires the Department to do that? I mean, isn't that part of the law? COMMISSIONER DECKER: That's part of the law, but this program was started in, I think, approximately 2004.
And I know you started it, and I appreciate that. 311 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes.
But isn't it also true that actually that's just part of what the bill asks for? And really the notice letter where, certainly an improvement, really is dealing with after the horse has left the barn, if you will, because that property, you have already accepted that deed, so the person gets a notice -- and I have an example here that I can go over -- that person then has to go through the whole very complicated system of trying to get their property that was stolen from them back; is that true? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes, but we have found that for many people, they would not be aware that any perhaps fraudulent activity had occurred until years later when they were ready to sell their property. So this provides an advanced opportunity for them to take action sooner rather than later.
No, I 312 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. understand, and I certainly acknowledge that, but there's other parts of the bill 4 that mandate things, like checking if it's the actual owner that's doing it, checking if there's power of attorney, trust situations, all like that. Is your department applying those -- COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes.
And your employees are aware of that law, that every time a deed comes in, they have to check those things? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes. We have process in place where all of those checks are really exercised and applied, and we do keep statistics on that. We're checking every time a deed comes in, we know whether there was documentation submitted by law. That includes whether there was required articles of incorporation, whether there was a power 313 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. of attorney that was required, whether it was submitted by a title company, whether it came by certified U.S. postal mail, yes.
And you say you have statistics. Can you forward that to the Chair so we can take a look at it? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes.
I appreciate that. Are you familiar with the name -- and I just want to use this as an example, and, again, it's one example. We think there are others too, but are you familiar with the name of Anthony Mitchell? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Anthony Mitchell, yes.
Doesn't actually exist, correct? That is a fraudulent person? COMMISSIONER DECKER: I don't know if it's fraudulent. I do, however, 314 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. know that it is under investigation, and we have been asked to keep that quiet since it is under investigation by the inspectors.
Okay. Well, let me just say, one of the properties that he supposedly was transferred to, a gentleman has been in touch with our office and has been dealing with us since last September, and in all due respect, at least in his case, those procedures that we just talked about were not followed. If they had been checked, the owner that supposedly gave this property to Anthony Mitchell was not the owner on record. The notary was not correct, and there was a lot of other information that was not in there. Now, again, I don't know if this was just an aberration, but we have heard from other people that sometimes those regulations aren't followed. So I guess I would just, as much as I could, urge people to -- urge you to make sure 315 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. your department knows that, because, again, there's still, I'll grant you, not as many people as it used to be, but there's people that still come up to our office who have had their properties stolen, and I just want to emphasize that once that happens, they are really in a long, drawn-out procedure. This fellow who had his property stolen that I just referred to, Mr. Groslick, again, he's still in touch with our office and as recently as today brought some examples of still the things he has to go through, because he can't afford the lawyer, he can't get it pro bono, and he's trying to do this himself. And where he's not an unintelligent person, he's not verse in this kind of law, and it just makes it very difficult when somebody has that situation. It's the most expensive thing, the most valuable thing the man has ever owned, and he's just frustrated by the whole situation. 316 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. Now, not just in this case, but any time that you see situations like this, do you get in touch with the DA, the Police? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes, we do.
Okay. And one of the things that Mr. Groslick has run into is that he needs documentation that these -- like the picture, the photograph that was taken, that kind of thing, that is mandated down there. Isn't that public record? Couldn't he get that from your department? He's saying your department is not giving that information. COMMISSIONER DECKER: We don't consider that public record, no. It has been furnished to the -- I mentioned there is an ongoing investigation, and it has been furnished to appropriate authorities.
Again, I don't want to just get into this 317 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. individual guy's case, but that's all well and good, but while that's going on, he can't get his property. And, again, he can't afford a lawyer. It would seem like when it's clear cut that this property was stolen, I guess I don't understand why there isn't more cooperation from your department to what is clearly an innocent victim. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Well, we work very aggressively and actively with the Fraudulent Conveyance Committee in the Philadelphia Bar Association and we have been partnering with Judge Annette Rizzo to try to help -- to expedite these cases and to provide as much support from non-profits as is possible. We certainly empathize with anyone who had their property stolen. We recognize it is a very difficult situation. However, some of the cases are extremely complicated and they're not very easy to so easily return the 318 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. property within a day or two. But we do empathize and we have taken as many steps as we can to try to partner with, again, law enforcement, we partner with the courts and we also partner with a committee, Fraudulent Conveyance Committee, from the Philadelphia Bar Association. We're all aggressively working on these issues.
Just a general question. Would you consider this still a problem in the City? COMMISSIONER DECKER: I think it is still a problem, definitely.
Okay. Because I was going to say, we got a letter. Council President got it back in February of this year from Judge Dembe, who seems to acknowledge it is still going on. And I'm not just putting it on your department. I'm not saying that. COMMISSIONER DECKER: We have met with Judge Dembe's office and submitted a list of recommendations and 319 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. suggestions that really address a composite of different issues that surround this, and that includes not only legislative changes, but the need for a great deal of community education. We do know that the incidents of fraud really are targeted -- the targeted communities are immigrant populations, the elderly and actually relatives who perpetrate fraud against their own family members.
Yeah, there's certainly a lot of that. COMMISSIONER DECKER: And there is a great deal of need, mostly for community education, where particularly in immigrant populations the community is not -- the customs are very different from their country of origin and they're very different from the land records and recording system that we have in the United States. And so really the many innocent victims unknowingly enter into transactions without the benefit of either land title insurance, perhaps on 320 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. the street for cash transactions without having secured receipts or any kind of evidence about the party from whom they've supposedly purchased the property. So we have submitted a number of recommendations to both Judge Dembe and to Judge Annette Rizzo, our observations and our recommendations on our experience and understanding what happens to the victims of fraud.
And last question, and I'm not saying this to embarrass the department, because I know the vast majority, like all City employees, are honest, hard-working people, but there obviously was a problem at the end of last year with one of the employees down there being involved in one of these property thefts. Has there been anything else you've been able to do to try to guard against that? Are there checks? I know everybody talks about each department's integrity officer. Do 321 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. you have such a thing? COMMISSIONER DECKER: We have a number of detection tools that we use in the background, and so we are monitoring that carefully. Unfortunately, that particular person really perpetrated a lot of what he did outside of the department, and that was the issue. It wasn't something that he did within the department, but he did it outside in his home on the street. That's a little bit more difficult to detect, but nonetheless, we have implemented some other preventive measures, which I would rather not mention publicly.
I understand. Okay. All right. I'm sure we'll be talking some more. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco. 322 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc.
I just want to add to your woes, but I just want to bring a situation to you that came to me as I was ringing doorbells to get petitions signed. A woman, whose husband was beginning to experience, I guess, dementia or Alzheimer's or whatever, I don't know, but anyway, they were having a problem back and forth and so he gave her power of attorney. So she came down and had the house turned over and the deed turned over in her name. Then the family came and got him, and he gave them the power of attorney, and they came back to your department and had the property put in someone else's name. So I don't know what you can do about that or how that happened and I don't know all the details of the story, but I'm just sharing with you that she 323 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. said this -- because when I ran the doorbell, I'm sick of this City. After a long story, I said, Well, what's your problem with the City, and then she told me that. But I'm sure there are a lot of other -- it's a more complicated issue than I know, and there are always two sides to a story also, but she was able to get the deed in her name and then maybe a week later or less they were able to transfer it into somebody else's name. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes. Well, we certainly will take a look at that. We'll look in particular at the powers of attorney. We do require copies of that at the time that a deed is recorded. Some of these cases are extremely challenging, because on the face of it, if a document comes in and meets the Document Recording requirements that are set forth in state law and as we are checking for the other items that were passed by City Council, it still is 324 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. possible for someone to perpetrate the fraud and to circumvent all the protections that are in place. So it's a very challenging type of crime for us to control, but we certainly will look in particular at the power of attorney issue and see if there's anything further that we can implement as a protection.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Sanchez.
Thank you. Good afternoon. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Good afternoon.
In continuing some of the questioning of Councilman Greenlee, you say you have a document verification system. Is this 325 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. checked off for every single transaction like to ensure -- what he was going through is apparently there have been several transactions where gaps have been. Do you have a way of ensuring that every employee is following the protocol? COMMISSIONER DECKER: We do. There is a process in place. We have formal procedures. We have done training. We retrain. The supervisors monitor. They spot check and sample the documents that the staff is reviewing. There is a procedure whereby any document that is reviewed that doesn't fall within the required categories is flagged. We do notify the District Attorney's Office. So we do have that in place. There is always a part of a system that has a manual process to it where a staff person is responsible for it. So what we try to do is to retrain periodically. So we are constantly taking a look at this, and we certainly will refresh the training again. 326 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc.
I'm just -- and I hate to add a document to this. Bill Green will shoot me over here. Is there a way that we can institutionalize some sort of check-off that says all of these things were met, signed by someone so that we can hold someone accountable for the fact that those documents were verified? COMMISSIONER DECKER: We will look into that, but I do want to add that when Council passed the legislation requiring that particular documentation be submitted when a deed is recorded in certain cases, and we mentioned some of them, articles of incorporation, power of attorney, trust, letters of administration, testamentary letters and also whether a document came in through the mail, what our staff does is, we actually copy and incorporate that and make it a part of the document. So if a document came in and references a will, it will be attached as part of the 327 3/23/10 - WHOLE - BILL 100117, etc. document that is recorded.