At the federal level, it is a reporting requirement. The basis they give is, for example, a normal corporation, they get treated like a normal corporation, but they get the deduction for dividends that they distribute to their holders or shareholders. A regular corporation doesn't get any deductions for dividend payments, but a mutual fund does get dividend deductions for the distributions that they make, because of their 176 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980787 special facts. And it is a very difficult statute to get into. And it restricts the type of investments you can purchase and also restricts or requires certain distributions be made every year to the mutual fundholders. And if they are not made, there is a penalty that is imposed, in effect. The penalty is so high that folks are basically forced -- the managers -- to make these dividends to these mutual fund shareholders.
This legislation won't help us get back some of the bank employees that have been moved outside of the city?
Well, I think this legislation will be helpful for us to keep that difference close. But whether we will get people to move back, I think this is one of several steps that shows the city cares about these businesses and wants to attract them. Is this the step that makes them all rush back in? I'm not sure. I think this is definitely a step in the right direction. But there are a lot of other costs involved in Philadelphia. Some 177 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980787 businesses are willing to pay it, and some of them are not. I am not sure if VanGuard would leave King of Prussia and come down here.
Well, I notice the Mellon Bank advertises on the storefront on Market Street that it is apparently the owner of the Dreyfus Fund.
And the Dreyfus Fund, that is not located in Philadelphia today, is it?
It is exactly that type. In fact, and the commercial banks, as the financial services industry broadens as more entities provide more services, we would want to not have a big barrier to having that type of -- the regulated investment activity, which is a growing portion of the commercial banking and investment banking world. We would not want to have significant 178 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980787 burden, that actually a significant hurdle as I mentioned, that comes about simply because the State changes a definition for an organization.
Well, let me just urge that if council passes this bill and it becomes law, that those banks would have tie-in with investment funds, like Mellon Bank, and maybe many other banks in the city that do that same, that they were notified of this change in the hope of bringing in -- you know, bringing back to the city a portion of the employees that have left.
Thank you very much. Does any other member of council have any questions of these witnesses on this bill? Thank you very much. Is there any other person in the chamber who wishes to speak on this bill? We are now referring to Bill No. 980787. At this time the Committee will consider Bill No. 980796, which is an ordinance 179 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 amending Section 20-101 of The Philadelphia Code entitled "Residential Requirements," by providing that acting in the United States Military Service personnel entering into Civil Service positions in the police department need not be bona fide residents of the city when appointed, but must establish such a residence in the city within six months after appointment. Are there any administration witnesses here to testimony on Bill No. 980796? The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.
Thank you, Mr. President. It is my understanding that the police commissioner is being paged and will be here forthwith. But I think there is some other witnesses that have been listed.
There are other witnesses. Oh, I think I do have a list. Is Fred Voigt here? Fred Voigt? Will Gonzalez? Rick Southerland? Steven Preston?
Good afternoon, 180 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 ladies and gentlemen --
Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. My name the Ricky Lynn Southerland.
Mr. Southerland, I am going to have to ask you to speak up and speak right directly into the microphone.
I am a military police officer in the United States Navy where I hold the rank of Petty Officer Third Class. I have been in the Navy for nine years. I am presently stationed in Lakehurst, New Jersey. I am 29 years old. I am married, three children. My wife, Shelly, of three years is a native of Philadelphia. My in-laws are still in Philadelphia. I would like to read to you the letter I sent to Mayor Rendell expressing the problem I had in facing trying to become a 181 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 Philadelphia police officer since I passed the entrance exam. "Dear Mayor Rendell, I recently applied for the position as a Philadelphia police officer, but they said to me that I did not meet the residence requirement. What I didn't understand and what frustrated me was I used to live in Philadelphia on 2123 East Washington Lane when I was stationed at Philadelphia Naval Yard for two years. "I have been in the Navy nine years now, my last three and a half years as a police officer. "I am scheduling and planning on getting out of the Navy in January, and I could get into the police class in February. Now, I can't because of the so-called residency policy. "My question is: How can I establish residency when I can't even establish employment? I have served nine loyal years for my country, never sold or taken drugs in any form or fashion, don't drink, smoke, in excellent health, I'm honest, and a family man, and still I can't get a job with the Philadelphia Police 182 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 Department. "Thank you for your time, and I hope you will support this bill, because it will make it possible for me and my family to move back to Philadelphia. Please give me and my fellow servicemen a chance to serve the City. We will not disappointment you. "Signed, Ricky L. Southerland, U.S. Navy."
Thank you very much. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
I'm sorry, Mr. President. My light is actually on from earlier. I may have some questions, but not for this gentleman.
Thank you, Mr. President. I'm sorry, if I have missed the beginning of your statement. Where do you live now? Or your family, I should say; where do they live now? 183 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796
I am stationed in Lakehurst, New Jersey, but my in-laws are in Philadelphia.
But your wife and family, they are stationed with you in Lakehurst?
Were you a resident of Philadelphia at the time you went into the military service?
I mean, how long were you in North Carolina as a resident before you went into the military service.
He was born in 184 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 Philadelphia.
Born in North Carolina. When did you come to Philadelphia?
Between '94 and '96 when I was stationed in Philadelphia in the Naval Yard.
You had the right, as I understand it, to acquire Philadelphia as a residence. I have difficulty understanding why the --
What is that? Well, once you establish a residence, you are entitled to maintain that residence for as long as you are in the service. That is my difficulty on this case. I don't know why they have any problem with residence.
Because I didn't 185 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 have a Philadelphia driver's license. I kept my North Carolina driver's license and kept it valid because I don't change licenses with every station I go to. Because I have been in nine different duty stations, so I just kept a valid license and kept valid insurance everywhere I go. And I never was so called a resident of Philadelphia. I was living there. I thought -- I was under the impression that I would have to at least live there and have credentials in my name before I could even go on with police test and the Philadelphia driver's license.
Well, the interpretation of "residency" is quite different than the interpretation of "domicile." And I just have a very difficult time with -- and if there are any appeal rights, I think you ought to raise them because I think you're eligible. And having lived in Philadelphia, you meet the conditions I am concerned, about of bringing in military people who may have never lived in the city, who may not even know about the city. But you have lived here, so I think 186 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 you would make a very fine police officer. Thank you, Mr. President.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Your rank in the service, your rank is?
Petty Officer, can you tell me some of the training you have been through in the Navy in order to be a military police officer, some of the different styles of training? And I will tell you what, we have had suggestions in the course of this discussion on this bill that somehow military training from police work isn't sufficient. We've had change, I guess, from when we're -- when we are actively involved in a war, say World War II or Vietnam or 187 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 Korea, as opposed to what the modern military has become. And we need to talk about some of the training you have gone through that you think that is simular to being a civic police officer.
Well, I have been through the Law Enforcement Academy in San Antonio, Texas, a military police academy. And that's -- I have been to street survival school, and direct comp condition school, qualified patrol. And we go to the range like every other quarter to keep our calls up.
Is there any other type of either forensic training or legal training that you have encountered in the course of your studies in training as a police officer that has enhanced your ability to perform your duties as a military police officer?
Could you maybe, in addition to explaining the exact schools you attended, maybe talk about some of the studies in those schools that you have experienced? In 188 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 addition to the firing range and other things, have you been through any type of training that would help you become a better police officer and explain the details some of what they are? Because when you said "direct comp," we as civilians really don't know what direct comp is.
Well, like different types of take-downs, a lot of self-defense maneuvers. And riot control; that's a big one we practice. And nuclear war, like as far as gas. And certified PR24, which they call the nightstick. And handcuff procedures; searches. And report writing, report writing, something that will hold up in court.
Have you been specifically trained both, either your military police training or from your general military training, in the written word, in writing skills and verbal skills?
Well, it is a little of both. A little bit the school. And then by me being in Lakehurst as a police officer for the last three and a half years, I have had 189 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 experience doing it personally, these types of things. (Councilwoman Verna assumes the Chair.)
Madam Chair, that will conclude my questions with the exception that I truly hope you have an opportunity to bring you and your family here to Philadelphia to become residents of Philadelphia and a member of our police department. You're exactly the type of person we were trying to attract. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Are there any other questions or comments from -- Councilwoman Blackwell.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Certainly I agree with the statements of my colleagues, and I am sure that this gentleman will be a fine officer. Is there anyone who can respond to the questions raised by Councilman Cohen, who stated that he did live in Philadelphia and, therefore, he might be eligible? Is there anybody here who can respond 190 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 to the issues with regard to this gentleman? Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Any other questions of this witness? Thank you very much, sir.
Good afternoon. Kindly identify yourself for the record before you testify.
I am Fred Voigt. I am the executive director of the Committee of Seventy. I recently completed an examination of the governments, of the police department and looked back across time, back to actually when the department was first created. Interestingly enough, in the 1850s, Philadelphia as we know it didn't exist; it existed in a different fashion. You could commit a crime here, which was Philadelphia, and flee to Germantown, and there was no police force that had jurisdiction over the totality of Philadelphia County. 191 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. " Today, if you have seen that movie, there are two jurisdictions in this county that have a similar control mechanism, and that is Los Angeles and Philadelphia. Both are reacting to absolute corruption and absolute abuse. So we took it to an extreme. The flexibility necessary to run that department is simply not there. We're talking more about management. We've heard the commissioner talk about thinking about crime, being proactive about crime, not waiting until the crime is being committed and reacting to that, which is the measurement that we had for years and years and years: How fast can we respond to 911 rather than how can we catch the bad guys before they do bad things? Now, we have also lost lots and lots of people. People have left Philadelphia in large numbers. 4 million, and you may recall that we had projections that 15 years ago we would be at 192 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 5. Instead, since 1990, we've lost over 130,000 people. So with a declining population, you have a declining pool. When you have a boom in the economy as we do, fewer and fewer people are interested in public service at any level, yet alone as a policeman. Your talent pool is limited. And the other thing that we found is this is just one issue. It's important to note that there are a lot of different pieces to this puzzle that have not been actively pursued and that everybody we talked to felt this should be pursued; that is active recruitment. For example, we were up doing an interview at Temple. And I happened to see these booths that -- it was an employment fair they were having. And here were the Connecticut State Police recruiting at Temple. And I said, gee, you know, I asked some people: Do you ever recall that kind of outreach on the part of the Philadelphia Police Department? And the answer was no. 25 And if you think about that for a 193 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 minute. If we are talking about actually going out -- because we never had to do this before -- actually going out and recruiting, where would you go? Well, what do you want? You want educated officers; you want mature officers; you want to be able to train them. And this is the kind of pool of talent that is simultaneous with some of these changes, some other changes, like the one in the bill. There is no silver bullet. You have to be proactive in attempting to go out to find the best people. And then what you have to do, among other things -- and this is not a matter relating to the bill -- you have to change the matrix; that is, how it is they get hired. You have to examine -- gee, nobody else uses those kinds of tests, why are we doing that? Why would they eliminate that part of the test or reserve it for those particular circumstances where, you know, it is an appropriate thing. For the most part, nobody gives a damn. So why are we? We have to look to the experience of 194 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 other departments and see what there and match it up as against what works here. Every city is different. Every city has a different environment. And no city is like New York. New York is absolutely unique by size, by diversity, by every measure. But there are commonalities. Now, the restriction that we are talking about here, only Boston has such a restriction. There is no other city where you are confined to find your employees within the city itself.
Most of them require that you do live in the city once you become an employee. Now, we're focusing on this bill 16 which provides not an open-ended piece but these folks in the military. There are reasons for that: one, again, judgement, maturity, training. And I demonstrated amendability to the profession. It is very interesting. I've talked to police officers. I talked to a lot of them. they don't talk about money. They talk about hey, this is really interesting work; I am in the job because I want to be in the job; and I want 195 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 my colleagues who are on the job to be as competent as I can be or make me more competent than them. And that goes back to training, education and discipline. You know, that's -- if you think about it, all of that leads to the military or policemen. Unfortunately, one of my board members had to go to Washington or he would be here testifying. And he was a commander to the military district of San Francisco. He is now an accountant. But that's where he started out. And someone with that kind of perspective to describe the nature of the job and transferability of the information... I would be happy to answer any questions you might have.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Voigt, do you think this is appropriate to make this available to active-duty personnel. Why not just open it up? Because you 196 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 gave us an example of other cities. Do they limit it to just active duty military personnel? I know some active duty military personnel that worked in the kitchen. I don't know how that makes them qualified to be police officers.
Well, again we are looking -- the focus, as I understood it, is primarily on the military, and by that you can even narrow it to the MPs; there is actual police training. You know, you can choose to look to a lot of things. But having that tool -- again, I emphasize, it is a tool. It is not a cure; it is just a tool. If the department doesn't do recruiting in a meaningful fashion, not only on the outside, the sooner you pass that bill, but inside, if you know, people are going to come take the test, you know, because -- it's an upward mobile thing. And if they don't do the training and the recruitment, nothing is going to work.
I heard what you said about this available pool. I am not 197 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 concerned -- I am not convinced that we have done enough to identify why 2300 applicants, when at one time we had 10,000 -- I run into young men and women every day that tell me they've applied to be Philadelphia police officers and for one reason or another are not very high on the list. And I've also talked to police officers that work in communities outside of Philadelphia that would like to come to Philadelphia to be police officers. So would you have any problem with us expanding that to police officers that work in other jurisdictions or other cities?
No, I certainly wouldn't. If you expand it as broadly as possible, ideally you would get the best from wherever they are and bring them in. And that adds to your base and your population. We've lost 135,000 people since 1990. So your pool is diminished. You have a booming economy, so there are lots of other jobs -- other choices people can make. The same thing that is happening in the military: You know, people aren't signing up, they are signing 198 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 out. But, again, it is not just this type of broadly expanded or narrowly expanded. If the commitment to recruitment and the commitment to change the matrix for hiring isn't forthcoming from the administration over a long span of time -- not just during the lifetime of this administration, not just during the tenure of this commission. You know, changing actions takes a long time coming when you are trying to turn a ship, and that's what this is about.
From your experience and the Committee of Seventy, do you believe the Philadelphia Police Department, Central Personnel does a good job in trying to recruit police officers? Again, if you saw the Connecticut State Police at Temple University, did you ever see the Philadelphia Police trying to lure residents of the City of Philadelphia that attend Temple University to become Philadelphia police officers?
Not at Penn, not at St. 199 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 Joe's, nowhere.
Well, again, I think we are putting the cart before the horse here. It doesn't appear that we are doing a good enough job in recruiting Philadelphians that want to be police officers before we go outside.
Councilman, it is just one bullet. Okay? It is not a silver bullet; it's a tool. And if it isn't used appropriately -- if you don't use the broad array of things we talked about, if you don't go to Temple, if you just rely upon, you know, who signs up -- I am not saying there aren't any great people who remain in Philadelphia who wouldn't make great cops. Nobody is saying that. What I am saying is that you have to fish more broadly because of the deployment of the population. The days when your father led the department and people signed up 10,000, 12,000 at a time are gone. Those days will never return. So what we need to do is have a bigger pool of applicants. We want to do that by doing what I 200 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 suggest with regard to -- not what I suggest, what people constantly told us: go elsewhere; put some life into that thing; go find these people, they are good people. But let's have -- all this does is provide you with one additional piece that can be very useful.
Before we start fishing broadly and throw the net out, I think we really need to analyze the problem we have. And I don't think it has been adequately analyzed. Before we start going outside, I think I would like to give every young man and young women an opportunity to be a Philadelphia police officer. And I would need to be assured that we are doing a good job in looking for those candidates. And at this point, I don't think we are doing enough to recruit our men and women here in Philadelphia. Thank you, Mr. Voigt. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Madam 201 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 Chair. Just one comment on your testimony, Mr. Voigt. And I thank you for giving it. You listed some items or some characteristics that you find you believe in the military can be found as far as education, maturity, training and other things. The other thing that is not discussed and hasn't been discussed to date is, we don't know -- we have a draft. And the people who serve in the military do it voluntarily. There is a certain work ethic and dedication to service of others that is exemplified in the petty officer there and other people who serve in the military. They are here to serve the country and to serve others in that capacity. I don't necessarily think -- I don't necessarily know if I want every person in the city who doesn't have the same dedication of service to others to be sought out as police officers first. I think there is a certain level of commitment and dedication and selflessness that is displayed on the part of the military 202 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 personnel serving our country and the part of the many, many, many good and honest and decent police officers. It certainly isn't being done for the money on the police force of Philadelphia, because they are not paid enough, and in the military because they are not paid enough. So there is a certain selflessness and dedication to others, which is I am trying to seek out, and what we should all seek out in trying to find the best capable and best available police officers. The other thing I would say is that during the '70s, I guess late '60s and early '70s, many, many, many of our police officers who are serving here today in the City of Philadelphia, that are fine, decent, honest police officers who were serving their country in Vietnam during the Vietnam era. And that's where many of our officers came from during the '70s when councilmembers Rizzo's father was here in Philadelphia both as police commissioner and as mayor. So the large bulk of people we were bringing in here had 203 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 military service. They had served their country in Vietnam honestly or served in theaters outside of Vietnam during the Vietnam era. So what I am looking for is not only capability and intelligence and maturity, but I am looking for a selfless, committed person who is committed to serving others. And I think that's what we need to do. And I don't want to eliminate applications from the people in the City of Philadelphia. I think we should go out and recruit and do what he can to find the people in the city. But if I can find decent, committed, selfless people in this that are serving their military and have the added benefit of bringing in their families into this city to become new residents, new taxpayers and new contributors, I don't see where there is a loss; it is a win-win for everybody.
I have to agree with you, Councilman, but I have add to that. It is like a broken record. This is only a piece of the puzzle. And if you don't have the other pieces and you don't have the commitment to make those 204 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 pieces work, it doesn't matter, because it won't happen. It will just sit there and you will have a record and you may even have a bill, but it ain't going to happen unless -- and I use the vernacular because that's really what it's about. It's not going to happen unless there is a commitment, a long-term commitment, to doing a number of different things including getting rid of the polygraph. All right?
I am so glad you mentioned that. What did you decide --
Well, I just want to -- can I just make one final statement? I don't think the qualifications for being a police officer in this city should be limited to the need of a job. The simple fact of having someone need a job does not qualify them to be a Philadelphia police officer, male, female, black, white, Hispanic or Asian. There is a certain element of dedication and selflessness that is needed to put your life on the line and do it every day. And I think that simply being unemployed is not one of 205 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 those qualifications. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Voigt, you said something about the polygraph test. Would you mind repeating that, please?
Sure. There is a matrix that is used, employment matrix -- I know you will hear testimony about it -- and that is who qualifies. And part of that qualification process is the use of a polygraph. Now, the polygraph is not used in any other city in the United States for that purpose. None. Zero.
None. It is very expensive. Of course, polygraphs aren't admissible in the court of law, but they can give you all sorts of problems. And I am sure you will hear testimony from individuals who took it again and again and again; some finally pass and some didn't. But there is a matrix that has to be examined that is something internal to the department. It is the criteria that they employ for applicants, and that is just another piece of 206 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 this. There are lots and lots of pieces, lots and lots of impediments that by way of example, if this commission were in New York City, every member of his community would serve at his pleasure. He could either remove anybody or go back to the rank of captain. They are Civil Service protected to the rank of Captain. He can do that there. In terms of -- not that New York doesn't have enormous problems, it does. Anybody will admit. But in terms of being on the forefront of instituting change, that's where, in fact, they had been. There are other jurisdictions, San Jose, California, lots of places around the country that are doing different things. You know, some people call it neighborhood policing, but the proactive element is really what is revealing across the country. And we are far behind that curve, in part, because we were reactive rather than proactive. And that's when we had lots and lots of police officers who could afford to be reactive. 207 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 We don't have that luxury anymore.
Well, I am glad you mentioned the polygraph, because I have heard from some of my constituents who have taken the written phase of the examination and perhaps got 100 or more in the written phase of the examination, they passed the background investigation and also the psychological portion of the examination, and they all seem to flunk on the polygraph. In fact, I am sure that you read in the paper perhaps last week or the week before about this one young man who apparently took the polygraph test four or five times and flunked each time for the police department; however, he took a test for the FBI, I believe it was, and was accepted by the FBI. Now, that puzzles me. That absolutely puzzles me.
I would like to hear a coherent answer to the question of why we do this. I have talked to a lot of people, and I have yet to hear an adequate, scientific justification for why the matrix is as it is. I would invite you and urge you to 208 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 ask every witness who comes up to testify, to focus their testimony on that aspect. There is a totality of the hiring process. And this is -- the bill before you is just a piece. But I would urge you to go beyond that and ask every one of those witnesses what do they think about the polygraph, what is the utility of the polygraph, what about the matrix? It is not simply about recruiting. Recruiting is just a piece of it. And we certainly have to address that. And that includes with or without this bill passing. It is absolutely essential that that be done. But the next piece of it is, okay, how do you hire people that have the dedication and all of the things that Councilman Kenny talked about?
Thank you, Madam Chair. Incidentally, over many years, including years in which I was involved in the practice of law, the item just referred to by the 209 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 Chair and people passing everything expect the polygraph test has been one of the biggest obstacles I have ever seen toward getting people who seem on all of the bases to be ideal police officers. I saw, also, in the last week that Police Commissioner Timoney is considering eliminating the polygraph test. It was the first common sense and sensible approach I have heard to the polygraph test as it is administered in the police department, because it just seems to me that that has been used, intentionally or otherwise, as an instrument to not hire people that are qualified to serve. So I would be very concerned about what we have done with respect to recruiting Philadelphians. I don't think there has been any case made for the fact that there was not enough qualified applicants in the City of Philadelphia. I also posed to you, and I haven't heard in anything you said or Councilman Kenney or Councilman Rizzo and I don't mean to be critical, but I just didn't hear anybody indicate 210 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 that living in the city and having experience as a resident of the city was important to be in effective police officer. Yet I think studies show that the best police officers are police officers who are familiar with urban life. The best police officers for an urban environment -- that's the only environment I am talking about is the Philadelphia environment. I would like your thoughts. Is that a factor that ought to be considered?
Yeah. It is a major factor of employment. We are -- again, other cities do it differently. New York City requires that you don't live in the city but that you live in an adjacent county. I don't think from what I've heard and read and studied that that's going to work for us, that Philadelphia residency requirement. In fact, of all of the people we talked to, no 22 one said that was a bad idea, the residency requirement. The question related to pre- employment residency and why that requirement 211 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 hindered the ability to go out and recruit. We're like a big company; think of us like a company. Our department has to go and compete. And we are competing for people all of the time. And then the particular skills necessary to be a policeman are different than a lot of other skills. It is a different concept. The mentality, that is different; it is a job-related kind of thing. And that requires having the broadest possible pool.
Well, before we move in a different direction. Will you have to have evidence that there was a real effort to make the current system work, that there have been efforts to recruit sufficient numbers of police officers from Philadelphia and it has failed? Because right now we have enormous unemployment in the City of Philadelphia, and it seems to me that we cannot only get very excellent police officers out from among the ranges of Philadelphians who live here, but we can also deal with the very severe employment problem that exists. 212 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796
I think it is very dangerous to view the police department as an employment agency. I think that is very, very dangerous, to put it mildly. What I think we have to do is a variety of different things at the same time. This is not a sequential process. This is a process to overcome inertia which built up over literally decades. Decades because they didn't have to go out. The recruits came to them in large numbers; not small numbers, large numbers. So what you did -- what happens, particularly when you are in a fiscal crisis, which we were -- some people forget that -- pieces atrophy. You don't put -- you put your money, you allocate your money, you allocate your resources based on squeaky wheels. Well, there was no squeak for years and years and years, so there was no -- there are no wheels. I think the new commissioner is committed to changing that. And I think there is a unanimity of view from in the department on -- not many subjects, but certainly on this one -- that they went the best there is. 213 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 And they want the best there is because essentially they want the best watching their backs. They don't want somebody who is there because they want employment and they needed a job and really that is all they are there for. There has to be that commitment to watching my back. And the answer is: There are great people living in Philadelphia; there are qualified people living in Philadelphia. There are qualified kids at Penn who might be interested in becoming a cop. This sounds crazy, but there is a mentality involved in terms of -- hey, there is a mentality involved about hey, there is something appealing about that job that attracts people not simply on the basis of money. I don't think you would find any officer who would like to take less than he is making, or wouldn't like to make as much as some suburban departments, but the characteristic that you find in all ranks is that they love the job. There is a culture to it. Now, what we have neglected as a city and as -- and this isn't just one 214 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 administration. This goes back a long time. The inertia that comes to a department like the police department -- remember, we have had three commissioners from out of town: We've had this one; we've had Kevin Tucker; and we've had General Smedley Butler (ph) in the 1920s, and he was a serving Marine general. Those are the only three. And if you recall -- you may not recall but Max Senate. Okay? -- the Keystone Cops, the film "Max Senate," did, he went and put it on us in the early part of the century. But each of those commissioners from outside did some changes. Smedley Butler wanted to put a top light on the stop of City Hall. There weren't any street lights down on Broad Street, so there would be one light, a big huge light. He lasted as long as a raid that he made, a probationary raid on the Union League, and the next week he was in Guatemala. You know Kevin Tucker for a year half made a lot of changes. But, again, it takes a long time when you are talking about 215 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 institutional change. And part of what I am suggesting, at least, as for as these steps are concerned, it is not an derogation of searching in Philadelphia, certainly not. Because that is probably the most important, because that is where we are going to find the biggest pool, if we go, search out the pool. If you go out to -- you can't go to Villanova, but we can go to St. Joe's. We can go to every institution of higher learning in the city, to every college.
Mr. Voigt, I have trouble. We're all in agreement. I agree fully with Councilman Kenney that we have an outstanding police force. They came from Philadelphians. Why would we want to change a system that has produced an outstanding police force?
Because we also lost, at the same time. The pool is far smaller than it ever has been. The people who are applying for the job, people who are interested in the job and the people who are available here -- we've lost, again, an enormous number of residents from the 216 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 city. And you can see the numbers. Who is applying to take the test? Now, I had also suggested to you that it is the test itself which is a problem, that is the matrix that they are using. But I am simply saying here, it is not in derogation of Philadelphians -- I am a Philadelphian; I am proud to be a Philadelphian -- but rather in terms of giving a better pool. Give me a pool which is competitive, where I can maybe save some money as a city by buying people -- by hiring people who are already pre-trained and pre-screened. And that's a function that the military does very well. We may have forgotten that Wilson Goode was an MP. That is neither to condemn or to bless the system, but he was.
And mayor of the City Philadelphia. 217 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796
And he ate Corn Flakes for breakfast, but what is the relevance?
I still believe as with everything else, when something is not broke, don't fix it. The place I go to look is the outreach effort of the police department or of the City of Philadelphia. Because in the last two years, there has been no sudden great loss of people from the City of Philadelphia. It has been a gradual draining away. We all admit that it is an excellent police force. I just fail to understand the urgency to go out and maybe recruit people who have no experience in living in cities. To me it seems to be a very important factor, and I don't understand why speakers don't refer to it, that the experience of living in the city is a very important factor -- not the only factor -- but a very important factor, in developing a suitable police officer for the City of Philadelphia. And I think that factor should weigh very heavily in the choice. And I think it does on the current requirement. And I think that's 218 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 why we have such an outstanding police force. Thank you, Madam Chair.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Voigt, is it correct that the Committee of Seventy produced a report recently on the Philadelphia Police Department called The Governance Study?
Is it also correct that the Committee of Seventy on this particular issue made some recommendations regarding pre-employment residency issues?
And my understanding of the recommendation actually was that -- and I am quoting from the report on 9: "Such proposals have normally centered on allowing recruitment at military bases, universities (especially those with a historically high minority enrollment) or other law enforcement agencies." Is that accurate? 219 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796
But your testimony today is only with regard to the military bases?
In an ideal world, I would broaden the recruitment. I would include universities. Why can't we do St. Joe's and not Villanova? There are lots of different places, but if I'm --
We are not precluded from going to St. Joe's, Penn, Temple, 220 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 Drexel or any other place in the City of Philadelphia.
No, no, no. I didn't say. My earlier testimony for criticizing department was for not doing it now. As I suggest --
Well, they're people who do it. They are the people who are charged with doing it.
I asked for your view; you conducted the study, you and others. Why don't we recruit from those places now? This is a very simple question.
And the answer is: There has not been a need or commitment of funds necessary to make that function happen.
In prior years, we had so many people who applied that you were inundated with applicants. And as a consequence, you need to go out and find people and encourage people to apply who wasn't there. That commitment has to 221 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 be made. As I said, this --
Has that commitment been made now? And what are the funds that are needed to do this?
That is something that you are going to have to take up with the commissioner, but as I understand it, there is a commitment on the part of this administration. And I am not speaking for them. But there is a commitment to do something, that this is an important function that has been neglected for far too long.
Okay. But now just so I am clear, the position of the Committee of Seventy has not changed with regard to actually expanding in three areas as opposed to the one that you are advocating today?
So you still think that we should go to universities and possibly other law enforcement agencies? Are you talking other police organizations, or are you talking about U.S. Marshals, FBI, Secret Service, Customs? 222 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796
Wherever you find those training criteria, where you are going to find some of the things that Councilman Kenney talked about. And you shouldn't be restricted -- I mean, this bill does, but, you know, there is no 7 logical reason why you shouldn't search out other departments; for example, why you shouldn't search out the FBI, why you shouldn't search for interest and other jurisdictions. It doesn't -- but if you are going to do that -- again, it is only a piece of the whole puzzle. And to think your recruitment is going to solve everything is wrong. And also there is a totality of commitment for change in that department -- I respect the department. But let us not kid ourselves to suggest that there aren't problems in that department, that there have been problems for a long time, problems in terms of management. I mean, look at the crime statistics. We could kid ourselves and say that everything is wonderful, and we could kid ourselves and say one man, John Timoney, comes in and does magic and everything is fine. Well, it 223 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 is not fine. Our study indicated there have been profound problems in that department for years. And everybody we talked to, whether leadership or whether management, whether union people, whether patrolman, everybody acknowledged that there was a problem and different kinds of problems. But this problem was focused on by everybody. And that is: How do we get the new people who are coming in to be as qualified, who are going to watch our backs? And that is the key to it. Even for people who are never going to face a gun in their lives. Having the people on the job who are going to back you up is vitally important. And each of them, in turn, said, number one, look at the numbers, just look at the numbers, who is applying, who is getting in? Part of it relates to the matrix. Everybody knows that. And I would love to hear somebody, you know, tell me how good the polygraph is, and how we can justify it, not only its accuracy but its expense, when nobody else in the United States, no other city in the 224 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 United States uses a polygraph except in very rare selective instances.
Notwithstanding the residency issue, could you highlight for us more in the bullet fashion any other obstacles to having a good recruitment program, or do you think that the City, whether it's the police department and central personnel, is doing all that they can to ensure the recruitment of the best qualified people notwithstanding the fact that presently you can't recruit from the outside?
Would it be appropriate considering the line of questioning that Councilman Nutter is entering into relevant to actual recruitment and personnel policies that either the commissioner and/or personnel director approach the table, in order to save some time. And maybe there are some questions that Mr. Voigt through his studies aren't able to answer, but the specific commissioner and personnel director 225 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 may be able to, if that would be acceptable?
Councilman, if I can make a mention, I have a full set of questions for the commissioner and the personnel director. Mr. Voigt is here in his capacity as executive director of Seventy, I've read his report on a couple of occasions. I would just like to establish for the record their analysis of what some of those recruitment problems are. I think that will be helpful for the later on discussion.
And with due respect to Councilman Nutter's position, I am requesting the Chair rule whether or not -- I think it's appropriate to them at the table now. There are certain questions that I think -- that I felt Mr. Voigt it is best to answer but was unable to answer because he just doesn't have the hands-on, day-to-day experience.
My question had to do with what in their study did they deem to be some of the other problems with recruitment? 226 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 Putting the residency issue aside and whether the department and central personnel, in their opinion, based on their analysis are utilizing all of the tools and resources available to them within the perceived current restraint --
So you are requesting information regarding their study?
Our study clearly indicated that whatever recruitment is taking place is being done inadequately, that it is not being funded as it should be, and that it has not been a focus for years and years and years and years. And that has to change. And that changes with a commitment on the part of the commissioner and on the part of the administration that this is important. For years and years, it wasn't a squeaky wheel. And when you put -- the squeaky wheel gets the grease. That's how the municipal government works, as well you know. And up until the point where you had -- your population drop off is one 227 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 of the major factors, but so is the economy. You know there are people who can do other things.
Let me ask you one other question, because I know we have other witnesses. A two-part question: One, are you aware of any other cities that have aggressively pursued primarily military people for the job of police officer?
San Jose, California, which has an excellent police department.
I think New York does. I am not positive. What we did was, if you look on the charts in the back to the book --
Okay. And as a part of that question, do you have any information on the impact of small, medium are large numbers of military personnel 228 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 becoming police officers in urban areas and any impact, good or bad, that those officers have had in a civilian environment versus what they were trained for, which was the military environment.
Well, no. There are no 7 such studies that I am aware of. But I would suggest to you, Councilman, that MPs are not changed to be rifleman. I mean, their first job is a job which is almost directly the same as a police officer; the mentalities are the same.
The job is a police job dealing with other military people, correct?
Thank you. At this time at the request of the stenographer -- yes.
Before you break for the recess, I just want to make one request. 229 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 Councilman Cohen on two separate hearings now has raised the issue of individuals who do not live in urban areas and they may not be as qualified to be police officers in urban settings. If the councilmember is aware of any studies, empirical data or any information that is not just anecdotal, that may help us under- stand his position better about why an individual from West Virginia or from Kansas or -- I brought that up, specifically, councilmember, that -- West Virginia or Kansas or North Carolina would not be qualified to be a police officer in a major city. If he has such studies or empirical data, I wish he would refer them to the Chair. Thank you.
Thank you. At this point in time we will call a ten-minute recess at the request of the stenographer. Also, I will give a copy of testimony from Dr. Jack Greene to the stenographer. He was here and had to leave. And I would ask the Sergeant-of-Arms to please give a copy to each 230 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 member of council. Thank you. (Brief recess.)
Mr. Voigt, would you please come back to the witness table? Councilman Cohen, do you still want to ask Mr. Voigt questions? Councilman Rizzo, did you want to ask Voigt any further questions? Your light was on when we recessed.
Mr. Voigt, thank you very much. Commissioner Timoney? Is Commissioner Timoney in the room?
I think the commissioner was anticipating that Stephen Preston was going to go before him.
Just point of order. Traditionally there has been the opportunity for the administration to testify. 231 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 The commissioner wasn't in the room, so we proceeded as a result of a time problem. But I would like to hear from the administration first as to why it is they want this bill.
Commissioner, are you ready to testify, or did you want Mr. Preston to testify before you? COMMISSIONER TIMONEY: It makes no 10 difference to me, but I thought Mr. Preston would want to testify.
Would you please speak into the microphone and identify yourself please.
Stephen Preston, and I am the legal director. We were here in support of this particular bill. And we are here in support of the commissioner's request that the residency requirement be changed. We have previously handed out some 232 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 testimony, and I don't want to recount it all, but I just want to highlight the fact that the Supreme Court of the United States over the last half century has made it fairly clear that we are one area of people, and as such we have a right to travel from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. It turns out my office has never had a request from anybody wishing to become an applicant for the Philadelphia Police Department who resides outside the City. So we never had to be forced before -- as we had, for instance, in 1985 when we sued the City of Philadelphia to try to abolish the polygraph test. That is something we took before federal court, and, unfortunately, we did not prevail in that instance. We are, however, prepared, if we were requested, to file a challenge to the present requirements that someone would have to live in this city before one could even make an application. We have set forth in our testimony, my testimony, several cases that stand to the proposition that having to live within the jurisdiction prior to being able to even apply is 233 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 not consistent with the right to travel, which has been delineated by the United States Report. So it really is on a happy note that I am here noting that there is some thought being given by City Council to begin to move away from the fairly restrictive requirements, since it is holding itself up to having individuals who reside outside of this city, but in the military can become members -- or at least applicants to become members for the Philadelphia Police Department, ultimately to take the position, that any of these restrictions are not consistent with the Constitution. Having said that, once an individual is hired, this city is on much firmer ground that a person who is employed by the department that to live with the city for some of the reasons that have already been talked by City Council. So that essentially is my testimony. I am here to say, again, in support of the bill 22 and in support of the commissioner's request that this bill move forward. Thank you. (President Street returns to the 234 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 Chair.)
Thank you very much. The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.
Mr. Preston, you state and you indicate that the reason you support the bill is because of the Supreme Court ruling. Is that the basis of your support for the bill?
Right. It is explicitly on constitutional grounds, on call -- on many Supreme Court cases. There is no one case that stands for the proposition that an individual wishes to become an applicant for a police department may do so even if one doesn't reside in the city. But we think there is sufficient precedent that the requirement set out by this city are at odds with that contusion.
Let me ask you: What was your statement? I didn't get it with respect to residents after applying.
It seems to me the balance of equities and the concerns attached to employer's ability to regulate the employee and 235 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 to attribute the employee is comfortable in the working environment would change at the point if the individual has now been actually hired. And so the fact that City Council even moves on its own or may ultimately be required to change its requirements by federal decree, that would not change the ability of City Council to insist that its employees live here in the city.
I am sorry. I still don't understand the position. I am not questioning right and wrong or sound as to unsound. But I would just like to know, what is the position of the ACLU with respect to the residency requirement following employment. Is it that you believe, the ACLU, believes and advocates that the city has a right to impose a residency requirement?
Now, if there were no constitutional rulings by the Supreme Court, would the ACLU have a position on the subject?
I am not sure we would have a position other than the fact that, as you 236 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 know for the last several years we have been working with the City as a result of a settlement of litigation for NAACP versus the City of Philadelphia. And we have been working closely with this particular commissioner, who I think is being -- has brought energy and vision to the department. In light of what I have learned as a result of working with this department, in light of the Committee of Seventy's report, I think my own personal opinion would be City Council ought to expand the pool open to the department. But whether I will be here, I can't say. I answer to a board that answers or moves because of constitutional concerns, because of constitutional concerns that we are going to get.
Well, do you think that the experience of living in an urban environment is the factor important or otherwise in making the choice as to the selection of the candidate of the police force?
I have no studies on either side of that issue. I certainly as a resident of this city, as someone who grew up in 237 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 an urban environment as well, I would want there to be training in the department about the the culture, our life on our streets. But it seems to be that just because someone has grown up somewhere else doesn't even mean that one can't receive the kind of training that will make one sensitive to what goes on within a large metropolitan area.
Well, you have confidence in the training, but we have all sorts of training in other areas. But things like sexual harassment seem to be expanding rather than contracting the more there is education and other things. I just find it difficult. May I ask you this: In coming to the conclusion, did the ACLU enter into discussions with other organizations that have a particular interest with respect to urban life?
Yes, Councilman Cohen, we did. And at the very beginning of my testimony or the written presentation, I made mention of the fact that prior to coming here today I discussed this testimony with the president of the Philadelphia Chapter of the 238 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 NAACP. And it is my desire -- I have also discussed this with my other client in the NAACP litigation, which is the Police and Fire Relations Practice Project, Mr. Will Gonzales. And I believe Mr. Gonzales will be testifying later. And we both will take the position that this is something -- this move to widen the pool is in good faith.
First, Mr. Preston, your testimony and position on this matter is strictly a legal one, not a public policy position; is that correct?
Do you have any particular personal or official feelings beyond the constitutional issues on this particular issue?
I do, as I indicated to 239 11/30/98 - WHOLE - BILL NO. 980796 Councilman Cohen. I believe that the present police commissioner has brought a lot of energy and depth of vision. It is my understanding that he believes this would be a good thing, that this is something that I would like to be able to be supportive of. And certainly we have had a (unintelligible) of -- we are in a dialog about much in the department. And so when we can make from the ground, I would like to do my -- I have attempted to do that.
And not notwithstanding the current attributes of the current police commissioner, how many police commissioners have you worked with in your time at the ACLU?