Okay. Thank you. I just want to get some additional information regarding the City Hall renovations. In one place it says exterior renovations and the other it 78 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. says interior. What is the status? What exactly still needs to be done with City Hall? I know I see the scaffolds outside on the exterior. What further needs to be done? It seems like they've been here renovating City Hall for a lot of years. And how many contracts have been awarded and who has those contracts, and what are the minority numbers?
I can start to answer that question. I may not have all the detail you're looking for right now, but the City Hall -- (Witness approached witness table.)
The City Hall exterior project actually started several years ago when we started the demonstration area, which was on the east side of the building, northeast corner. Since then, we have completed the project. Actually, we're doing four phases of the work. Phase 1, and are almost complete, 3 being the south side 79 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. of the building and then coming up the southeast side of the exterior of the building. We still have the last phase of work to do, which will be to complete the south side of the courtyard, which has not yet been done, as well as the two light wells. There are two light wells on the south side of City Hall, which are openings that extend down all the way, I guess, to the second floor. So there are exterior spaces and walls, but they're surrounded by building. They're called light wells. So all of that work still has yet to be completed. And we're looking at somewhere around June of 2010 in order to complete the work. You're right, the work has been going on forever, and I guess the reason being is we've only had small amounts of money to use with each fiscal year. The total project cost is between $75 and $80 million, but we've only been getting small increments of money. So that's why we would tailor the work and the phasing 80 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. to match the funding so that we could continually have funding as we marched around the building. In regards to the interior work, the interior work was identified in the PICA report, and it includes completing the balance of the sprinklering throughout the building. We right now have all of the public hallways are sprinklered in the building. What we don't have is all the -- the suites. The office suites are not sprinklered. And this project will go to completing that so the building will be 100 percent under sprinkler. That's an important aspect of it. The other thing that we will be doing is, there are what we call chases that run up through the building that when the building was originally built -- and I won't get into this too deeply -- but when the building was originally built a hundred years ago, there wasn't heat in each one of the rooms. There was 81 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. the heat that was provided in the basement through huge coils, and that heat would come up through the building through these chases that are in the wall that rise up, and then these vents you'll see on the wall are basically open area of vents where the heat used to rise up into the building. The problem is, that also is a mechanism by which smoke can enter rooms from other spaces. So part of this interior work will be to seal off those openings so that we don't have a method or way of smoke or fire to move from space to space. So that's the other aspect of the interior work as well.
Who has the contracts, Mr. Tustin? Would you know that? Would you know who has the contracts?
The Phase 3 contract for general construction is Keating right now, and he has -- there are also other smaller primes working on 82 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. the job as well.
Well, if you don't have today, can you get to the Chair the number of minority firms and the minority workforce?
Absolutely. I can get the breakdown of all the firms working in the job, whether they're minority, whether they're women if they're not minority, as well as number of workers on the job and dollar value.
Great. Because I very seldom see minorities working on any of this -- $70 million of construction?
Thank you. I'll be back. 83 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc.
Thank you, Madam President. I'm concerned about the Dell as well. So I don't know who will be included in a meeting, so if it's the Committee on Recreation, fine, but anyhow, I'd like to be included in discussion. We're getting a lot of calls about the Dell, and it's very important that this bring -- people are already asking me to even buy season tickets. You mean I won't have the Dell this summer? So it's very, very important that this area is not perceived as overlooked, and that we have a program for all of those. Obviously it is a support to the City as well. And so I agree with Councilwoman Blondell Reynolds Brown that we really do need -- and Councilman Jones, whom I heard on the radio Sunday talking about the need for 84 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. us having at least an alternate site, and it's very discouraging when you hear about it almost by accident. That should not have happened. I mean, there are many things we repair while we're moving or at least we have repairs. I know it's the beginning of a new Administration, so certainly we want to be cooperative, but this is unbelievable.
Councilwoman Miller, did you have a point of information?
Yes. I also wanted to piggyback on Councilwoman Blackwell. I am also interested in what's going on at the Robin Hood Dell. I didn't ask the question because Councilwoman Brown raised the issue, but I want to be sure that I'm also included in any discussions as relates to the Dell. It's unfortunate how we found out about it. We should not have found out about it in this type of a setting. 85 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. We should have known about it in advance of this.
Mr. Tustin, I think Councilwoman Blackwell had a question.
My understanding, Councilwoman, is that the Administration is setting up a briefing for members of Council to talk about the Dell, and all of the issues raised by members of Council today will be addressed at that briefing.
Take 86 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. the time off of Councilwoman Blackwell. Yes.
-- to the interest raised by my colleagues that the meeting has been set as of five minutes ago, tomorrow at 2 o'clock in the Caucus Room. So we will send out a formal e-mail to all members of the Committee. We will send an e-mail to all members of City Council, and anyone whose schedules permit are welcome to attend. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you. Thank you very much. Mr. Tustin, in your testimony you refer to public service contracts for '07 and '08. What is the W/DBE breakdown for you mentioned 31 percent '07 and 33 '08?
In the -- I have a breakdown for the first half of '08 with me. I don't have a breakdown for '07, 87 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. but I do for the first half of '08. And for professional service contracts, out of the 33 percent, ten percent is African-American, three percent is Asian, percent is Hispanic and four percent 7 is women for professional service 8 contracts. 9
For FY08, which is 12 only the first half, we only have half a 13 year, out of the 33 percent of 14 participation, ten percent is 15 African-American, three percent is Asian, 16 18 percent is Hispanic and four percent 17 is women. 18
Apparently the average salary based on the first page of your statement and combining the operating and capital, your average salary comes to $86,268. How does this relate to other departments and what is the same breakdown there?
Are you talking 88 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. about staff salaries?
I think the staff salary for my staff is probably very comparable to the Streets Department staff, who have the same type of titles as we do, engineers, architects and construction administration type staff. So I would imagine that our staff and our salaries are comparable on a position-by-position basis.
Madam President, Councilmember, Steve Agostini, Budget Director. The numbers in capital also include their fringe benefit component. So it's not just the 86,000 for salary. It also includes a portion for fringe benefits. And if you would like, we can give you a comparison citywide compared to the CPO if you'd like me to prepare that for you.
Thank you. That will be fine. 89 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. Thank you, Madam President.
You're welcome. I see that Councilman Goode has his light on and he has not been recognized, so I'm going to take him out of order so that we could start the second go-around with everybody who has already been recognized. Councilman Goode.
As we prepare for a hearing tomorrow dealing with annual participation goals and a hearing that deals with an ordinance that will require a departmental ranking system in terms of diversity, it's kind of fortunate and unfortunate that you were the first up to bat as we try to set the tone not only for that hearing but also for the rest of the budget hearings. 90 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. I appreciate what you said you've done in terms of ensuring that the dollars are supposed to go to disadvantaged businesses to actually get there and there's a sure record of it, but for the record, do you know the total amount of contract dollars under the Capital Program for the last fiscal year?
Just so I understand the question, you want to know the total dollars of capital dollars?
The numbers you use separate the public works portion from professional service contracts.
You don't blend the numbers. So I'm interested in the total number of dollars --
Okay. I understand. We broke the dollars out by two different types of contracts. One is 91 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. for professional services, which is to hire architects and engineers, and the other is for work that gets bid to contractors. So if we were to look at, let's say, the '07 dollars for both public works and professional services, it would be -- I can do the math for you if you'd like, but it's --
I'm actually not asking you to use these two categories. I'm actually asking at the beginning of the budget process and as we move forward in the hearing, as we look at what type of participation rates actually exist, I want to know the total amount of contract dollars given out by a department and the actual percentage. I mean, for instance, as we consider whether we should move to a departmental ranking system, do you know what percentage of contract dollars went to disadvantaged businesses overall and do you know where you rank versus the other departments? 92 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc.
No, I do not. Each department is required to track their own percentages for both public works contracts and professional service contracts. That information is forwarded to the Minority Business Enterprise Council, who I believe gathers that information from all the departments and may be better to answer your question.
Well, actually, we want to hold each department responsible for answering the question. That's the purpose of this. The first question I'll ask to you, then, is, do you know what the City's goal for minority participation is?
No. There's actually a number. There are annual participation goals that are set by the Administration per a change to the City 93 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. Charter and then a subsequent ordinance. There are annual participation goals set on an annual basis that are a matter of public information, and the question is whether that is trickling down in terms of what the Administration is trying to accomplish overall. So I am asking, do you know what that overall goal is for disadvantaged businesses, for minority businesses, for women businesses and so forth?
The goal that has been set for our department over the past several years, not just this past year but many years, has been to try to achieve at least a percent minority 22 participation for professional service 23 contracts. 24
I'm asking 25 you for an overall goal. I'm not asking 94 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. for you to separate it.
I do not know what it is for the City overall for all departments.
Well, you can break it down first and then I'll get back to the blended goal, but break it down in terms of the two categories, the goals set by the City for your department.
Again, the only thing I can tell you is that we've been using a percent goal for professional 15 service contracts, and the goal for 16 public works contracts has not been set 17 by our department at all. Those goals -- 18
Not to my 21 knowledge. I think it varies on a 22 project-by-project basis. 23
And needless 24 to say, the professional services 25 contract portion of it is the minimal 95 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. portion of the contract dollars.
The professional service contract value is usually ten percent of the total project cost. So it is the smaller value. (Bell rung.)
So you have a goal for the ten percent, but not a goal for the 90 percent of contract dollars?
Well, let me explain it. For the smaller value professional services, we have total control over that. When I say "we," the Capital Program Office.
Very quickly let me sneak this in. Your overall percentage rate is 16 percent, and you fall somewhere in the middle. Thank you, Madam President.
You're welcome. All right. I think I'm next. On Pages 35 through 42, you 96 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. detail commercial development, neighborhood commercial centers site improvements. Can someone go through each component of Line and explain the 6 projects and their locations? I just 7 don't understand how this could have 8 gotten by us. I just don't understand 9 why some of these funds have not been 10 spent in a timely manner. 11 Would you believe that we're 12 carrying forward monies from as far back 13 as 1998? 14 I just need some explanation as 15 to how we could allow this to happen. 16
Council President, 17 my name is Duane Bumb, Deputy Commerce 18 Director. 19 I think there are sort of 20 several different answers to your 21 question. Probably the central one is that for some of the funding that you're referring to for some of these older categories is not City funding. Sometimes it is matching state or federal 97 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. funding.
It doesn't matter what funding it is. We had it in the budget and it hasn't been spent.
Right. There are some existing older City funds. I guess my layman interpretation of the non-City funding would be that is a holder for should we be successful in getting some state or federal grant funds which we do not have. But on the City funding side, which I think where we do have older City funding, there are several projects that are in the pipeline right now that will in fact draw down those funds, and sometimes -- I mean, we will get you the detail on what those projects are. I think that helps to explain the categories that we're holding here. But --
Well, if they were state funds, what's the 98 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. problem? Why are we --
Those are often times arbitrary places where we hold an account for should we be successful in getting some state funds, not that we have received the state funds.
Well, how about the state funds that we have that you referred to?
We do, for example, receive some state funds under the Hometown Streets Program, which would be assigned specifically on a quarter-by-quarter basis and we would have City funding attached to those same projects. One example of that, for example, would be Grays Ferry within your district, which would have a $1 million state grant, and that needs to be matched by City capital funding. And so there is funding within our overall program for that.
How far back does that go? 99 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc.
Those program funding -- the state funding under that program would go back up to two years where the funding sort of was awarded, but not under contract yet.
I don't know about anybody else, but I would definitely like to see detailed information on this. I think it's absurd that we've had money sitting in this, as I see it, since 1998.
Yes. We will get you the detailed information, and I would just remind you that although we're sort of carrying the full balances of those old line items carrying forward, that is not to say that some of those haven't been drawn down. A portion of those in fact have been drawn down, but we'll get you the detail which will demonstrate that.
They have been drawn down since when? Since before the budget was prepared? 100 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc.
If there is -- I believe that if there is a portion of a certain line item that is still open, that we carry the full amount in the Capital Budget so that --
A clear explanation as to why we have all of this money pending.
I would like to know who is responsible for the Fire Department's capital program. I would like someone to go through each line it funded by CT and explain why it is taking so long to complete these projects.
Councilwoman, the Capital Program Office worked with the Fire Department in completing their projects. They're one of our 15 different departments that we do work 101 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. with. If I'm looking through the FY09 budget request, I guess I'm starting on , the first $2 million in CR funding is designated for computer and communication system upgrades, which we do not manage. That's managed by the Department together with MOIS and -- I guess with MOIS. That also pertains to the second line, 36A, which is CR improvements, and as well as 36B and 36C. All three of those -- four of those lines pertain to communication and computer upgrades.
Well, why would it take so long to complete that?
I may have to ask somebody from the Fire Department to come up and answer that question. We don't manage computer projects, but let's see if I can get somebody to answer that question.
We're 102 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. going through to 2014. (Witness approached witness table.)
We're going to have the Fire Commissioner answer that question.
Good morning, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER AYERS: Good morning. Fire Commissioner Ayers. The upgrades that we have for computers and for our communication systems are managed through MOIS. And as far as the schedules for putting in the networks, the computers and things like that, we manage internally with the staffing that we have. We have been short staffed as far as making sure that the internal upgrades and things that we have to do as far as software is concerned, but the networking, the running of the lines, all of those things are not handled by the Fire Department. They are handled by MOIS. 103 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc.
Are you aware that that project will be taking so long to complete? Were you consulted about that at all? COMMISSIONER AYERS: Yes, we understand how long the project has taken. There are other issues that impinge upon the completion of the project as well.
So you're satisfied with it? COMMISSIONER AYERS: I am not satisfied with that.
Well, tell me what you would be satisfied with. COMMISSIONER AYERS: I would be satisfied with a communications system in place that would allow us to put the rest of the computer systems and software-based systems in place so that we can function properly. That's what I would be satisfied with.
All right. That's something we will 104 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. definitely take under consideration. Also, I see on Line 37A for Fire Department interior and exterior renovations, again, I can't understand just why it would take so long for the completion of that, Mr. Tustin. Thank you, Commissioner. We will be in touch with you, sir. (Witness approached witness table.)
Madam President, Gary Knappick, Capital Program Office. Basically the way I've approached the budget is to prioritize projects for every one of my client departments, and I'd have to address them individually to you to really answer that question appropriately. If you'd like, I can send you a list of all the projects.
I could also add 105 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. to that, Council President, that the 37A, that $5 million under "A" is the PICA funding that has been, I believe, requested as part of the additional interest earnings, and that's what that funding is. And we really can't spend that yet because it hasn't been fully finally approved by PICA. So even though we're showing it there, we really can't do anything with it yet until they approve that funding and the release of that funding.
The locations of the projects? Gary, who is my Project Director for Public Safety, works with the Fire Department in identifying what their needs are. He develops a spreadsheet, listing all the work that needs to be done, and then together with the Fire Department, he identifies the priority of the projects and how they should go forward. It's usually based on 106 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. the overall condition and whether it's a life-safety issue or not a life-safety issue.
Madam President, just to clarify a little bit, just to give you some idea of the PICA assessment that was just recently performed by a PICA-hired consultant, they evaluated 65 facilities, approximately 580,000 square foot, and the total required capital and maintenance dollars to correct those facilities -- and they were just corrections -- that are needed over the next four years is $35 million. So what we're trying to do is find the best way to spend the money and the most highly needed corrections to those facilities.
There are $5 million in FY08. The $5 million is "A." Isn't that PICA money, and, if so, why hasn't that been spent?
That is PICA money. It was appropriated, but we -- I think Ms. Ginnetti might be able to 107 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. answer that better. We don't have the actual funding in place.
Why not? Has anybody asked for it? If you don't have it, why don't you have it?
Tina Ginnetti, Deputy Budget Director. We were waiting the results of the PICA assessment so that we could put that list of projects together in an informed manner, and we are just finalizing the list to submit to PICA.
Using the PICA funds, the $5 million in PICA funds that were appropriated in FY08. But the PICA assessment report was just completed. I believe we received it in November. So we've been going -- Gary Knappick has 108 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. been going through that painstakingly and putting together a list of projects to request from PICA that meet the PICA eligibility criteria.
I still don't understand what the delay is for '08.
Madam President, Gary Knappick. The reports at least with respect to the Prisons, the Fire and the Police identified well over 6,000 corrections in the facilities. Each one of them has to be looked at, classified, prioritized. So I've pretty much completed my analysis of the Police and the Fire and I have recommendations for spending that money, which we can get on immediately. I'm still working on the Prisons to classify those problem areas.
So when do you think you're going to be able to move forward on the '08 $5 million?
The Police and 109 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. the Fire has been completed.
This is the Fire Department that I'm referring to.
Oh, okay. That has been completed. It's just a matter of getting with Budget and having everyone agree to what those -- and the Fire Department and having everyone approve of that and going to PICA for the money.
Okay. I have quite a few more questions, but I want to give my colleagues the recognition. We have two Councilmembers who have not had an opportunity to ask questions, so I will recognize them first. I know they've walked in a little later, but we will now recognize Councilwoman Sanchez.
Thank you, Madam President. For the Capital Office, one of 110 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. the things that I'd like to get on the record is -- because I think it will clarify some of the issues regarding the length of time some of these contracted -- the limitations on our contract procedures. Mr. Tustin and I spoke about this, but I'd like for this to go on the record as we work with the new Administration in some of the reform issues. Our contracting procedures, our requirement for primes, our cap on our spending ability to do projects and specifically also the amount of money that we spend on our permitting process with our L&I office, I'd like for you to put that on the record for us, please.
Okay. Yes. The process by which we have to follow to do capital projects is somewhat driven by a state law called the Separations Act. Pennsylvania has that requirement, as well as New York has a similar called the Wicks Law. These laws, which are state 111 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. laws that sort of drive the way we do projects, require any dollar value that's, I believe, over $4,000 to be bid as a separate prime contract. I'll try to abbreviate this and try to make it as clear as possible. If we were an agency other than the City of Philadelphia or a government agency, we would be able to design a project as a single package whatever the dollar value is, from $500,000 to -- from $500 to $60 million and put it out as a single prime package. That would mean we'd only have -- we would probably reduce our design time by ten to 15 percent, without having to put multiple bid packages together. We'd definitely reduce the funding required to complete capital projects, because we would not be confined by doing multiple bids. And last, but certainly not least, we would reduce the time to complete projects significantly. Right now we have to deal with 112 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. many times a minimum of four contractors, primes, doing work at the same location, and any one prime if he doesn't perform affects the work in the time frame of the other three primes doing that work. So it's somewhat of a juggling act trying to get all four primes at a minimum to work together in harmony to complete projects in a timely fashion. And this is driven through the state law called the Separations Act. We would love to see modifications made to that state law, anywhere from changing the minimum limits to eliminating the law all together, quite frankly. There's only two states in the country that still have that law in effect, and that's Pennsylvania and New York. So I'd love to be able to discuss that in more detail, but I think going forward, as most of the other states in the country have recognized, we can get projects done cheaper, faster and 113 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. better if we did not have the confines of those laws. As far as the L&I and permitting issue, we're also required, as anyone is, to submit all drawings and specifications to L&I for permits, whether they be zoning, building permits. And now one of the biggest things that is slowing us down a little bit is called stormwater management, and you've probably heard this issue brought up by private developers as well as private entities trying to get work done. Stormwater management is a requirement by both Water and L&I that anything over, I believe it's, 5,000 square feet needs to produce a stormwater management plan. The reason for that plan is to be able to retain rainwater on a site so it doesn't all run down the drain and then back up our stormwater system in Philadelphia. It's a process that right now, since it's relatively new, takes substantial amount of time to get through 114 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. before we can even go out to bid on a contract. I do have plans to meet with the Water Department and L&I in the upcoming weeks and hopefully work out something that will be more advantageous to us on City projects being able to move them quicker through the process.
So I want to go on record that this is a formal request by City Council to get the Administration to begin to work with the state around this contracting issue, because I think that it is something pertinent to our expenses and it's something that is a priority. (Bell rung.)
Can I get to ask one more question? I used up my time.
115 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. Councilwoman Krajewski. She's not here. I'd like to call Dr. Schwarz up. (Witness approached witness table.)
Good morning. Dr. Schwarz, I know you're new, you just got there, but have you or are you contemplating of doing a total assessment of what you really need in terms of capital improvements to your facilities?
We certainly are. There was an assessment done in September by PICA, and I've gone through that assessment. It prioritizes, which is part of where the capital expenditure request comes from, and in a number of cases, there are questions about the numbers that were developed. So we will review that. A number of projects will move to more formal assessment. That was a general assessment looking particularly 116 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. at what the cost of replacement was versus the cost of repair. For those areas that we could prioritize from their "for repair," this capital expenditure includes for Health Center 2 in particular an assessment.
Yes, ma'am. And the plan from there will be to undertake the renovations required on Health Center 2. In addition, the report highlighted the need for HVAC repairs in the health centers more generally, which is included in the $1.2 million capital request here. But to answer directly, yes, we will undertake a comprehensive review to 117 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. look at what repairs are required for all of the health centers.
Well, since I'm an advocate for the Health Department, I think you ought to try and get some of this $36 million that we just found. So just don't take the $1 million, the $1.7 million. You'll ask for more money.
The other thing is, what's happening with the health center at Broad and Lombard?
I presume your question is whether we will repair versus relocate?
Both are under consideration. I think that the repairs are substantial. The initial assessment by PICA there suggested that major renovations would be required, as you know, and so one of the questions that I 118 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. have is, can we relocate, where would we relocate, how do we think about Health Department facilities more generally. The Medical Examiner's Office is another area where ultimately we may want to think about some either movement or major repair.
In reference to that health center Councilwoman Tasco just mentioned, I understand that there is a non-profit looking at acquiring that space. Are you aware of that?
I'm not aware of that. I'd be happy to chat more about it, though.
There's no 24 one in this room that knows that that health center is being identified by a 119 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. non-profit? (No response.)
Thank you very much. Before my time is up, Mr. Tustin, in your testimony, you talked about the number of positions in your Operating Budget and you talked about the number of positions in the Capital Budget request. How many positions are in your department total?
Now, are your staff members assigned as project 120 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. directors to various capital improvement programs that are set forth?
Two-thirds of our staff are capital, work on capital projects, which is, as Gary was here, project director or project coordinators on different projects. The other third of the staff are budget-related staff that help manage the Capital Budget, and they cannot be -- so that's how we divide our staff, capital projects managers, if you will, and budget managers. So we're broken into two areas. On the -- we have 15 departments that we do projects for, Fire, Police, Prisons, Health, and so the staff that are dedicated towards project management are broken into five teams. I have a public safety team, and Gary was just up here. He has a staff of about seven people that work on all Fire, Police and Prison projects, for instance. I have a health and human service team, who is headed up by Jim Lowe, who works 121 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. on Health Department projects, DHS projects, homeless projects. I have a team that does recreation that all they do is recreation. You've met Eric Iffrig and that team. And I have a team that does Fairmount Park and they do all the projects in and around associated with the Fairmount Park. I have one last team, which is a central facilities team, that gets involved in any major renovation to office space, whether it be City Hall or any other office space that the City leases or rents. They're the ones that are doing the sprinklers of buildings and things like that.
Now, within those teams; for instance, on the recreation facilities, a project manager could have more than one site that he or she may be working on?
Speaking of he or she, how many of these project managers are female? 122 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc.
I don't have that number off the top of my head. We have quite a few females that work on our floor, and I can get back to you with the number and what that represents as far as percentage of my staff.
Are they all civil service? What proportion of your staff is civil service?
The project directors, which are the team leaders, are not civil servants. Other than that, on the project side, everyone else is a civil servant.
What's the diversity of your staff along racial and ethnic and male, female?
Again, I don't have those numbers with me, but I'd be more than happy to provide those numbers 123 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. to you.
Thank you, Madam Chairman. The Capital Program section of the Five-Year Plan indicates that the Administration will continue to phase six-year initiative begun in FY08 to transfer the salaries of CPO employees from the Capital Fund to the General Fund. FY09 it's 934,000. Appendix 2, which details the obligation summaries by department, shows a 934,000 increase in Class 100 expenditures, bringing the total to 2,533, but the Class 100 expenditures remain at this level for the remainder of the Five-Year Plan. I guess what is the Administration's plan for moving all CPO 124 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. salaries to the General Fund?
Councilmember, we are looking at that on a regular basis. I think part of the desire to move those positions off of capital funds is that it's never really a great idea to borrow money to pay for your staff, which is, in essence, what we were doing. But we need to look at that so that we don't do it in a fashion where we can't absorb it back into the General Fund and then cripple our efforts. So we're going to keep looking at that on an ongoing basis.
I think in some circumstances it is. It depends on what they're actually doing. They have to be very specific to the projects in terms of design, in terms of the actual work being done on those projects, but in terms of a good financial practice, it probably isn't the best.
So you say 125 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. that you're continuing a six-year initiative to transfer people over, but you've only transferred people in year one, and the out years there is no 6 transfer of the 43 additional personnel to the General Fund. Do you intend to increase that over time?
Councilman, in FY08 a percentage of the staff was transferred from capital operating. '09, this will be the second transfer of staff. And, again, as Steve said, they're looking at the budget impact to both Operating and Capital. On the question about the legality, anyone who works on capital projects that gets funded from the Capital Budget needs to track every hour he spends on the job. It needs to be associated with a capital project, whether it's in the design of that capital project or through the construction of that capital project. So we have to track every hour those 126 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. employees spend on the projects to make them capital eligible.
Okay. But we're talking about the Capital Budget here, and in theory, transferring everybody to the General Fund would leave four and a half million dollars a year to spend on capital improvements versus over, say, the next five years adding $25 million to the City's debt for salaries. And so I just wonder if there's a commitment to continue this or not, because the budget indicates there's not.
Councilmember, I think the commitment is there. To point to the table you were pointing to earlier, I mean, we had to absorb almost a million dollars in making that change. So there's a million dollars that we don't have to put to other priorities on the operating side. So we're trying to do this balancing. I agree, it is not necessarily the best in spite of being able to dot 127 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. the I's and cross the T's to be sure that you're conforming to bond documents, but, again, it's probably not the best to borrow for that, in part because you're borrowing for staff and in part, as you suggested, now that your capacity to do some spending on national capital projects is limited.
Okay. I'm going to go through a few departments, if I have time. On the Police Department, in an interview with KYW last month, Commissioner Ramsey commented, quote, "You would have to bleep me out if I gave you my true feelings about the condition of police facilities. In short, our facilities are in terrible shape. We have to do something to fix them up. You can't expect people to act in a professional way all the time when they are working in conditions like that." To what extent does the Capital Budget fix that problem? Are those 128 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. conditions going to be fixed in year one, year two? (Bell rung.)
Councilmember, as the Commissioner said and I think sort of detailed in the Crime Plan, there are some capital plan issues that we have that need to be addressed. Part of the Crime Plan looks to that. We are working internally on some changes that were part of the Crime Plan in terms of movement of some individuals, in terms of addressing some of the needs that were pointed out. From what I've heard, I can't -- I don't have any evidence to suggest the Commissioner is wrong. In fact, it seems he's right on point on these things, and we need to address them, and we're trying to do that. We don't have that all in the capital plan now and we're trying to find a variety of avenues in which we can do that.
Your colleagues are very strict. They'll hang me. Councilman Clarke is not here. I don't know where he went. Councilman Jones. He's not here. Councilwoman Sanchez.
Going back to my line of questioning earlier on designs, when we do our contracting on projects, particularly the prime projects, I guess my question is, what have we been doing that delays some of these construction projects two and three years out and what are your plans to mitigate that moving forward?
Richard Tustin again, Capital Program Office. 130 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. I'd sort of like to hopefully set the record straight that most of our projects are not delayed two and three years out. We do have on occasion projects that do run into some roadblocks. Unfortunately, one is in your Council district, Councilwoman. I referred to a little bit earlier the Separations Act. We had in that particular project, we had a situation where we have four prime contractors. We had what we believed was a general contractor that wasn't performing properly. He wasn't, in our belief, wasn't working well with his subcontractors, some of them who were minority firms, and we tried to bring that to his attention and he delayed the project substantially. And, again, through -- we've tried to cajole that contractor to continue to move forward, mostly because we didn't want the other three primes on the job to sort of have an impact or a delay based on the general 131 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. contractor not doing his work. We eventually put that contractor in default of the contract, at which point in time that contractor brought in his attorneys and we had the City's Law Department sit down and meet with him to try to come up with a resolution so that contractor could move ahead and continue with the work. We are substantially complete on that project as of now and we'll go into Phase 2, which is called litigation. Although we don't have it on a lot of projects, we have two or three projects a year that do end up in litigation between the City and contractors because of delays, either caused by the contractor, which costs the City money in design fees, as well as delay the community from using those facilities. So we are going after those contractors through litigation at the end of the job to try to recapture some of the lost time and money that was spent on 132 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. those projects. It is difficult on some projects when we have to take lowest responsible bidders, which is a requirement of the City. We have to put three or four contractors together working at one site. All of their work is interdependent upon their other contractors getting done. Because none of the contractors report to each other, they all have prime contracts with the City, they feel they don't have to work with each other sometimes on getting things done in a timely fashion. So a lot of our effort goes in to trying to get those contractors to work together, get those schedules to be completed in the same time and to get projects done in a timely fashion.
I will say this, and I want it on the record, the whole issue of how we deal with contractors that have been troublesome in past on public works projects and 133 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. continue to get rehired. So at some point, this Administration has to decide are we going to continue to use people who have a bad history with us. And the other thing that is an issue that I think we need to own as a City is when we delay our invoicing process and when we create instability in projects by moving folks from Capital Office, the project managers, which in this particular case I believe we're up to six project managers. So, again, as we reform ourselves, it is very important that we're cognizant that as we enter into litigation we're displacing residents, who by no fault of their own. And, as you know, my position on that is I'm going to get a CO and you guys could litigate until you're green, but moving forward, I think this is part of -- we need to do a better job in managing the projects and we need to do a better job in our payment cycle so that we don't enter into these technicalities with a 134 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. contractor. And, again, managing those primes -- I've only sat at the table once -- is ridiculous. (Bell rung.)
Council will stand in recess until 1:30. (Short recess.)
The Committee of the Whole is now back in session. I would like the Administration to please take the witness table. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
All right. I think I'll go first, Councilman Green, if that's okay with you.
Thank you. The Fiscal 2009 Capital Budget contains $60.9 million in CR funding. Can someone identify where these funds 135 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. are budgeted in the Operating Budget?
Madam President, Steve Agostini, Budget Director. I have a schedule that was provided by Mr. McPherson detailing the 60.9 million, and I have been --
Mr. McPherson, did you share that us? MR. McPHERSON: Yes.
And it is a very detailed schedule, so I'm spending some time going through that and identifying where that money is. Ten million of that is in the pay-as-you-go for Streets. So that part I can identify. There's approximately another 49 million. I think approximately eight million of that is in Health. And the balance is in either Public Property, Fire or Police. And I have started asking questions about that and I will come back to you with the detailing of where that is.
Very well. 136 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. I'm certain that Councilman Clarke, if he were here, would probably ask what the status of the renovations and expansion is of the Central Library, and can you tell us when do you anticipate that this project will be started.
Madam President, I don't know that exactly, but I'm going to look to the Library representative, who is here, to answer that. (Witness approached witness table.)
Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon, Council President Verna. My name is Bill 20 Fleming. I'm the Administrative Services Director for the Free Library. I believe your question dealt with timing of the expansion and renovation project for the Central Library. As it stands now, the project 137 3/4/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080154, etc. is in the fundraising stage. We plan to break ground sometime in the fall of this calendar year if fundraising is successful.