COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA2 COMMITTEE ON LAW AND GOVERNMENT3 Room 400, City Hall6 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Wednesday, September 28, 20117 10:10 a.m. PRESENT: COUNCILMAN WILLIAM K. GREENLEE, CHAIR10 COUNCILMAN FRANK DiCICCO COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR.11 COUNCILMAN BILL GREEN COUNCILMAN JACK KELLY12 COUNCILMAN JAMES KENNEY BILL 110498 - An ordinance amending Section 9-804 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled15 "Unfair Rental Practices," by requiring that every lease provide that a landlord shall be16 prohibited from terminating the lease based upon a tenant's status as a domestic violence17 victim... BILL 110556 - An ordinance amending Chapter 20-1200 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled19 "Lobbying," by modifying certain definitions, provisions, and exemptions...20 - - -22 2
Good2 morning, everyone. This is the Committee3 on Law and Government. For the record,4 we have a quorum with myself, Bill5 Greenlee; Councilman Kenney, the6 Vice-Chair of the Committee; Councilman7 DiCicco; and Councilman Kelly.8 Ms. Marconi, will you please9 read the title of the first bill before10 us today.11
Bill No. 110498, an12 ordinance amending Section 9-804 of The13 Philadelphia Code, entitled "Unfair14 Rental Practices," by requiring that15 every lease provide that a landlord shall16 be prohibited from terminating the lease17 based upon a tenant's status as a18 domestic violence victim, and shall be19 required to terminate the lease upon the20 request of a tenant victim of domestic21 violence, or may bifurcate the lease if22 such victim requests bifurcation, all23 under certain terms and conditions.24
Thank25 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 you.2 Before we hear from the3 witnesses, I just have a very brief4 statement.5 Victims of domestic violence6 are some of our most vulnerable citizens7 and need the appropriate protection of8 government. Oftentimes they are9 victimized twice in various ways. It is10 with this thought that I introduced this11 bill before us today. Like the law City12 Council passed a few years ago providing13 unpaid leave from employment for victims,14 this bill would not allow a victim to be15 evicted through no fault of their own.16 We're going to hear from a17 couple of people who -- a few people who18 were victims and are kind of the real19 reasons why this law is necessary, and20 also from the advocates, who will explain21 the bill and why it will work to the22 benefit of all concerned, tenants and23 landlords.24 By the way, I'd love to say25 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 this is groundbreaking, but states2 have already implemented this law. So in3 a way, we're just kind of catching up.4 And for the record, at the5 meeting we'll be presenting an amendment6 agreed to by the Apartment Association,7 who we met with a couple weeks ago, that8 will further ensure landlords' rights and9 make sure that they have no problem with10 this bill.11 So that being the case, the12 first panel -- I'm not sure if all three13 are here or if maybe there's a14 substitution for one of these people --15 Nicole Bounds, Vernetta Burger and Beryl16 Tilman. If you could just come up to the17 table, please.18 (Witnesses approached witness19 table.)20
Good21 morning, everyone.22 (Good morning.)23 COUNCILMAN GREENLEE:24 Ms. Bounds, I have your name first, so if25 5 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 you are there, you'd like to start.2 You're speaking right into the3 microphone. You know how this works. If4 you could just identify yourself for the5 record and proceed with your statement,6 please.7
Absolutely. Good8 morning, everyone. My name is Nicole9 Bounds and I sit in front of you this10 morning with a little coercement, because11 certainly my story is one that I didn't12 think I'd ever have to tell. I sit in13 front of you as a victim, but, more14 importantly, I sit in front of you as a15 survivor of domestic violence. 18 My husband and I separated back19 in January of this year. I came home20 from work one day to find him sitting on21 the steps of my home. 24 We had been going through a25 6 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. 4 Next thing I know, a violent5 assault ensued. 11 He came to the house on a continuous12 basis. My neighbors could hear the13 noise. My neighbors would often call the14 police. 16 The intimidation of my17 co-workers, my company president, company18 CFO and the accounting department then19 ensued. 25 7 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 But it didn't stop it. It did not stop2 it. He knew what he was doing. 6 The landlord of our property7 was his friend. While all of the8 violence and intimidation was going on,9 the landlord hired my husband as a10 contractor. 12 I was a little over a month13 behind in my rent, as I was missing days14 from work because I had to heal. As I15 was making partial payments, my landlord16 went to court anyway. We had rented this17 home from him for three and a half years18 without any problems. I knew others that19 had rented from this same landlord, and20 he had given more time for them to catch21 up and become current. For me, it was he22 wanted me evicted. 24 I looked for a place, but I was25 8 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 afraid that running from my abuser, my2 husband, would hurt my chances of finding3 a place. I was turned down at several4 different places. 11 I did not want it to be a12 surprise if indeed my husband, who I now13 know is incarcerated, but if he were to14 find me, didn't want it to be a surprise15 to the landlord, didn't want it to be a16 surprise to the neighborhood if the cops17 were going to be called to the house,18 because I had lived that, and it was19 very, very embarrassing. 21 I cannot overstate how helpful22 this proposed law would be to victims23 like me. Having the option of24 terminating or getting the significant25 9 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. 5 Victims of abuse have a lot to6 worry about, and they often don't get7 much sleep. And I can only speak8 personally. 18
Thank19 you. And I think that your testimony20 kind of put it in real framework of why21 this bill is needed, and I appreciate it.22 And I know for all of you it's probably23 not easy to do this, but I really24 appreciate your time here.25 10 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 I don't know if anybody has any2 questions, but we'll wait for all three3 to testify.4 Just for the record, Councilman5 Green and Councilman Goode, also members6 of the Committee, are here. So we have a7 full house.8 Ms. Burger, is it?9
Hi. 13 My name is Vernetta Burger and I am here,14 and I count it not lightly that I sit15 here before you. As I have my testimony16 that is actually written here on paper, I17 need to personally express the difficulty18 it is for me to sit here. And while I19 have been in a process and on the road of20 healing and recovery from what I21 experienced for the majority of my life,22 I still sit here because of the urgency23 of this bill to be passed. And for me,24 it gets very, very personal, because we25 11 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 don't as a society recognize those who2 are affected by domestic violence even3 beyond what's in the home. I'm talking4 about our children, who continue to be5 affected by it. 7 Although I was in the8 domestic -- an abusive marriage and9 relationship some 15 years ago, I sit10 here dealing with the impact and the11 effects and the damage of it through all12 four of my children. 17 Not only do two of my sons18 because of the anger that they ensued19 because of having to witness this on a20 daily basis in their lives, they grew up21 very angry children. As a result -- and22 I'm not justifying any of their choices,23 but as a result, both of them sit in24 prison right now. I have a son who is 2425 12 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 years old. 5 My youngest son, the age of 196 years old, was murdered last year, April7 2010, because of the effects, the8 emotional, psychological, physical9 effects, that my children had to suffer10 through from their father. 13 I was a victim of domestic14 violence about 15 years ago, as I already15 stated, and at that time, I was in a16 relationship with my husband that was17 psychologically and physically abusive18 for many years. 23 One occurrence took place when24 I was first married and I was living in25 13 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 an apartment, and at that time is when my2 husband began to physically abuse me. In3 addition to the physical abuse, there4 were also verbal and mental abuse. 18 I can't leave now. How am I going to19 support my family? 22 It was very hard for me to23 leave or even to talk to the landlord,24 because my husband and the landlord were25 14 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 good friends. 4 One particular night, my5 husband was in the area and wanted to see6 his children. 11 One particular night he was in12 the area and he wanted to see his13 children. At that time, I knew he had14 been drinking and I did not want him to15 come up to my apartment. My husband16 continued to call for the outside17 intercom. 20 So I would not let him in. So21 he continued to push many different22 apartments' intercom, and eventually23 someone let him in, and when they let him24 in, he come to my apartment, he kicked25 15 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 the door in. And when I say that he2 savagely beat me, it was the first time3 in all the ten years where I actually4 went to the hospital. Pictures were5 taken of my face. 8 When we're in abusive9 relationships, we live with a lot of10 fear. I feared if I would tell somebody,11 I feared if I would call the cops that he12 would eventually kill me. 15 So he proceeded to kick my door16 in, he beat me up. He created a17 disturbance to the point to where my18 neighbors got involved and they did call19 the police. 23 I didn't want nobody to judge24 me if I left my house. I didn't want25 16 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 nobody to judge me because I lost my2 place to leave. I didn't want nobody to3 judge me because I was in an abusive4 relationship. I always feared that I5 would be discriminated against and6 prejudiced because of the fact that I7 didn't have the ability to leave this8 abusive relationship.
19 Not only was I responsible for the broken20 door that is now off of the hinges, the21 broken window, but the cleanup of all the22 blood that is all around all the walls23 from me holding my face and now trying to24 get away from him. Literally the25 17 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. 3 Nevertheless, I felt that I had4 no choice but to flee the situation. I5 felt that if I had stayed, I could have6 been killed, and I know I would have been7 killed. 10 I did flee, but I was left to11 carry the debt of over $2,400 from the12 rent during the unexpired portions of my13 lease. 24 So as I explained my situation25 18 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 to several landlords, we talked about2 being victimized twice? 7 As I began to get my family8 situated in our new home, my husband9 started to call and beg to see the10 children. I mistakenly agreed, and when11 he found out where I lived, he came all12 the way from Philadelphia down to13 Baltimore. 18 This type of behavior occurred19 on several occasions. He would pop up20 from Philadelphia, attack me and then21 leave. At that point, I was notified22 months in advance that my landlord would23 not be renewing my lease because of the24 violence and the fact that the police25 19 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. 3 When I returned to4 Philadelphia, I was faced with5 homelessness. I was still employed, but6 could not find a landlord that would rent7 to me because of my rental history. Not8 of having the rent being unpaid, but9 because of all the attention that was10 always brought to my attention, always11 brought to my place of residence because12 I allowed him to come and to -- even if13 he were to use the excuse to see the14 children, nevertheless I always expected15 something will be different. I always16 expected that he would change. Just this17 time, maybe this time it will be18 different. I never realized if nothing19 changes, nothing changes. If he had not20 done anything to change his behavior or21 his character, then why would I expect22 the situation to change? And that's some23 of the things that when we're in abusive24 relationships, that we're continued to25 20 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. 12 I talked about earlier the13 effects that my abusive situation, how it14 affects my children, all the attempts I15 had tried to stabilize them to give them16 a healthy environment, to help them17 escape from what it was that I was18 facing. We're talking about the19 long-term damage and effects they now20 deal with. Being 27, 28, 29 and my son,21 who was murdered last year, 19 years old,22 the devastation that they still deal23 with, having to sit there and watch their24 mother be beat, even when having their25 21 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. 4 My children suffered5 tremendously from witnessing all of the6 abuse, and they continue to suffer. But,7 however, I did beat the odds. As my8 sister here stated, yeah, I am a9 survivor. 19
Thank20 you, Ms. Burger. Obviously none of us21 could really reflect totally on what22 you've gone through, but it certainly --23 you deserve congratulations for hanging24 in there and now being a homeowner and25 22 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 for coming down today. We appreciate it.2 Ms. Tilman, or are you3 pinch-hitting here?4
My name is Sakia5 Ross. I work with Mothers in Charge, and6 I'm basically here to support the young7 ladies here and also in support of the8 bill.9 I'm also a victim of domestic10 violence, but mine wasn't so much11 physical. And through that, I had to12 move on numerous occasions because of13 that, and moving so much and going14 through so much after that, the effect,15 like Ms. Burger stated, on the children.16 My children are babies, and the17 abuser made me -- he made himself a18 victim and turned the tables on me.19 That's how good they are in manipulating.20 And now the abuser is raising my child.21 So now the children are affected even22 more, because not only did he watch him23 abuse me, but now he's in a situation,24 and it's like you're left with nothing25 23 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 after that. And you can't run, because2 it's like the system somehow connects to3 the abuser, if you're a victim and you're4 afraid.5 So I'm just here in support of6 the ladies.7
Okay. I8 appreciate that. You know, I'm not going9 to say this bill is going to solve10 everybody's problem, but I think it will11 go a long way in helping people and at12 least help that balance a little bit,13 because I think the tenant is, the14 domestic violence victim, is so much on15 the defensive in lots of ways, and they16 certainly shouldn't be in the defensive17 when it comes to the law, because they're18 not doing anything wrong. They're19 victims, and they need to be protected.20 I will say that we're going to21 hear from some experts and some advocates22 and people who certainly know a lot about23 this, but I don't think anybody can say24 more than what you folks just said,25 24 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 because I think it puts it, like I said,2 in real-world terms. We're talking about3 something on paper. You lived this.4 And, again, I appreciate you all coming5 down.6 Any comments or questions from7 the Committee?8 (No response.)9
Also for10 the record, I will put in a testimony of11 Beryl Tilman, who also relates her12 problems and her support for this bill.13 Again, thank you all for coming14 down very much, and I hope this bill will15 help people in the future of what you16 went through. Thank you very much.17 (Thank you.)18
Our next19 witness -- and let me just say for the20 record, I think we have the testimony of21 most of the other witnesses that are22 coming in. Most of it is short, but for23 those of you who have testimony, as I24 think you all know this, it will be made25 25 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 part of the record and if you would like2 to shorten it and just hit the highlight3 points, that would be great, because we4 do have another bill coming up after5 this.6 So our next witness, Rue7 Landau, Executive Director, Human8 Relations Commission.9 (Witness approached witness10 table.)11
Good morning,12 everyone. I'm also the Executive13 Director of the Fair Housing Commission,14 which is the --15
-- capacity I sit18 here today. That's fine.19 First, before I start, I just20 wanted to just say quickly to the21 incredibly strong women who just22 testified, the survivors, your stories23 are incredibly important to all of us.24 Please keep telling them, and we're very25 26 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 glad that we're moving in the right2 direction in Philadelphia.3 Good morning, Councilman4 Greenlee and members of the Law and5 Government Committee. I'm Rue Landau,6 the Executive Director of the Fair7 Housing Commission, and I am very happy8 to have this opportunity to testify in9 favor of Bill No. 110498. With me today10 is Rosemary Branigan, a supervisor in the11 Fair Housing Commission, and although12 he's in hearings and trying to get here,13 also hopefully we'll be joined by14 Chairperson Ralph Blanks, who is the15 Chair of the Fair Housing Commission.16 The Fair Housing Commission is17 the City agency that administers and18 enforces the Philadelphia Fair Housing19 Ordinance, and that would be directly20 responsible for implementing the bill21 being discussed today.22 I would like to thank23 Councilman Greenlee for introducing this24 important bill.25 27 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 This body, City Council,2 enacted the Fair Housing Ordinance in3 1962 to combat unfair rental practices.4 The ordinance established a five-member5 Commission and granted it both6 investigative and enforcement authority.7 When you look at the legislative history8 of the Fair Housing Ordinance, the intent9 of the law was to help protect the10 health, safety and general welfare of the11 inhabitants of the City. The proposed12 amendments to the Fair Housing Ordinance13 do just that.14 Under the proposed amendments,15 every lease must provide that a landlord16 is prohibited from terminating the lease17 based upon a tenant's status as a18 domestic violence victim. In addition, a19 landlord shall be required to terminate20 the lease upon the request of a tenant21 victim of domestic violence and22 presentation of supporting documentation,23 or the landlord may bifurcate the lease24 if such victim requests bifurcation.25 28 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 All of these amendments are2 essential to protect the health, safety3 and general welfare of our city's most4 vulnerable populations. And they are in5 line with the protections already6 provided to tenants living in subsidized7 housing under the federal Violence8 Against Women Act.9 Finally, the proposed10 amendments balance the needs of the11 landlords and the tenants as each deal12 with the difficult realities of domestic13 violence.14 Thank you again for the15 opportunity to testify in favor of Bill16 110498. It sends a strong message once17 again that Council is committed to18 protecting Philadelphians from domestic19 violence.20 I'd just like to add, we21 requested, the Commission requested, that22 the enactment time for the bill be23 changed from 30 to 60 days, because we24 have some internal administrative changes25 29 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 we need to make, and I believe that --2
That's3 one of the amendments we're putting in at4 the meeting, yes.5
Thank8 you.9 Any questions, comments from10 members?11 (No response.)12
And13 Ms. Landau, we've worked together on a14 number of things and I just want to thank15 you for all the work you do on behalf of16 the citizens of Philadelphia and for both17 Commissions for what they do, because18 they're oftentimes protecting the most19 vulnerable of us. And maybe it makes me20 a crazy liberal, but I think government21 is supposed to help people sometimes. So22 that's what we're trying to do.23 Thank you.24
We're happy you're25 30 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 here.2
Thank3 you.4 The next group why don't we5 bring up as a panel. I got Molly6 Callahan from Women Against Abuse, Phil7 Lord from TURN, Rachel Garland from CLS8 and also George Gould, who is here to9 basically answer any questions we may10 have, and anyone else a part of that11 group.12 (Witnesses approached witness13 table.)14
Councilpeople, I15 know that I'm done with my testimony, but16 I just wanted to tell you that17 Chairperson Ralph Blanks has now gotten18 here. Again, he had to leave hearings to19 get here and will quickly go back. Thank20 you.21
Welcome,22 sir. Thank you for coming. Thank you.23 Molly, I have you down here24 first, if you'd like to start.25 31 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561
Sure. Thank2 you. Thank you to Council for all of3 your support for domestic violence4 victims and to Councilman Greenlee for5 having these hearings today.6 Women Against Abuse strongly7 supports these amendments, which will8 protect domestic violence victims and9 allow them to stay in stable housing when10 appropriate or to quickly leave a house11 that is no longer safe. We also believe12 it provides a framework for landlords who13 are dealing with tenants who are14 experiencing domestic violence.15 Last year, as the only16 emergency shelter in Philadelphia for17 domestic violence victims, Women Against18 Abuse was forced to turn away 7,700 women19 and children seeking shelter. Without20 another place to turn, and without21 legislation like the proposed, victims22 may be forced to return to their abuser.23 This puts women and children in24 dangerous, potentially lethal situations,25 32 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 and it increases pressure on City2 services such as law enforcement,3 hospitals and the shelter system.4 Women who do not return to5 their abuser may end up on the streets.6 There's a strong correlation between7 domestic violence and homelessness, as 928 percent of homeless women have9 experienced severe physical or sexual10 abuse at some point in their lives. This11 amendment prohibits discrimination12 against victims and ensures that they13 cannot be forced out of their home simply14 because they are victims, because they15 have had to call the police on their16 abuser. Equally important, it allows the17 landlord to evict an abuser under the18 bifurcation provision. This allows the19 victim and her children to safely remain20 in a stable home. Rather than forcing a21 victim to unnecessarily flee, it allows22 the victim to stay in her own23 neighborhood, where she often has a vital24 support system. It also allows the25 33 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 children to stay in the same school2 system and to continue within their own3 support system in the neighborhood.4 The ordinance also recognizes5 that sometimes leaving a residence which6 the defendant knows about is the only7 safe option. By allowing a victim to8 terminate a lease early, the City is9 providing an important safety valve.10 Without this provision, victims may feel11 forced to stay in a home which the abuser12 has access to. The abuser may continue13 to abuse, harass and stalk a victim14 unless she's able to move to a15 confidential location. Often, despite a16 protection from abuse order and police17 intervention, the safest alternative is18 for a victim to move to a confidential19 location, and this provision allows the20 victim to do that without any penalty.21 These amendments respond22 flexibly and sensitively to domestic23 violence, an issue which ultimately24 affects all neighborhoods and the quality25 34 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 of life in our city. The amendments2 recognize that victims may turn to the3 police, the courts, a domestic violence4 counselor or a healthcare provider. And5 it is important that any of these6 front-line responders are able to7 complete the certification. Victims who8 do not call the police or go to court for9 PFA often do see their doctor or go to10 the emergency room for treatment, and so11 it's important that these victims have12 access to the safeguards as well.13 Again, we thank you for your14 support, and we believe this bill will15 help stop the cycle of violence.16 Thank you.17
Just21 quickly, I want to just put a question22 out there that you can think about in23 your testimony.24 A lot of discussion about the25 35 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 possibility of being evicted based on the2 tenant premise -- on the premise history3 from the Police Department. So I assume4 when a landlord-tenant complaint is5 brought, there is often presented at some6 proceeding a premise history from the7 Police Department. So if the police had8 been called to the premise 35 times in a9 year, would that appear somewhere10 in information provided by the Police11 Department as to the frequency of police12 going to a premise? Is that something13 that's part of the record?14 (Ms. Garland nods head in the15 affirmative.)16
Would it be17 helpful that there was a requirement that18 the police had a different designation,19 like SDV or something, suspected domestic20 violence, when they arrive at the scene21 so that when a judge or a landlord-tenant22 officer sees this report from the police23 that 50 times were there last year, it's24 all SDV, I mean, it does mitigate the25 36 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 landlord's position that this person2 should be evicted, not just loud music3 and parties and drug use and fights, but4 that suspected domestic violence5 designation on the premise history would6 go a long way in kind of identifying the7 victim as opposed to allowing the Police8 Department information to be the reason9 why she's evicted in the first place.10 Does that make -- I mean,11 through your continued testimony, if you12 just address that, because I'd be13 interested in knowing your opinion.14
I can also let15 you know that right now the police do16 actually use a specific domestic violence17 report form. So when they go out and18 suspect domestic violence, this report is19 very clear that it is domestic violence.20 And I think it would be helpful if that21 then transferred over to the22 landlord-tenant court to show the premise23 history.24
Okay.25 37 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 Thank you.2
Thank3 you. Thank you, Councilman.4 Phil, I have you down next, if5 you'd like to go.6
8 I'm here on behalf of the Tenant Union9 Representative Network, or TURN. As you10 know, TURN is a housing service advocacy11 organization which provides counseling12 and workshops. And so we see people who13 are in need of rental assistance,14 sometimes they're trying to get their15 deposit money to move and relocate, or16 they're being evicted. 19 One of the main problems is20 that they don't tell us that they're in21 this situation. They're often humiliated22 and ashamed by it, and so we have to ask23 them what's going on so we can give them24 more help. But usually they just say, I25 38 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 need another place to stay. But if you2 see someone else was on the lease and3 they're not mentioning that person or4 they have to move very quickly, you get5 the impression that you should ask more6 questions. 11 I just wanted to highlight a couple of12 things. First of all, probably most13 importantly for me, this bill is already14 in effect. 23 There are three aspects to this24 bill, and I think they're not really25 39 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. 2 Non-discrimination, early termination and3 bifurcation. The bifurcation part is4 voluntary. So that means the landlord5 and the tenant agree that the lease6 should be split so that the perpetrator7 is off the lease. It gets the8 perpetrator out of the picture, it gets9 the tenant more stabilized. They don't10 have the person coming back and saying,11 I'm on the lease, I have financial12 interest in this property. So it's good13 for everybody. 15 The non-discrimination16 obviously is common sense. You don't17 want people who are running for their18 lives to be told they can't get a place19 because they've been a victim of20 violence. We don't want a society like21 that. I don't think anybody is22 advocating for that. And so I think23 that's pretty clear as well, that not24 discriminating against domestic violence25 40 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 victims is important. We don't want to2 let that happen. We don't want them to3 be treated differently. As you heard4 already and other people in the units, we5 don't want friendly relations with the6 perpetrator to create situations for them7 that cause bias. 13 First of all, it doesn't mean very much14 if there's a month-to-month lease,15 because in fact you can terminate a16 month-to-month lease with very little17 notice anyway. So early termination is18 only an issue for long-term leases. 22 As you heard today, it's a very, very23 difficult, humiliating situation. People24 will not pretend to do that. We don't25 41 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 expect that to happen. 5 What happens most often is what you heard6 today, and, that is, that it damages the7 credit report. 12 And keep in mind too that13 landlords are obligated to mitigate14 damages, which means they're obligated to15 re-rent the place if they can. 19 We're not talking about something bigger20 than that. Here we're talking about a21 situation where someone doesn't wind up22 leaving and then gets sued for rent and23 says, Oh, I was a domestic violence24 victim. The victim has to say up front25 42 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 and 30 days before they leave that they2 are a victim and have documentation of3 it. So the landlord has notice that4 something is going to happen. This is5 better than someone running out in the6 middle of the night because they're7 scared for their lives. 10 So we hope you support this11 bill. 16
Thank17 you, Mr. Lord, and I think it's18 particularly -- the last part that you19 talked about, about the fraud, because20 every once in a while, you get that21 concern. A landlord who is a friend of22 mine -- so I won't mention her name --23 said to me that that was her concern.24 But I think you know, and I saw it with25 43 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 the bill that I referenced early about2 the getting leave from employment for3 victims of domestic violence, people4 don't think that. I'm not saying there5 will never be anybody in the history of6 the City that might, but that just isn't7 something women do. In fact, oftentimes8 the problem is they don't report it; am I9 right?10 So, I mean, that -- so the11 concern that there's going to be this12 fraud I think -- I just think is13 unfounded. And I always point this out.14 Back then, the Administration and the15 Chamber opposed the employment bill, and16 I check all the time to see has there17 been -- and one of it was they were18 concerned about fraud, and I check all19 the time, and so far, I've not heard one20 complaint that people have faked domestic21 violence so that they could get off from22 work. Not one time. And, again, as you23 said, there's documentation involved, so24 you just can't say this happened. You25 44 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 have to prove it.2 So I think that that is a3 concern that should really be put to4 rest.5
If I could just add,6 not just documentation, there's got to be7 a court hearing before in fact a landlord8 can say, I want the future rents. So a9 judge can see those papers and everything10 else.11 So it's not an easy thing to12 get around. Any kind of fraud or perjury13 is something that you can't plan on14 having.15
Any other16 questions for Mr. Lord?17 (No response.)18
Good morning,22 Councilman. My name is Rachel Garland23 and I'm a housing attorney at Community24 Legal Services. For the past four years,25 45 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 I've been representing subsidized housing2 tenants either living in public housing3 or Section 8 voucher housing under the4 Violence Against Women Act, which has5 these protections for subsidized tenants.6 This bill has proven very powerful in7 helping both landlords and tenants8 mitigate the damages that can be caused9 to property as well as to the family when10 domestic violence occurs. I support this11 bill because I believe that it will12 extend these protections to private13 housing tenants as well, just as it has14 done in 22 other states before us.15 I believe that this bill is16 powerful because it provides a mechanism17 so that the landlords will have certainty18 as to what is happening and what their19 options are going forward. It will also20 provide tenants who are victims with21 options that they can discuss with their22 landlord and the framework in which to23 have that conversation. As we heard the24 victims testify earlier, it's often hard25 46 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 to know how to approach the situation and2 what your options are. So by laying it3 out, it will help both sides work4 together to figure out what is the best5 solution for both of them.6 We were able to meet with7 Christine Young-Gertz of the Apartment8 Association of Greater Philadelphia9 through Councilman Greenlee's office two10 weeks ago. We went through the bill with11 her. We made some changes to the bill in12 response to her concerns, and we are13 pleased to announce that we do have their14 support for this important bill.15 We thank you for this hearing16 today and for the opportunity to provide17 testimony on why we believe this bill is18 very important.19 Thank you.20
Thank21 you. And I'm glad you mentioned about22 the Apartment Association. They were the23 only group that actually got in touch24 with us, raised some concerns, and I25 47 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 think we addressed them. And I got an2 e-mail from Ms. Young that she couldn't3 come here herself because she's in4 Harrisburg, but she supports the bill.5 Yes, George.6
If I could,7 Councilman Greenlee, I just had a couple8 very quick comments --9
Just10 identify yourself. We all know you, but11 just for formality.12
I just wanted to13 say how impressive the testimony was of14 the victims of domestic violence. I15 believe the time has really come for this16 bill.17 And, secondly, I wanted to18 thank you for your leadership on the19 issue, on other bills, on this bill, and20 the Committee for taking this up. It's21 just an incredibly important issue, as22 you heard from the folks who testified23 and many other victims in the City. So24 thank you.25 48 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561
Thank2 you. And thank you all, because I know3 you did a lot of work on this and I4 appreciate all your expertise.5 Any questions or comments?6 (No response.)7
That is11 the list of witnesses I have for this12 bill. Is there anyone else here who13 wishes to testify on this particular14 bill?15 (No response.)16
Seeing17 none, Ms. Marconi, could you please call18 up the next bill before us.19
Bill No. 110556, an20 ordinance amending Chapter 20-1200 of The21 Philadelphia Code, entitled "Lobbying,"22 by modifying certain definitions,23 provisions, and exemptions, all under24 certain terms and conditions.25 49 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561
Thank2 you.3 The first witness I have is the4 Ethics Board.5 (Witness approached witness6 table.)7
14 Good morning. My name is Shane15 Creamer. I'm the Executive Director of16 the Philadelphia Board of Ethics. 20 Landmark legislation was21 enacted by City Council and signed by22 Mayor Nutter in June 2010 to create the23 City's first Lobbying Code in Chapter24 20-1200. The law requires those who25 50 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 lobby and their clients to register and2 report their activity and, most3 important, requires that the information4 be made accessible to citizens. 8 Bill 110556 contains amendments9 to the new Lobbying Code, and these10 amendments are directly connected to the11 Board of Ethics' work to implement the12 new Code. 21 As Council considers the22 proposed changes to the Code, it is23 important to recognize that the new24 Lobbying Code has not yet been25 51 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 implemented and that it is not2 self-executing, because Section 20-12103 of the Lobbying Code requires the Board4 to promulgate a regulation. In addition,5 the law requires the City to create an6 electronic filing system and database7 that can be searched by the public on the8 City's website. Pursuant to the law's9 mandates, our staff presented the first10 draft of Regulation No. 19 Many of the amendments in Bill20 110556 have their genesis in the21 extensive public comments the Board22 received at its June 15th hearing on23 Regulation No. 9. These concerns were24 addressed in the version of Regulation25 52 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 No. 9 that the Board approved on2 September 21st. Between the June 15th3 public hearing and September 21st, our4 staff consulted with City Council staff,5 shared proposed changes to the Regulation6 and received feedback. Many of these7 proposed changes to the Regulation have8 been incorporated in some form in Bill9 110556. This cooperation with Council10 staff continues a collaboration that11 began more than a year ago with the12 Board's campaign finance and political13 activity regulations. " The23 new Code requires reporting of lobbying24 to influence both legislative activity25 53 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 and administrative actions of City2 government. 6 Concerns were raised in public7 comments received by the Board that the8 Code's broad definition of9 "administrative action" might sweep10 citizens' everyday interactions with City11 government into the realm of reportable12 lobbying activity. For example, the13 definition of "administrative action"14 includes any determination with respect15 to improvement of real property subject16 to City regulation. There is a vast17 difference between my individual18 application for a building permit to add19 a deck to my house and the effort by a20 lobbyist to convince a City regulatory21 agency that the safety standards for22 decks should be changed. The Board does23 not believe that the lobbying law was24 intended to capture information about the25 54 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. 3 Several of the modifications to4 Regulation No. 9 approved by the Board on5 September 21st were therefore designed to6 clarify the types of conduct that rise to7 the level of lobbying. 13 For further clarity, examples of14 non-lobbying transactions were added to15 Regulation No. 22 In a similar fashion, Bill23 110556 amends Section 20-1204 of the24 Lobbying Code to add an exemption from25 55 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. " The purpose of this amendment,5 which the Board supports and is included6 in Regulation No. 13 Several public commenters at the Board's14 June 15th hearing explained that City15 officials frequently attend events in an16 official capacity, but that they are not17 asked to pay for food and beverage or to18 pay to attend the event. 25 56 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV.
- BILLS 110498 & 1105561 The Board recognizes that an2 official's attendance at a reception in3 an official capacity is not intended and4 is not the same as a personal gift to a5 City official or employee, and that6 officials and employees consider7 attendance at these receptions to be8 within the scope of their work and9 official responsibilities. 12 The Board did not have an13 opportunity to consider this proposed14 exemption for receptions. 22 Three, exemption for lobbying23 by government officials. Section24 20-1204(7) of the Lobbying Code25 57 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. 4 Bill 110556 expands the exemption in5 Section 20-1204(7) to include state,6 local and federal government officials7 and employees. "10 Efforts to include administrative actions11 of a City agency may be reportable under12 the Lobbying Code. Proposed Regulation13 No. 18 Bill 110556 would expand the19 definition of "agency" at Section20 20-1201(3) to include any "City-related21 agency," as defined in Section 17-1401(9)22 that is not subject to the state Lobbying23 Code. We believe that this definition24 will require further clarification in the25 58 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. 2 After submitting my testimony3 this morning, I received a revision to4 this provision in Bill 110556. 7 No. " The Board14 believes that it is good public policy to15 encourage amendments to registrations and16 expense reports when errors are17 discovered by lobbyists, firms and18 principals. It therefore considered19 addition of a "safe harbor" provision to20 Regulation No. 9 to permit correction of21 material misstates or omissions without22 penalty in certain circumstances, but23 decided to defer adding a "safe harbor"24 provision pending these amendments to the25 59 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. 2 The Board supports the3 amendment to Section 20-1205(8)(a)(xi) of4 the City Code in Bill No. 110556 to5 include a "safe harbor" provision. As6 drafted, the amendment provides an7 incentive for lobbyists, firms and8 principals to self-correct registrations9 and expense reports that have been filed10 with the Board. 18 Six, expansion of persons who19 can request advice from the Board. The20 Lobbying Code grants authority to the21 Board of Ethics at Section 20-1206(2) to22 provide advisory opinions to a "lobbyist,23 lobbying firm or principal" about24 compliance with the Code. However, as25 60 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 noted by a public commenter on June 15th,2 the Code does not mention that other3 persons or entities may ask whether they4 are required to register or file expense5 reports under the law. Bill 110556 would6 correct this limitation. The Board7 supports the proposed amendment to8 Section 20-1206(2), which was also9 included in Regulation No. " Bill 11055612 modifies the general rule at Section13 20-1202(1) that triggers registration by14 lobbyists, lobbying firms and principals15 to substitute the phrase "engaging in16 lobbying" for, quote, "acting in any17 capacity as a lobbyist, lobbying firm or18 principal," close quote. 24 I'd be happy to answer any questions you25 61 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. 4
Thank you.5 As far as this whole issue of6 receptions and food served at receptions,7 I understand the amendment does tighten8 it up and clarify it, but I want to give9 you an example of something that was10 highly critical a number of years ago at11 the opening of the Kimmel Center when12 City Councilmembers were invited, along13 with state officials and others, and14 Elton John was the concert, and there was15 a terrible coverage for a few days16 afterwards about how bad that was.17 I mean, give me your opinion of18 the opening of a major cultural venue in19 the City and being invited as ex-officio20 and attending. I mean, how does that --21 if you had to interpret that event after22 this bill is passed and the rules are23 promulgated, what would be your --24
That's a25 62 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 challenging issue, and I think that2 "reception" needs further clarification3 by regulation, which we can do by4 amending Regulation No. 9, and we will5 get to that.6 I think it's helpful to look at7 the state regulation, which does define8 "reception." And if I may read it, it9 says, "Reception is an event attended by10 invited state officials or state11 employees that is hosted by a registered12 lobbyist, lobbying firm or principal in13 which items such as appetizers, beverages14 or light fare are served for afternoon or15 evening events and items such as coffee,16 juice, pastries or bagels are served for17 morning events." And this is important.18 "A related hospitality event will not be19 considered or included as part of a20 reception."21 So if there is a reception at22 the Kimmel Center for its opening where23 there's light fare and beverages, those24 things are not reportable expenses as25 63 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 gifts. However, the related hospitality2 event, the Elton John concert, would be a3 reportable gift. So the value of4 attending that concert would be a5 reportable gift expense under the state6 interpretation, I believe, which I think7 is probably the direction that the Board8 would go in. I can't speak for the Board9 because we haven't considered this10 exception yet, but I think that would be11 my recommendation.12
I mean,13 again, I don't want to belabor this whole14 example, but it becomes somewhat15 subjective relative to light fare16 versus -- you get over a certain like17 ounce of food? I mean, I don't know18 where light fare and heavy fare come in19 and how many drinks is too many drinks,20 like for some people the number varies.21
I agree. I think22 it's very hard no matter what you do23 here, because if you don't have this24 exception, theoretically someone will25 64 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 have to -- let's say you have a reception2 at the Pennsylvania Society, and many law3 firms, businesses, unions have rooms4 where people wander in and wander out and5 they have buffets set up and bars set up.6 If you don't have an exception like this7 that probably applies to those kinds of8 events, you would literally have to have9 someone follow the Mayor or10 Councilmembers around writing down what11 food they picked up, what drinks they had12 and trying to calculate the value of that13 so they can report it in their expense14 report.15
But if in16 that event at the Pennsylvania Society17 you go there and you're entertained but18 there's no discussion of legislation or19 business or policy, how is that a20 lobbying event?21
It's not a22 lobbying event. The trigger is whether23 it is held by, under the state24 regulation -- again, the definition we're25 65 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 working with is under the state2 regulation -- if the event is hosted by a3 registered lobbyist, lobbying firm or4 principal. So it has to be -- first, it5 has to be held by someone who is in the6 system who is reporting.7
So an8 institution like Temple University or9 University of Pennsylvania would not --10
Well, no. They11 probably are going to be a registered12 principal.13
But at the14 Temple breakfast on Sunday morning, if15 there's no discussion of --16
The only19 thing you talk about is the bacon and20 eggs.21
That doesn't22 matter. And the amendment to this bill23 that creates this exception also states24 that if there's any lobbying that occurs25 66 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 at the event, that that is reportable.2 So I think that the amendment anticipates3 that there will be receptions where4 officials are attending in their official5 capacity. There is incidental food and6 beverage at these events and the7 officials are not being asked to pay for8 attending the event or for the food or9 beverage. They are not lobbying events10 per se. Lobbying may or may not occur at11 it, but what it does is it excludes12 these, I think, de minimis values of13 attending the reception and the food and14 beverage values from reporting.15
But the16 Board, in its analysis of any particular17 complaint or any problem, would take into18 consideration the de minimis value of19 what was offered, or would that matter or20 not at all?21
I think it22 would -- I threw out de minimis there,23 and that's not in the state regulation.24 I don't know whether that's something25 67 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 that we would consider in our regulation2 or not, but I think we'd look very3 carefully at the state regulation. I4 think they're very, very careful the way5 they break out different types of food6 and beverage in the evening and afternoon7 versus morning.8
Exactly. So I11 think if you're getting into a sit-down12 dinner and it's at Le Bec-Fin and you're13 ordering from the menu, I think that14 takes you out of "reception" under the15 state regulation.16
I just17 wanted to ask your opinion on that.18 COUNCILMAN GREENLEE:19 Councilman Green.20
Thank you,21 Mr. Chairman.22 I do want to respond to some of23 that colloquy, but before I do, I want to24 thank you and your staff for the hard25 68 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 work that you've done on this issue since2 June 2010 when we originally discussed3 this. You worked hard to promulgate4 regulations, which you received many5 comments on. The comments were useful,6 involved many stakeholders, and I think7 as you stated, the Regulation No. 98 really is most of what these amendments9 are. And the reason that we amended the10 law rather than allowing it to be done by11 regulation is, of course, that some12 things can't be done by regulation if the13 law is contrary, and we felt we didn't14 want to set a precedent of doing things15 by regulation that are required by law.16 So we appreciate you working with us on17 that, and your staff did a lot of hard18 work and --19
-- so did my21 Chief of Staff, Sophie Bryan, and we too22 hope to continue the good working23 relationship that we have.24 With respect to that colloquy,25 69 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 I would say -- and I want to state this2 for the record -- I think the language in3 this bill, it would be -- my colleagues4 can disagree with me if they wish. It5 would be the intent of this bill that a6 Temple breakfast, for example, after the7 Pennsylvania Society is a reception that8 would be excluded, because a ton of9 people are invited and there is no -- as10 long as there is no direct lobbying of11 that public official at that event on an12 issue of Temple, I think it would be13 caught within the exception and no14 reporting by Temple would be required at15 that event. And so no matter whether we16 were served -- no matter what was served17 for breakfast, I would say that it would18 be the intent of this bill to exclude19 that.20 Also, I think the City Council21 does not intend for this to be a strict22 liability offense. In other words, the23 person lobbying must intend to lobby in24 order for there to be lobbying activity25 70 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 that is reportable. And so I just wanted2 to state that for the record also.3 Thank you for your testimony.4
Thank9 you.10 Mr. Garcia, please, the Bar11 Association.12 (Witnesses approached witness13 table.)14
Please18 identify yourself for the record and19 proceed, please.20
Yes. My name is21 Rudy Garcia. I'm Chancellor of the22 Philadelphia Bar Association. I'm joined23 this morning -- still morning, yes -- by24 our Executive Director, Ken Shear.25 71 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 Good morning, Chairman Greenlee2 and members of the Committee on Law and3 Government. As Chancellor of the4 Philadelphia Bar, I'm the primary5 spokesperson for approximately 13,0006 Philadelphia lawyers and judges. The7 Philadelphia Bar Association is the8 oldest association of lawyers in the9 United States, and for centuries we10 promoted justice, professional excellence11 and respect for the rule of law.12 In addition to serving our13 members and the courts, we also consider14 public service to be a core part of our15 mission. For example, through the16 organizations we support at about 3,00017 volunteers at private firms, Philadelphia18 lawyers handle 50,000 cases a year for19 free for people struggling with poverty,20 abuse and discrimination. We also speak21 out on issues affecting the law or our22 profession, as we did when the23 Philadelphia Board of Ethics proposed its24 first draft of regulations on the City's25 72 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 lobbying ordinance. Since then, we've2 met with various staff members of both3 the Board and City Council to further4 explain our concerns and to suggest5 potential solutions. This collaborative6 process has led to substantial changes to7 the regulations and to today's8 consideration of proposed amendments to9 the ordinance itself. And what I'm10 addressing today would include the11 additional revisions that Councilman Bill12 Green has suggested to the version of the13 ordinance that was originally published14 with the notice.15 In our view, in combination,16 these changes to both the ordinance and17 the Regulation are a tremendous18 improvement over the previous version.19 The most important issues, from our20 standpoint, have been resolved in a way21 that makes sense for everyone. For22 example, it's now clear that the23 ordinance does not cover the practice of24 law or routine contacts with City25 73 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 government as opposed to actual lobbying.2 So I'm here today to support3 the proposed amendments and to thank you4 for addressing our concerns. In5 particular, I'd like to acknowledge6 Sophie Bryan of Councilman Green's7 office, Derek Green of Councilwoman8 Tasco's office and Shane Creamer, Evan9 Meyer and Nedda Massar at the Ethics10 Board, all of whom worked very hard11 together to get this right. They didn't12 always agree with us, but they always13 listened to our suggestions, fairly14 considered them, and they came up with15 many great suggestions on their own.16 So in our view, this process17 was City government at its best. It was18 very impressive to me personally that19 everyone pulled together this way to get20 this thing right, and as revised, it will21 serve the intended purpose without all of22 the unintended negative consequences that23 were there in the previous versions.24 So we hope our input was25 74 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 helpful and we hope that you'll call on2 us again if we can assist you in any3 other way. And I'm really just here to4 express our thanks and support for this5 as it's been reshaped, and I'd be happy6 to answer any questions you may have.7
Thank you.11 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.12 Chairman Garcia, the practice13 of the law has changed, kind of evolved14 over the last couple decades where law15 firms and lawyers were representing16 specific clients. Larger law firms and17 even medium-sized law firms now are18 developing what are called Government19 Affairs, Government Relations Departments20 or centers. I recognize that probably21 the Supreme Court regulation and state22 law eliminates you guys from any of this23 stuff in reality, but isn't that more not24 a direct lobbying effort as opposed to25 75 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 representing a client in the traditional2 way a lawyer represents a client? I3 mean, you go out and solicit companies or4 are called on when an issue comes before5 a legislative body, like something that's6 introduced by -- recommended by the7 Mayor, introduced here in Council. Those8 larger firms then go out and solicit9 those companies to take their10 representation.11 What's the difference between a12 lobbyist and a lawyer lobbyist?13
Yes. My firm, for14 example, does have a substantial15 Government Relations practice. Those16 people are lobbyists. They would17 register. What they're doing is not the18 practice of law.19
So what20 you're saying is that all of those21 lawyers or all of those folks, if they're22 not lawyers, they have to register, but23 if they're lawyers working in that24 department, they all would be registered25 76 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 lobbyists?2
Yeah. I think3 that the solution that was arrived at4 here is not to look at it in terms of5 whether someone is a lawyer or not, but6 to look at it in terms of whether what7 you're doing is practicing law or8 lobbying. And if it's lobbying, it9 should be regulated, in our view, whether10 you're a lawyer or not.11
Is there an12 argument that a lobbying lawyer could13 make to say that he or she is not bound14 by this proposed lobbying law or15 regulation, but it comes under the16 authority of the Supreme Court and that17 they're somewhat shielded from that?18
The constitutional19 provision that was called into question20 with the initial version of this is21 something that gives the exclusive22 authority to the Supreme Court of23 Pennsylvania to regulate the practice of24 law. It doesn't say nobody can regulate25 77 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 lawyers when they're doing something2 else.3 So by approaching it this way,4 we think it passes muster under the5 Constitution, as long as you're not6 intruding upon the actual practice of7 law.8
Do you9 expect -- I know this is just10 prospectively. Would you expect that11 someone would challenge that assertion12 and say, We disagree, this is the13 practice of law and this is our client14 and we don't feel that we need to15 register?16
I can't predict17 the future, but I hope that that would be18 unlikely, because I think the way it's19 restructured now it's pretty clear that20 doing the things that lawyers do when21 they're representing clients where the22 client has an interest in a matter are23 not covered by this and that it's only24 when you're advocating some policy change25 78 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 that you would be covered by this. I2 think the line is pretty clear now.3
Thank6 you.7 Any other questions or8 comments?9 (No response.)10 COUNCILMAN GREENLEE:11 Gentlemen, thank you very much.12
Our last14 witness on the list is Committee of15 Seventy.16 (Witness approached witness17 table.)18
Good morning. I'm19 Ellen Mattleman Kaplan, Vice-President20 and Policy Director of the Committee of21 Seventy. First, I just want to thank22 Councilmember Tasco and Green and23 especially Sophie Bryan and Derek Green24 for what has really been a tremendously25 79 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 collaborative effort involving a lot of2 people in this room, and I think the3 ordinance and the regulations are a4 result of that collaboration.5 I saw when I came in this6 morning that the recommendation that I7 had, to include the Philadelphia School8 District and the School Reform9 Commission, had already been added. So I10 was pleased to see that.11 And on the question that12 Councilman Kenney raised about13 Pennsylvania Society and what constitutes14 a reception, I know that the Board of15 Ethics has issued an opinion in the past16 specifically about participation in the17 Pennsylvania Society, and that, of18 course, was before this lobbyist19 ordinance, and I believe that there are20 going to be a lot of people who are going21 to be asking similar questions that you22 asked today. So I might just say23 publicly that I hope that the Board of24 Ethics will proactively address this,25 80 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 because otherwise I think they're going2 to get a lot of requests for advice on3 that topic.4 And, finally, I just want to5 once again urge City government to6 provide the Board of Ethics with the7 additional $130,000 it has asked for in8 order to successfully implement this9 lobbying ordinance. If they can't do the10 job that you expect them to do and that11 you've given them to do, it would be very12 disappointing I think to all of us in13 this room.14 So, again, my thanks for all15 this hard work. This is a great16 achievement to have this city's first law17 regulating lobbyists.18 COUNCILMAN GREENLEE:19 Councilman Goode.20
Thank you,21 Mr. Chairman.22 Good morning, Ms. Kaplan.23
Does the25 81 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 Committee of Seventy have a policy2 position on whether the School District3 should be returned to local control?4
There is7 legislation that has been pending in8 Harrisburg. Does the Committee of9 Seventy intend to take a position on10 that?11
On the14 general policy. It's not just a question15 that comes out of nowhere. The issue has16 been discussed at different levels of17 government and I think it is a point that18 needs to be raised even with regard to19 this amendment. I don't believe under20 Act 46 that the amendment is probably21 legally valid, but I actually support22 local control of the School District, so23 I will support the amendment.24 So I'm interested if the25 82 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 Committee of Seventy is taking a position2 related to the School District because3 they believe that it should be returned4 to local control.5
We have formed a6 public education subcommittee and we are7 doing research now on the various forms8 of control of the School District,9 whether School Reform Commission, an10 elected School Board, as some people have11 asked for, or an appointed Board, as we12 used to have, but we have not taken any13 position on that question.14
Thank you.23 Just I wouldn't want the record24 to reflect that something might be25 83 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 illegal in the bill, just in case this2 ever ends up in litigation. So for the3 record, we have checked with the Law4 Department on that provision and all the5 provisions of this bill, and they believe6 that it would be enforceable against the7 School District of Philadelphia and all8 its employees. The SRC itself obviously9 would be subject to maybe different10 criteria.11 Thank you.12
On that13 point, Mr. Chairman, on that point,14 Councilman Green, did the Law Department15 specifically talk about appointees from16 the Governor? I can understand the17 transference from on this bill on mayoral18 appointees to the SRC, but, again, as you19 know, there are gubernatorial20 appointments. Would they come under the21 state regulations as opposed to22 Philadelphia ordinances?23
Well, this24 bill was modeled after the state ethics25 84 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 law, and so it basically mirrors the2 state ethics law. If the state ethics3 law applies, the state ethics law will4 apply to lobbying, and if the local law5 applies, this law would apply. So under6 either circumstance -- and I did misspeak7 slightly. It's not enforceable against8 the SRC or the School District.9 Obviously it's enforceable against -- at10 the state or local level, it's11 enforceable against anybody who is12 lobbying them to report to either the13 City of Philadelphia or the State of14 Pennsylvania their lobbying activities to15 that agency.16
Is there22 anyone else here to testify on this bill?23 (No response.)24
Seeing25 85 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 none, that concludes the hearing of the2 Committee on Law and Government. We'll3 now go into our public meeting.4 The Chair recognizes Councilman5 Kenney regarding the amendment to Bill6 No. 110498.7
Thank you,8 Mr. Chairman. I move the amendment to9 Bill No. 110498 be approved.10 (Duly seconded.)11
It's been12 moved and seconded.13 All in favor?14 (Aye.)15
Hearing18 none, the motion carries and the19 amendment is adopted.20 Councilman Kenney.21
Thank you,22 Mr. Chairman. I move that Bill No.23 110498, as amended, be reported out of24 this Committee with a favorable25 86 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 recommendation and a request made for2 rules suspension to allow first reading3 at our next Council session.4 (Duly seconded.)5
Hearing11 none, the motion carries and Bill No.12 110498, as amended, reported out of this13 Committee with a favorable recommendation14 and with a rules suspension.15 The Chair recognizes Councilman16 Green regarding the amendment to Bill No.17 110556.18
Thank you,19 Mr. Chairman. I move that the amendment,20 which has been previously circulated, to21 Bill No. 110556 be approved by this22 Committee.23 (Duly seconded.)24
It's been25 87 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 moved and seconded.2 All in favor?3 (Aye.)4
Hearing7 none, the motion carries and the8 amendment to Bill No. 110556 is approved.9 Councilman Green.10
Thank you,11 Mr. Chairman. I move that Bill No.12 110556, as amended, be reported from this13 Committee with a favorable recommendation14 and with a suspension of the rules so15 that it may be heard at the next session16 of Council.17 (Duly seconded.)18
It's been19 moved and seconded.20 All in favor?21 (Aye.)22
Hearing25 88 9/28/11 - LAW & GOV. - BILLS 110498 & 1105561 none, the motion carries. Bill No.2 110556, as amended, reported out of this3 Committee with a favorable recommendation4 with a rules suspension.5 There being no further business6 before this Committee, the meeting is7 adjourned. Thank you all very much.8 (Committee on Law and9 Government concluded at 11:25 a.m.)10 - - -11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 89 CERTIFICATE2 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the3 proceedings, evidence and objections are4 contained fully and accurately in the5 stenographic notes taken by me upon the6 foregoing matter on September 28, 2011, and7 that this is a true and correct transcript of8 same.9 --------------------14 MICHELE L. MURPHY15 RPR-Notary Public16 (The foregoing certification of this20 transcript does not apply to any reproduction21 of the same by any means, unless under the22 direct control and/or supervision of the23 certifying reporter.)24