Committee Hearing, March 7, 2006

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Tuesday, March 7, 2006 10:25 a.m. - - - PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILMAN FRANK DiCICCO COUNCILMAN JACK KELLY COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO BILLS 060001, 060002, 060003, 060004, 060006, 060007, 060008, 060014, 060089 and 060090 RESOLUTIONS 060019, 060099, 060100 and 060119 - - - V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services Eleven Penn Center 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 2

Good morning, everyone. This is the continued public hearing of the Committee of the Whole, and I would ask Mr. McPherson to merely read the bill numbers and the resolution numbers so that we could proceed. MR. McPHERSON: Bill No. 10 060001, Bill No. 060002, Bill No. 060003, Bill No. 060004, Bill No. 060006, Bill 12 No. 060007, Bill No. 060008, Bill No. 13 060014, Resolution 060019, Bill No. 14 060089, Bill No. 060090, Resolution 15 060099, Resolution 060100 and Resolution 16 060119, which is a resolution proposing 17 an amendment to Bill No. 060003, which 18 provides for the Operating Budget for 19 Fiscal Year 2007, and a corresponding 20 amendment to Resolution 060019, which 21 provides for the Five-Year Financial 22 Plan, to establish a 2.5 million fund to 23 provide a Witness Protection and 24 Relocation Program on behalf of the 25 District Attorney's Office. 3 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC.

Thank you. We will first hear from the Police Department. Is the Commissioner here? Good morning and welcome. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Good morning, Council President.

11 Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Commissioner Sylvester M. Johnson, Police Commissioner of the City of Philadelphia.

Please proceed. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I'm not sure exactly. This is about the $5 million or this is the regular budget hearing?

This is the regular budget hearing. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Okay. Good. I'm sorry. 4 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Good morning, Council President Verna, members of City Council. I am Sylvester Johnson, Police Commissioner. With me today are Deputy Commissioners Patricia Giorgio-Fox, John Gaittens, Charlotte Council, Richard Ross, Chief of Staff Kimberly Byrd, our attorney Zorz Horgus (ph) and Fiscal Officer Thomas DeWaele. The Police Department Fiscal Year 2007 General Fund budget request is $498,497,141. It's over million 14 higher than the FY06 estimated 15 obligations. The additional funding 16 supports a three percent salary increase 17 for both uniform and civilian employees 18 and an additional 10 million to support 19 overtime costs associated with the 20 implementation of Operation Safer 21 Streets, a City-wide initiative 22 formulated to address the upsurge in 23 violent crime. Supplementing the General Fund budget is $12,826,227 provided by the Aviation Division and $19,442,660 5 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. received through various grant applications. Personnel levels in FY07 remains constant from FY06. The FY07 General Fund request will provide for 6,424 sworn personnel, including 327 recruits, 884 civilians and 1,037 school crossing guards. With the addition of 151 sworn officers funded through the Aviation budget, the total sworn strength of the Police Department at year end FY07 will be 6,575. Budgeted amounts in Class 200, 300 and 400 will remain consistent with FY06 budget allocations. Although these allocations have been sufficient in the past, the decrease in grant funding in the above classes may adversely impact equipment purchases. Our objective: While overall crime in the City has remained consistent with that of the past few years, the upsurge of gun violence and homicides has grabbed our collective attention. Much 6 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. of this increase stems from spontaneous acts of violence, crimes of passion and of the moment, with the remainder of violent gun crime and homicides directly linked to narcotics, including retaliatory shootings. The Police Department cannot fight this fight alone. To reduce the number of these violent assaults within our communities, the Violence Reduction Strategy, a comprehensive and multi-pronged attack focusing on violent criminals, was implemented by the Police Department on December the 19th, 2005. This operational plan has been incorporated into the City comprehensive Operation Safer Streets program introduced in February 2006. Operation Safer Streets utilizes the cooperative efforts of clergy, business, communities, legislators, prosecutors and law enforcement, concentrating these resources in specified areas of excessive violent crime. Working together, we can 7 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. bring about change. Operation Safer Streets is the conduit to our objectives. The focus of the Department has not changed. It has become more comprehensive. Through this initiative, I hope to finally eradicate gun violence and drug activity by committing all of our resources. I wish to enhance the quality of life for residents of our City, restore citizen confidence and recover their feelings of safety, and finally, I want to bring Philadelphia to the rank of the safest city in the country. Some of the initiatives we have: In order to achieve these objectives, the Department relies on many proven programs, such as the Gun Recovery Reward Information Program called GRRIP and Operation Safe Schools and newly implemented ones such as Operation Safer Streets. These programs are highlighted below. Operation Safer Streets: 8 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Introduced in February 2006, Operation Safer Streets is a comprehensive multi-pronged initiative focused on violent criminals and a corresponding reduction in the number of violent assaults within our community.

Operation Safer Streets rests on a foundation of criminal data, intelligence and field input that will identify "hot spots" in each of the City's six police divisions. Hot spots are locations that experience relatively high amounts of serious crime, particularly gun-related crime. Operation GRRIP disburses cash rewards up to $1,000 to citizens who provide the Department with information leading to the arrest of those who illegally possess or traffic in firearms. Operation Safe Schools: Operation Safe Schools utilizes a community policing approach incorporating the services of a task force comprised of numerous organizations, universities and 9 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. law enforcement agencies, to reduce opportunities for criminal anti-social activities involving young people. Anti-Drug and Gang Education Program: The Police Department sponsors numerous programs aimed at the prevention of anti-social behaviors relating to adolescents and teens. They are addressed through Drug Abuse Resistance Education, called DARE, and Gang Resistance Education and Training, called GREAT, school programs and through HEADS UP, Heroin Education and Dangerous Substance Understanding Program. Supporting Gun Legislation Revision: Pending legislation includes Senate Bill 516, Faheem's Law, which would make possession or use of guns within 1,000 feet of a school or 500 feet of a recreation center or a playground a crime. House Bill 871 and 1013 propose the limitation of handgun purchases to one a month per buyer. It requires handgun owners to be responsible to 10 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. report lost or stolen handguns. Some of our accomplishments: During the past year, the Police Department realized many goals and achieved numerous successes. Highlights of the Department's accomplishments for FY06 and '05 include implementation of new technology, the continued upgrade of Police facilities, and our successful performance during the Live 8 concert, for which the Department provided a safe and peaceful venue for the event. I am proud to report that with nearly 1 million people in attendance at the concert along the Benjamin Franklin Parkway and adjacent areas, the Department safeguarded an event that was free of significant criminal activity or disruptions. With a limited capital budget, the Police Department addressed the needs of various Police facilities through a number of approaches. While capital funds provided for a large-scale roofing 11 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. project at Police headquarters and a new gymnasium floor at the Police Academy, other avenues were pursued in order to accomplish many other smaller-scale projects. The Training Bureau has continued to facilitate the development of the Department's workforce by partnering with various local and national colleges and universities to provide undergraduate and graduate degrees for employees. Computer-Aided Dispatch: Together with the Departments of Public Property and Fire, the Police Department is currently in the process of installing its improved Computer-Assisted Dispatch system. The hallmark of this technology advancement is simultaneous communication and linkage among the dispatch systems at Police, Fire and Public Property for the first time, allowing for emergency information to be assessed by any of the three departments. 12 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Phase One and Phase Two of the Wireless Technology: In fall 2005, the Department began testing of the Phase One of Wireless Technology Project. Phase One technology provides 9-1-1 call-takers with a cell phone caller's information, cell phone provider, tower location and phone numbers. Phase Two technology will begin testing upon completion of Phase One. Phase Two provided a caller's approximate location within 400 feet. I can assure you that Philadelphia is a safe city.

The City continues to be safe because of the dedicated efforts and continuous improvements made by members of the Philadelphia Police Department. Since the last time I sat before you, I can report that school violence has decreased. I can also inform you that the Department is effectively processing an increasing number of citizen calls for assistance and completing service dispatches. Due to outreach efforts, 13 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. there has been an upsurge in the number of adolescents participating in the Department's various anti-drug programs, as well as the long-standing Police Athletic League program. Finally, the Department's increasing utilization of advanced technology, such as DNA analysis, has contributed to the arrest and subsequent successful prosecution of offenders. Make no mistake about it, this Department will not rest on its achievements. We reaffirm and reassert our efforts to eradicate gun violence and the crime resulting from it. One fact is clear, and I can't emphasize this point enough, the Police Department cannot remedy the gun violence problem alone. It requires the cooperation and coordinated efforts of City departments and agencies, along with outside public and private organizations. But most important, it needs the engagement and the commitment of all 14 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Philadelphians from all neighborhoods and communities working together in this cause. With the support of so many, we will overcome this problem. Thank you very much, Council President.

You're welcome, Commissioner. I certainly want to thank you and your department for all the fine work that you do. Commissioner, can you tell us how you arrived at the cost of $10 million for overtime for Operation Safer Streets and what funding is included in the outer years of the Five-Year Plan for the continuation of this program? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Good morning, Madam President.

Good morning. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Good morning, members of Council. I'm Deputy Commissioner Jack Gaittens. 15 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. That $10 million figure was given to us by the Mayor, and that covers Fiscal Year '07. As of today's date, we have no information on any continuation of that past Fiscal '07.

So actually we don't know if we're going to be able to maintain this program in the future; it's simply for the one year. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: That funding is simply for the one year, yes, ma'am.

So that would literally bring the police overtime to $58 million; is that correct? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Yes, ma'am. That would be including abatements. Looking on , the Column No. 9 for the obligation level down the bottom for uniformed forces, Section D, the amount of overtime listed is 54,133,811, which if you look at the last column, Column 11, is an increase of $10,170,517 for the uniformed forces. 16 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC.

Right. Let me just ask a question. I would assume that you would agree that with the expenditure of the additional $10 million in overtime, it will certainly result in additional arrests. Would you agree? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, ma'am. What the $10 million will do is give us immediate help right now. And hopefully we're not going out there just to arrest a lot of people; we're trying to prevent crime. That $10 million will give us the ability to put more people in the hot spots for longer periods of time than we would normally be able to do if we didn't have the $10 million.

Well, my only concern is if in fact there are additional arrests as a result of the additional $10 million in overtime and we have not increased the departmental budgets that compromise the justice system -- do you know what I'm saying? 17 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, ma'am. I understand exactly what you're saying.

We have not increased the Clerk of Quarter Sessions. We haven't increased the DA or the Public Defender. I don't know how we do that. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, again, our whole plan is not based on going out to make a lot more arrests. Our plan is to go out there and go into these areas to prevent crime from happening. We're trying to be more proactive. Hypothetically, will it commit more -- I mean, will there be more arrests? There is a possibility. There's also a possibility there will be lesser arrests because less crime will be committed.

Would you say that there's less crime that's been committed last year than there is this year this time? 18 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I'm not sure of the overall crime at this point. I believe that last year compared to this year, I think we're about even, maybe approximately one percent minus or even. So, again, violent crime, other than homicide, has been reduced. Again, these things fluctuate. Hopefully we're being more focused now than we've ever been. We're being more focused in the hot spots than we've ever been. In addition to that, when we started this initiative, there was 804 outstanding warrants in the City of Philadelphia and an additional 466 warrants of people who have already been arrested who failed to appear in courts. We have been out there and we arrested close to 450 people on these warrants. In addition to that, I met with people from the state, federal and local probation, and we have partnered with them to go out there. We're focusing on the bad guys. We're not focusing on 19 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. everybody. We're focusing trying to eliminate as much crime as we possibly can by identifying the bad guys and going after these bad guys and putting them where they should be. Hopefully we'll eliminate and decrease the amount of criminal activity that's happening in the City.

Commissioner, can you tell us if we still have approximately, is it, 30 police officers leaving on a monthly basis? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Deputy Commissioner Jack Gaittens. That has actually slacked off a little bit. We're estimating now approximately officers going out. 19

20 Rather than the 30, which has been 21 traditional? 22 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Yes, ma'am.

And how many of the police officers do you 20 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. anticipate will be going on the DROP program in this coming year? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: In Fiscal Year '07, we've identified 163 sworn personnel going out at various ranks.

And hopefully we are going to be replacing -- DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Yes, ma'am, we hope so.

-- all of those? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: We do have Academy classes scheduled throughout the year. I can give you the dates and the approximate numbers, and it will all depend on the attrition rate as we go along. We currently have an Academy class in now, which started in February, which has 73 recruits. We anticipate putting another class in in May 30th, with about another 75 recruits. Through Fiscal Year '07, we are looking at 21 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. putting in altogether 327 recruits throughout the course of the year, starting with Class 347 around July 17th, 348 around October 9th, and 349 around March 12th of next year. Again, that depends on the attrition rate, but we fully intend to keep our manpower level at exactly where it is now.

Glad to hear that. Commissioner, can you explain why you're proposing to use overtime for Operation Safer Streets instead of using these funds to hire additional police officers? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, because one is that when this plan was implemented, the intention of even overtime was not even mentioned, but at the same time, the $10 million gives immediate help. Right now if we put a class in place, we will not see these police officers approximately until February or March of next year, and the 22 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Mayor had indicated this money should go directly towards overtime, and that was the mandate from the Mayor's Office, the mandate from the City, that this money be used in overtime, put in overtime.

On of your testimony, you state that "decrease in grant funding may adversely impact equipment purchases." Will this in any way jeopardize the health and/or safety of our officers? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Deputy Commissioner Jack Gaittens. No, ma'am, that will not. That was for specific equipment dedicated towards the Forensic Science Center or information and technology. We're looking at things such as microscopes, computers, things of that nature. So that would not affect it.

All right. I see there are a number of Councilmembers that want to be recognized. I just have a few more 23 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. questions I'd like to ask. On Pages through 6, you 4 detail for the General Fund you reflect various savings due to delay in filling positions and turnover. These savings for the General Fund total $4.1 million. Could you explain for the record how you achieve these savings and the impact they have on your ability to maintain sworn personnel levels? Doesn't this $4.1 million equate to approximately 100 police officers -- vacancies, I should say -- which must be maintained at all times? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Deputy Commissioner Jack Gaittens again. That figure there is based on the concept that we don't replace people immediately. There is a certain lag time. That figure is estimated by central finance. There is a lag time in hiring, whether it's due to background investigations, the time we get to put a recruit class in, if we have to wait for 24 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. a promotional list. The actual cost for a recruit class, we had put in a recommendation to hire an additional 100 officers for this year, and we figured out what the additional cost would be, and that would be approximately $3 million the first year. $2,850,000 would be for salary, another $230,000 in equipment and uniforms, because we would have to spread that out over the course of the year, but after that, the cost does go up.

All right. I have a number of other questions and I don't want to dominate the hearing, so I'm going to start recognizing my colleagues. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning. Commissioner, first of all, I want to thank you for responding to an issue that you know I 25 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. had a lot of interest in for many years, and I understand that, at least I hope, that this Police Reimbursable Overtime program is now a fixed program within the Police Department where we are -- because it was troubling to see that Controller's report that $483,000 of unpaid bills for that program were written off by the City. And, again, thank you. From what I understand, this is fixed, and if you could have one of your staff comment on the fixes to this program. And, again, we all believe that it does serve a good purpose, where we allow police officers to work on their days off for the private sector, but it's also very important that we get paid for that service. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Yes, sir. Good morning. Deputy Commissioner Jack Gaittens. As you pointed out, Councilman, the Department has lost a significant amount of money over the years from non-payment from some of the clients that 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. we've had. The change in the Reimbursable Overtime program, we are working together with the Revenue Department to transfer the billing and collection process from the Police Department over to the Revenue. With that in mind, we have two different contractors, Anexinet and Information Systems Partners, working on this online billing system. But in the interim, we have changed the Police Department's directives. We are now requiring that first-time users of this system pay for 50 percent up front if this is going to be a continuing contract. If it's a one-time deal, we are requiring 100 percent up front, and that was because the Managing Director's Office did an analysis and they found out that it's around 65 to 70 percent of the first-time users default on their payments. So this should seriously impact on that.

Well, it's 27 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. really appreciated that you took this issue. I know you guys have a lot on your plate, and $480,000 in your budget isn't a lot of money, but it is, and you took it real seriously and fixed it, and I appreciate that. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Thank you.

The other issue that I have is, I hope some day we're going to be at the end of this road on this issue of the expressway police. I understand we have 80 to 90 police officers assigned somewhere between that to do that work. The Governor indicated in his budget that the State Police will be on site on January 1 to take over that responsibility. I think that's a mistake, because the state to do that same work is going to have to spend close to $10 million to patrol the roadway, where we do it for 5.6 million. So I would hope that the 28 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Governor would get his calculator out and see where the best value is to do it, let us continue to do it, but get paid. If the Commonwealth does bring the State Police into the County of Philadelphia, Commissioner, I hope that there's been some -- that's 90 officers. That's like graduating a police class. Is that being considered in the fact that we wake up January 1 and we don't have our police on the roadway? What are we going to do with all those officers? Because there's suggestion to hire more, which would probably be a good idea. The temporary fix is, I guess, overtime, but what are you going to do with 80 officers that may become available this January? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GIORGIO-FOX: Good morning, Councilman. Deputy Commissioner Giorgio-Fox. There are currently 63 officers that patrol the expressways, and we have been meeting on a regular basis with a state transition committee, because there 29 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. are a variety of issues that come into play with this transition, not the least of which is some degree of responsibility that Philadelphia may or may not still have when we talk about the exit ramps. And so at this point, it is so early in the transition that our ability to assign those 63 elsewhere is a little premature. However, we have discussed repeatedly the fact that we would have these 63 officers. While we would have them not in the expressway units, that they would be necessary to maintain some responsibilities that we will still have. The transition is extremely complicated, and the committees meet on a fairly regular basis and have given us updates, but it's early.

Commissioner, is there a chance that they'll see the light in Harrisburg and allow us to continue to do that work or do you believe that the State Police will take over that responsibility? Based on 30 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. meetings, I assume that that is the direction that we can expect to go? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, I think we're having difficulty. I would personally prefer, and it's my personal opinion, prefer that the Philadelphia Police Department continues to patrol the highways, with the experience that they've already had in patrolling these areas. In addition to that, I think that it would be important that they just pay us the $5.6 million. It would benefit not only the State Police, but it will benefit the Philadelphia Police Department. Now, I've been in communication with the State Police and Colonel Miller, and we have a very good working relationship with them. They have some issues involving their unions and other issues. We're trying to work that out, but, hypothetically, if they do take it over, we will assist them in every way 31 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. possible that we can do. Our preference is that we continue to work on it and get the money.

Commissioner Fox, in a publication or a report that was submitted by the Administration, I believe the Police Department, the number that was posted, unless those numbers have gone down, were closer to 90 officers. So there's a discrepancy with a report that we received recently to the number that you just disclosed. So have we reduced the number of people on the expressway? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GIORGIO-FOX: No. I can check that for you. My last count of -- expressway officers are combined within the Traffic Division, and so how many of them are assigned specifically to the expressway, my understanding was, there were 63 that were full-time expressway officers. When we have major events or other reasons to add additional personnel 32 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. there, we get them from the Traffic.

I'm interested in how you get the 5.6 million. I'd appreciate you providing to the Chair the number of police officers, including supervisors, that do that work. Because, again, we get a number as high as 90 on some reports and today a different number. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GIORGIO-FOX: Okay.

So if you can come up with a real number, I'd appreciate it. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: We will get that report back to you as soon as possible, Councilman.

Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, Madam Chair.

You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke. 33 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC.

Thank you, Madam President. Good morning. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Good morning, sir.

Commissioner, a couple of quick questions. One, the current deployment as it relates to Operation Safer Streets, I understand you've ramped up some of the activities in some of the hot spots? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes.

And that is happening approximately, what, two, three weeks ago? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, approximately two or three weeks ago, but what we basically do, when we started the program, we identified based on an analysis and information and intelligence of the hot spot, but we also meet each week with the Mayor and the Managing Director and our own people to analyze what had happened in there. So the 34 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. people that we have in place are very flexible. They're our tactical people. Based on crime, based on other information, then we can move these people based on where we need them to be. The main focus is that we have people who are assigned to the division, because there are six Detective Divisions here in the City of Philadelphia, six Police Divisions in the City of Philadelphia, but those officers who will be in those divisions will stay in those divisions and they will fluctuate from spot to spot based on the crime pattern that's happening.

So it's a redeployment of existing person power? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: We're trying to be very, very focused of the areas that we should be in.

Have you found the need to utilize any overtime for the current deployment for Safer Streets? 35 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I believe that we have. I think Deputy Commissioner Fox can speak a little more about that, but I believe that especially in the area of homicides. The majority of our homicides happen between and 7 8 o'clock in the morning, and most of our 9 tactical people work from 6 o'clock at 10 night to 2 o'clock in the morning. 11 That's where we figure these are the 12 high-crime areas. So there's times that we put people, instead of working and getting off at 2:00, they work until 4:00, work until 5:00 based on the request from the commanders, based on the request that we have from other people. So I don't think we utilize too much overtime at this point, but the overtime has been utilized.

With respect to the current overtime, do you think this will be consistent with the overtime that you're requesting for the 36 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. next fiscal year? I mean, will you still have a similar type of pattern -- the $10 million that you're requesting is for the next fiscal year. So the question is, will it be consistent with the overtime that you're using currently for the current deployment of Operation Safer Streets? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well --

Or will there be a different strategy? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, it will probably be a different strategy, because we're constantly looking at things. Because some of this overtime, I think was mentioned earlier, will be used for court time from the arrests that these officers make, and depending on what happens during the time that the City -- whether there's another event or a Live 8 or something else that happened. It's hard to predict where overtime will go. Now, we have things in place, 37 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. say, for example, of our court system where right now the officers check into City Hall, then they walk over to the Criminal Justice Center and punch out and back over here to leave. Within the next year, hopefully we will have something in place where they will just go straight to court, and when they leave the court, they would just sign out right there, that they would have a card. We are estimating approximately it saves about a million dollars a year. But based on the question, the answer to your question, we're not so much in a planning stage, but we really have to analyze what's going on and how we're going to do it with this overtime, whether it's going to be enough right now, but hopefully right now the $10 million is a plus. It gives us the ability to put more officers for longer periods of time out there where we need them, which we wouldn't have if we didn't 38 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. get the $10 million.

You said that the bulk of the violent crime happens between the hours of 12:00 to 7:00? I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: We analyzed the majority of our homicides happened between 12:00 at night and about 7, 8 o'clock in the morning.

Which requires you to have overtime. Is there a way that you can simply change the hours of operation -- I know the FOP has a very strong bargaining agreement -- to focus those officers in the latter hours as opposed to paying people overtime to work in those high-priority times? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: No. 20 Because of budgetary strength -- not budgetary strength, but because of our unions and things, we can't just change officers' hours. But when you really analyze the homicides, even during those hours, a large amount happened indoors. 39 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. So having officers out there wouldn't prevent them anyway. I constantly say one homicide is too many. Say, for example, the homicide over the weekend where we had a 40-year-old male that was killed in an elevator at 3:30 in the morning. I mean, the overtime is used to prevent crime from happening and go out there and make sure that people have a good quality of life. But there's 380 homicides last year, 215 arguments, 100 indoors, 97 percent victim specific, somebody meant to kill that person, maybe not at that location but at a different location at a different time. So what we're trying to do is go out there and be more proactive, show a presence, show a physical presence, to prevent crime from happening.

Okay. Commissioner, the Homeland Security funds that the City of Philadelphia gets from the federal government, are they blended 40 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. into the police operations at all? You may not be able to talk specifically about some of the levels of activity, but how does that come -- DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Deputy Commissioner Jack Gaittens. Yes, we do utilize Homeland Security money for a variety of reasons. Mostly it's for equipment. We do utilize it for some overtime. The current trend going into this next fiscal year under the UASI is for more intercounty cooperation. So it's not specific to Philadelphia anymore. They're looking for us to do more cooperation with Delaware County, Bucks County, et cetera. Looking at the grants specifically, the Byrne Grant and the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant were replaced by the Jag Grant. And I'm sure you're aware, in the federal '07 budget, the President has indicated he's going to zero that out. So we're going to lose 41 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. that. However, we are fortunate that we got Jag One and Jag Two. Jag One we acquired in '04. That was $1.5 million. Jag Two we got in Fiscal '05. That was 1.2 million. They are both four-year grants. So we do have money going out to '08 and '09 respectively. And we are still looking for more federal and state money. We have a Grants Management Unit and that is their full-time function, to look for grants and to manage the ones that we have.

What are the limitations on Homeland Security dollars as it relates to the -- DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Generally speaking, it can't be to replace City monies. You can supplement, but you can't supplant. And additionally, it's not for bricks and mortar. So there is very little capital application.

Is there a way of utilizing Homeland Security 42 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. funding to assist you in policing of local activities, meaning that -- give you an example. We went to -- DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Generally speaking, it would only be if it's terrorist related.

All right. That's kind of what I thought. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Otherwise, they will say we're supplanting our current --

When we went to Baltimore -- and I'm getting to this video camera surveillance issue. We'll deal with that on Thursday. I know we have a hearing. There were some issues with respect to some of the funds that they got for homeland security, and they were able to make a case that they could utilize some of that money to support surveillance systems within the city of Baltimore, and they talked about the fact that they had to secure infrastructure, 43 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. had to secure public transportation, and somehow they were able to use that money. Do you think we have that level of flexibility in the event that we want to have -- DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Sure. Grants can be written in any number of ways for any number of applications. We have priority lists, and while cameras are a very useful tool, I think they would be further down on our priority list. As you said, we can get into that a little deeper Thursday.

They would be further down? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Yes, sir.

You're not coming to testify Thursday, are you? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Yes, I am.

Commissioner, I want to ask you not to send the Deputy to Thursday's hearing. 44 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. It's not the answer that we would like. Well, my understanding, to be brief -- I know we have a lot of people that want to talk -- we do have or it's my understanding that there is surveillance used by the Philadelphia Police Department now in specific cases, more investigatory-type of cases. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: There is areas that we have put up pole cameras as far as surveillance. There is times that we put up cameras in other areas for surveillance. I will also be here to testify.

I appreciate that. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Thank you.

Do you use capital funds for those surveillance cameras or operating funds? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Those were already purchased. I believe some of them were purchased through grant 45 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. money.

But I'm saying, do you use capital or operating? I know you -- COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: They were probably operational monies.

Operation dollars? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

So in the event that we were able to use surveillance systems at a broader level for monitoring local activities, non-terror related, we could possibly use operating dollars? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

Okay. Thank you.

Point of information. Commissioner --

46 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Councilman Rizzo, please refer your point of information to the Chair.

Point of information.

The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo for a point of information.

Just to comment on what Councilman Clarke just asked you about the surveillance cameras, is there anything right now that would prevent you from installing a camera at a location legally, law? Is there anything stopping you from installing a camera today at a particular location, ABC and XYZ, and have a monitor at Police headquarters watching activity there? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: No, sir.

Nothing? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: No, sir, as long as we don't have any audio. I mean, any sound. But to put those in place, there is nothing that would stop us. 47 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter. Oh, I'm sorry. Councilman Clarke, were you completed with your line of questioning --

Not officially.

-- before Councilman Rizzo asked for a point of information?

I just had one related question. It probably should wait until Thursday, but I'm going to ask it anyway. As it relates to the audio on camera systems, currently you don't have the -- well, I assume you have the capability, but you would have to get a court order or something? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: That's 48 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. correct.

So in the case of the Chicago systems where they respond to sounds to gun shots -- COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I think we would be allowed to do that as long as we don't pick up voices and we don't -- I mean, I have to look into it more, but I think from my information, if it's going to respond to sound and sound only and just push the cameras to the direction the sound is going, that would be permissible.

Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.

You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Good 49 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. morning, Councilman.

And Deputy Fox and Deputy Gaittens. Let's go back. The Council President I believe asked a question with regard to the $10 million that has been designated by the Mayor for overtime; is that correct? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

And in response to a question, which I think was how did you arrive at the $10 million figure, the answer was that's what you were told. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: The $10 million was the figure that was given to us by our budget people.

Did you have a different request going in when you started the budget process? What did the Police Department ask for? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: As far as overtime is concerned? 50 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC.

As far as any budget request, when you go through the normal budget process. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I think we had asked for 100 officers per year for the next five years.

100 officers per year for each of the next five years? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

And what did your budget office estimate the cost of that? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I believe it was over $20 million per year.

And what was the basis for the request? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, we just thought that the things that were happening and the attack of violent crime, to put more officers out there, anticipating whether it would be going up or down, that in my opinion, four 51 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. thousand -- I mean 6,424 officers in the next year may not be enough, but we wasn't sure. But it also is my opinion that, one, that I think additional police officers by itself is not going to change the quality of life. What we decided to do based on the information that I got from my deputies and their idea of looking at the other things, that because of the things that are happening here in the City of Philadelphia and because Philadelphia's Police Department, it's more service oriented than almost any other city in the nation -- and what I mean by "service," we have police officers that go out there in neighborhood surveys, we have community relations officers, we have victim assistance officers, we have officers that are assigned to PAL. We have officers that other cities don't have. And my idea, during the next five years, is that hopefully -- and I'm not sure I will not be around for the next five 52 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. years -- that they have to analyze it. Putting the request in doesn't necessarily mean that we're going to get these officers, but the factors that if we needed those officers, they would be put into the budget in case we could use them. The idea also is that when the $10 million came in and the surge of homicides and violent crime is happening in the City of Philadelphia, it gave us an immediate ability to put experienced officers out there right away, and I think that that was a help. So also I understand that the Police Department has to be fiscally responsible, and I understand that. So, again, in the combination of everything, to have it in the budget and request the budget, we may not have needed them based on what had happened. I didn't want to go into next year and all the sudden we have 480 homicides and more crime that is happening here. 53 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. So my opinion was to put it in there. It's better to have them and not need them than need them and not have them, but at the same time, our request was based on my commanders, based on my deputies, based on other departments that we will put the requests in --

The request being 100 officers per year for the next five years? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Right.

That was the analysis by the Police Department, the recommendation of your top command staff, and that was a request made to the budget office? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

Okay. And what happened? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, we got $10 million from the Mayor's Office from the budget people for this fiscal year. And I say based on that and based 54 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. on the fact that we feel as though we have sufficient amount of officers right now to be able to handle these things and that, again, if we put the officers -- and it is approved, we wouldn't be able to get those officers out in the street until February or March of next year. Now, we had a class just started. We have scheduled for classes in the next two or three years. So again --

I want to ask you about that, but let me go back for one second. When you made the request, how did you receive the response that it was $10 million for overtime? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I didn't know we were getting the $10 million of overtime until the Mayor's budget address.

So earlier that day or during the address? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I 55 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. received it probably the day before, if I can recall correctly, that it was mentioned at a Cabinet meeting, and that was probably the day before, and I did not know that we were getting that money --

It was mentioned at a Cabinet meeting? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

So the address was on, I believe, the 24th, which I think was a Tuesday. There was a Cabinet meeting that Monday and it was mentioned in the meeting that you were to get $10 million for overtime? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: It was one or two days prior. I'm not sure exactly when, but I did not know until it was mentioned to me and I did not know it, again, until it was at the Mayor's budget hearing.

Okay. Well, let me ask this question: When you 56 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. go through the budget process -- and I don't know whether this is a correct assumption or not, but I'll assume for the moment and you'll correct me if I'm wrong, your budget people sit down with the City's budget office and you made your recommendation. The Department, in addition to possibly other items or other budgetary matters, you wanted 100 officers per year for five years. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: That's correct.

You gave them that information? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

Was that pretty much the end of the conversation or they said they'll get back to you? I mean, just how does it work? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: That was pretty much the end of the conversation. And I says, again, this is a request anticipating in case we may need them. 57 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. We may not have needed them.

I understand. Do you recall when the request was made? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: No, sir, I do not. It was prior to the $10 million being allocated to the Police Department.

Well, I understand that. I'm just trying to get a sense of the timing. Was it in December? Was it in early January? Was it in November when the request would have gone in? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: That would be in December, Councilman.

So sometime in December the request went in, and the day before the budget address or so at a Cabinet meeting you were told that the response was $10 million in overtime. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I don't know if it was a response to my request, 58 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. but it was --

Well, you were just told. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: That's correct.

Okay. Was there any further discussion about the hundred officers per year for five years or did you just take it that that conversation was pretty much over and you should be happy about the $10 million in overtime? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: When the Mayor gave us $10 million, I was satisfied with that.

Point of information.

Point of information. Councilman Reynolds Brown.

To put this in some perspective for me, can you share with us what the increases have been over the last three years or the 59 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. last two years? And I'm presuming increases. Shame on me. But what the budget has been for the Police Department over the last few years? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Hold on one second. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: The General Fund obligations for Fiscal Year '05 was $477,186,098; for Fiscal '06 original appropriations, $480,230,753; and for Fiscal '07, the obligation level is $498,497,141.

I thank you for that, the background. Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam Chair.

You're welcome. Councilman Nutter.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Deputy Gaittens, I'm sure it was inadvertent. If we're reading from the same page, which is Section 34-3, did 60 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. you for some reason skip the column that says Fiscal 2006 Estimated Obligations? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: No, sir. I already talked about Fiscal '06 original appropriations.

I understand the original appropriation, but your estimated obligations are $475,032,339. What does that mean to you? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: The original was what we put in first. The estimated obligations are what we believe we're going to end up at the end of the year.

And isn't that actually lower than what was in Fiscal '05? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: That is correct, sir.

So from that, is it correct that the budget went down in '06 as compared to '05? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: 61 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. The spending went down, yes, sir.

Why is that? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: There was a significant reduction in overtime.

Significant reduction in overtime? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Yes, sir.

And why would overtime go down in the Police Department? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, I think there's a couple of reasons. One, because of the new things we have in place working along with the District Attorney's Office for court overtime, and there is a number of other things. What we try to do is constantly monitor and talk to our commanders about the reduction of overtime in every possible way that we possibly can. One of the things is, a couple 62 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. years ago, just for an example, we had people going through our homicide cases maybe 50, 60 at a time. Talking to the District Attorney, we decided that any time there's over that appeared even 7 in the homicide case, they have to get 8 the permission of their supervisors, even 9 at the District Attorney's Office. 10 So we constantly monitor our overtime to make sure that -- we're not saying police officers can't get overtime, but make sure that if overtime is needed, that it is definitely needed.

Well, I'm probably way over my time, and you're commended for monitoring your overtime. I mean, obviously we're now in a discussion about increasing targeted overtime. Let me, I guess, kind of conclude with this, and I'd like to come back, Madam Chair. Commissioner, how long have you been with the Philadelphia Police 63 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Department? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: October of this year will be 42 years.

42 years? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

You are known as a consummate professional, probably could, if you chose to, could be virtually a diplomat for the federal government, if you chose, and ultimately you are a tremendously loyal person, which is a credit to you. I do want to, though, go back to your statement earlier. If you put in for and received recommendation from your top command staff for 100 officers per year for five years, I do want to query you a little bit on your comment earlier that notwithstanding that request, when you received the proposed $10 million in overtime, you were satisfied with that. Knowing your police professionalism, I would only be left with the impression 64 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. that the more appropriate word might be that you accepted it. As compared to given the size of that request and what the response has been, I'd be a little surprised but for your diplomacy to hear that you're satisfied.

Councilman, Pedro Ramos, Managing Director. Councilman Nutter, may I --

Well, can I get a response from the Police Commissioner first?

May I ask to be able to supplement the answer given by the Commissioner previously on which you're premising this question? Because I do think that you've asked questions in a way that certainly paints a particular picture, but I'm not sure that --

Sir, I'm not trying to paint a picture. They are factual.

Well --

But I guess 65 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. if I could, Managing Director, Mr. Managing Director, in accordance with the Chair's desire, since my time is over, I would just like to get a response from the Police Commissioner, as I did ask him a question, and then I'd be pleased to entertain anything that you'd like to respond to, with every respect.

I'd like for permission to speak on behalf of the Administration. I was here to speak on your proposed resolution on February 28th on this question and on which the hearings did not happen, and I think they're pertinent to the line of questioning that you've led so far. And while you make reference to the Commissioner's ambassadorial skills, your interrogation and cross-examination skills are also worthy of high acclaim, and I think you've framed this budget process as well as the overtime issue in a way that misses a very substantial point, which the Commissioner has tried 66 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. to make, which is that for this -- just for year one of this Five-Year Plan, for Fiscal '07, for which the Administration has proposed an additional $10 million, 100 extra police officers would have cost about $602 million. Also, that the request of 100 additional officers per year over five years is a Five-Year Plan impact of $102 million. And the numbers that have been given by the Police Department, as often is the case in budget testimony, refers to their own salary expenditure. It does not reflect the full expenditure by the City, which, as you know, carries for each dollar of salary expense an increment of about 38 to 40 percent of benefits. And I'd be happy after the Commissioner responds to your question, Councilman, to go through the analysis with you of how $10 million of proposed overtime provides greater flexibility, more hours and more hours of service in Fiscal '07 than either the Police Department's proposal or the 67 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. amounts identified in your proposed resolution.

Okay. Well, I look forward to the conversation. I'd just like to get a response. I am way over my time. I'm tremendously sensitive to that particular issue, and I'd just like to get a response, and then I'll come back for a second round and you and I will have the rest of the day to each other. Commissioner. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Okay.

What was the question again?

I kind of got lost myself.

Did you satisfy or did you just settle? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: What happened is that every Police Chief in the nation would love to have more people. There's no way that I would not ask for more people, and I don't think 68 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. any police department would not ask for more people. The facts are that I work for a city government and there is a process. I put and requested 500 police officers for the next five years. They make the final decision whether I should get them or not. The facts are that for this particular year, Fiscal Year '07, that they decided, whether it was a compromise or not a compromise, that we will give you $10 million. That $10 million gave me the ability immediately to attack the crime problem in the City of Philadelphia. And with the surge of crime and violence that we have in the City of Philadelphia, it gave me the ability, especially with this initiative, to put more police officers on the street immediately for a wider period of time and more officers. And I think with that $10 million, I think instant results will come out of it.

Okay. I appreciate the diplomacy of the answer. 69 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Thank you, Commissioner. I'll come back, Madam Chair.

You're welcome. There are a number of Councilmembers that want to be recognized and I know I gave latitude to the first Councilmembers that wanted to be recognized, only because there weren't that many who were interested in asking questions, I guess, and many weren't here. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I was here.

Who was here? But since you were here, Councilman DiCicco, we're going to give each Councilmember seven minutes for the first go-around. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I will probably be less, but thank you, Madam President.

You're welcome. 70 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Good morning, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Good morning, Councilman. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I echo the comments made by the Council President earlier today about the fine work that the Department does and all the folks with you today, the hard work that goes into making the City of Philadelphia a great place. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Thank you. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Is there a ratio for big cities, cities similar the size of Philadelphia, police versus population, some sort of a ratio that is like a general rule? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: What is that number normally? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I don't have it and I think the Managing Director 71 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. may have it or Deputy Commissioner Gaittens.

I can share with you the federal stats by the Department of Justice FBI UCR statistics, which the last year, which I think were published -- COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: You can just give me a general number.

I can -- COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: X amount of police --

The way the Department of Justice measures staffing levels is, they do it by population, by 10,000 people in the population. The City of Philadelphia compared to other cities ranks fifth in total population, as you hear all the time, and in terms of police officers per 10,000 people, on the last reported UCR was fourth per 10,000 people among cities and staffing per 10,000 people. And overall crime was about 16th or 19th in crime per 10,000 72 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. people. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I guess what I'm getting at is probably what the conversation that's been going on for the last half hour or so is, the complement of police officers that we have today based on the current population, does that meet the standard? Are we above? Are we below? Are we about where we should be? And I'm not getting into this to be critical, because I have another follow-up question to it.

I think if you looked at it by UCR, if you're just looking at numbers, even when you look at the poverty ranks in UCR, we're about where we should be in terms of total staff in the Police Department. One of the things that the Police Department has been extraordinary at over the last several years and under Commissioner Johnson has been in continuing to flatten out the Police Department and get more of its resources 73 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. on the streets. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I think what happens -- I'm sorry, Councilman -- is that a couple years ago, we sat down with the Managing Director at that time, Phil Goldsmith, and the Budget Director and we reconfigured the Police Department. We basically reduced our command staff. What we didn't want to do is reduce the amount of officers on streets, which we did not. Say, for example -- and I'm just giving these as an example -- we went from six deputy commissioners to two, went from chief 16 inspectors down to 14, went from 41 17 inspectors down to approximately 20, went 18 from 129 captains down to 89, 90. And 19 the way we did that, we combined units. 20 Say, for example, you had a captain for 21 K-9, a captain for mounted, a captain for aviation, a captain for marine unit. Four captains. We made one captain in charge of all four units. So my concern was that at that 74 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. period of time, we came to a conclusion by talking to the Budget Director and the Mayor's Office that 4,424 officers was sufficient to run the Philadelphia Police Department. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: With its current population. And this is where I'm going with this, and you and I have had a conversation a few months ago in my office with some of your deputies. Fortunately for Philadelphia, I think our darkest days in terms of losing population are over. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: All indications are that we're either going to be stabilized at the current population or we will see an increase, which is a good thing. My concern is -- and it's not any criticism to you and/or this Administration, because in a very short time, there will be a new Administration. 75 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Are we going to be ready for the increase, the inevitable increase in not only the population but the increase in terms of retail and commercial and entertainment venues? We have the potential -- not the potential. We will have two slot casinos in the City of Philadelphia. We're not sure exactly where they're going to be, but definitely one will be in my district along the Columbus Boulevard, Delaware Avenue corridor. There's anticipation of somewhere between 15,000 and 20,000 patrons per day just going to one individual casino. If I wind up with two in my district, the math is close to 40,000 more people a day. But in addition to that, currently there are a number of residential projects that are underway or are on the drawing board literally as we speak, all of which have the potential to increase population dramatically. Today north of Market Street to about Girard 76 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. from 5th Street east to the Delaware River and including the Delaware River, which also includes my colleague, Councilman Clarke's district, Northern Liberties, there is a realistic number of about 4,000 to 6,000 new units that will have been built in the next two years, possibly even more. Two persons per unit. You can do the math. We're going to see a significant increase in population. Will we be ready as a city in 2008, 2009, 2010 when the residential population is increased and will hopefully continue to increase when the slot parlors are in place? Will we have enough police then, and should this be something that we should be looking at today as part of the Five-Year Plan?

I know we can do it next year and the year after, but it really tightens up that window of opportunity, because it takes a certain amount of time to get 100 police through the Academy. If I heard 77 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. correctly, it's generally a year or so for a class? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: So best case scenario, if we were today to say, Well, we're going to get ready for that increase in the casinos and all the other issues that we definitely know we're going to have to deal with, the best case we'll have is 200 new police officers on the street if we talked about or budgeted for that today. Should this be something that we should be talking about in terms of being progressive as opposed to waiting for that to happen and then try to figure out how to get enough police personnel out there? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I think one of the reasons why we put that many police officers in the Five-Year Plan, we will visit this again in Fiscal Year 2008. I think the question to me was 78 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. will the $10 million help us for a year, and it did, what I try to do with our command staff, anticipating crime, like you said, anticipating population. I agree with you 100 percent. The Sixth District has really expanded and the amount of officers and the amount of things that are happening in the Sixth District with Old City and other things. There are about the same level of police officers there that may have been three or four years ago. So they're working harder and smarter. But right now, I think that when we revisit it in Fiscal Year 2008, that we would have to. Depending on also our crime pattern. So what I try to do is anticipate what's going to happen in the future. The problem is that what's happening now is what I'm main concerned about, is what's happened here in 2006 and the amount of homicides that we're having today. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: And I 79 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. appreciate that. I know my time is up. I appreciate that, and I'm not sure on the $10 million either way. I understand that it's more for preventive measures. And you and I have talked about a plan that I may be coming to you with in the not too distant future about hopefully preventing crime before it happens. But, again, I just think that as a body, as this Council deliberates this budget and looking towards next year, working with your department, that I think a much broader plan, a more futuristic plan, needs to be looked at, because it's coming. I mean, there's no question about all these things we're talking about. And it's not just the Sixth Police District, as you know. It's in other parts of the City as well. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: And that growth is a good thing, but will we be ready is the question on my mind for the 80 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. future. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.

You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell.

Thank you, Madam President. Good morning, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Good morning, Councilwoman.

As you know, because you were kind enough to speak at our hearing on school violence, we're just requesting if we could have information from you to include with regard to your Juvenile Violence Intelligence section of your new Criminal Intelligence Unit as it relates to school violence. I read here where you say you have 65 officers assigned daily with incidents with regard to neighborhood services, highway, narcotics, strike 81 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. force, and we're interested in it, because you mentioned safe corridors and how it relates to school and any school violence so that we may include it in our school violence report. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Okay. There is a couple things that we did with the schools, more than a couple things. We have a pretty good working relationship with the School Board, and what I've done is put police officers, especially in all the high schools, public high schools, there's a police officer assigned to every single high school in the City of Philadelphia. Not just to come there and monitor, but, I mean, actually assigned to that school. In addition to that, we took our administrative people that work indoors to go out on the street for arrival and dismissal. In addition to that, we have approximately 40, 45 police officers available every day after 2:00 p.m., our 82 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Neighborhood Survey Unit. If we're contacted by the School Board that there is a problem in a certain area, if they give us the information, we will have police officers out there to monitor it at the school that they designated us to monitor. So, again, my thing was not that we didn't want police officers in school, because they can secretly go inside the school. I don't have a problem with that. I have a problem with them patrolling the schools. If there is an incident inside the school that we need to go into, they can go inside the school. I didn't say they could never go inside the school, but I wanted them to be patrolled by their supervisor and by the Police Department instead of the vice principals and the principals, and I did not want them go into the hallway enforcing school rules. I wanted them to enforce crime. So, again, we have a numerous 83 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. amount of police officers, and I've told the School Board that anything that we can possibly do for the school children, we will do. If this child is not safe in school, it's not going to be safe out of school. If we get the information -- and we do have our School Safety Unit right now to get the intelligence if someone calls, but it seems like there's not a lot of people calling there. I'm not sure whether they don't have confidence in that phone number. And we're monitoring that. But everything that the Philadelphia Police Department can do to make sure our children are safe in and out of schools, we will do.

Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, President.

You're welcome. The Chair recognizes 84 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Councilwoman Brown.

Thank you, Madam President. Let me echo first the remarks of Councilman Frank DiCicco and I'm sure the sentiments of many of us, that your department and professionals do an enormously good job. I want to follow up to Councilwoman Blackwell's question regarding school safety. Your testimony indicates that you currently have -- and I should say that I recall it was Councilman Jim Kenney who did the comprehensive look at what was happening around our schools with regards to young children being hit by cars. So with that, you currently have 1,037 crossing guards. Speak to me, if you will, about whether or not that's an increase, do you have vacancies, what are the procedures for filling those vacancies, et cetera. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: 85 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Good morning, ma'am. Deputy Commissioner Jack Gaittens. That is correct. Our staffing level is 1,037. As of today's date, we have 1,002 that are active. We have about that are on different types of 8 leaves, FMLA, medical. And we are going 9 to be in the process within the next two 10 weeks of hiring about 15 more crossing 11 guards. We're waiting for their uniforms 12 to come in. 13 We do have a significant 14 turnover rate in the crossing guard unit. 15 So that is an ongoing battle all year 16 long. In 2005, we hired 87 and we lost 17 98. So that's a constant battle. 18

And the 19 reason for that would be? 20 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: In some of the cases, they actually get full-time employment with the City. They get a job as a core or other entry-level positions, and others, they just decide that's enough. 86 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC.

Is there a wait list? Do you have wait lists, schools that are waiting to have crossing guards deployed? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Each of the individual districts has a list of all the schools and all of their corners, and they put them in priority order as to where they would want them. When you say is there a wait list, sometimes there are corners that have not traditionally had a crossing guard out there and the principals will ask for a corner to be established. Currently, our staffing level is 1,037. We may want to revisit that, but that's what the staffing level is now. So if a captain wants to put up a corner, then he or she would have to take down a corner.

Training is a part of that, I would presume; is it not? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: 87 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. That is correct.

When a crossing guard is not able to be at school that day, I know that one practice is for the principal to contact the local police district and have presence. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Well, from my experience generally, the first thing that happens is, they look within their staff, to have a non-teaching assistant or possibly a teacher or another volunteer go out there and cover the corner. Otherwise, if it is a particular busy intersection, such as when I was in the 35th, along 5th Street, along Olney, yes, they would call the district, and the district captain would send one of the administrative people out there to cover the corner.

Is that standard operating procedure? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Generally speaking, yes, ma'am.

In the 88 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. request of Councilwoman Blackwell, when you provide the information to the Chair, if you could, just indicate the Safe Corridor Program. Is that universal around the City as well? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, ma'am. What's happened is that for the Safe Corridor Program, we have a lot of community groups at schools themselves. I know Men United for a Better Philadelphia and other groups have put men out there. Some of the labor unions have also volunteered to come out. I know there is a group -- I'm not sure exactly. It's in West Philadelphia around Cobbs Creek. I'm not sure of the exact location, but you have senior citizens who patrol safe corridors.

So they are all volunteers? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: They're all volunteers.

Is there any formal training? 89 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Normally the police captain will give them some training, and it's not -- they don't need a whole lot of training. The main thing is to make sure that the visibility of adults in those areas will prevent anything from happening. So you don't need a whole lot of training. You just need the volunteers to come out there to make sure the children are safe and that they be able to cross the street and no 13 one bothers them.

Okay. Let's go quickly to the Operation Safe Streets (sic). You mention in your testimony that there are, and I quote, a number of organizations. Could you provide to the Chair a listing of those organizations that make up the task force, who they are, et cetera, provide that to the Chair? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: You mean for Operation Safer Streets?

No, no. 90 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Operation Safe Schools. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Sure. Basically --

The task force, the composition of the task force. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I would have to get that for you.

Sure. Sure. Okay. How often do they meet, the task force? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I'm not sure how often the task force meets, but we have it co-located. The school police and the Philadelphia Police meet every day because they work together.

I see. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: It's a unit by itself. I mean, they just don't come maybe once a week or once every two or three weeks. That is their assignment. That's their permanent assignment. That's their permanent assignment for the school police and the Philadelphia Police. They work together 91 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. on a daily basis.

I see. You say that the centerpiece of their work is, and I quote, intelligence-gathering analysis. What does that do? How does that inform the actions of the task force once you collect that data? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, what happens sometimes is that, one, if there's information that's given to these people about a possible fight or a possible incident that's going to happen in certain schools, then they would send people out there to make sure that doesn't happen. Say, for example, too, it's information about Gaittens is going after Johnson and there's going to be a fight or an argument, there's some sort of confusion between these two groups. They would go out there and talk to these individual children, but also talk to their parents to prevent things from happening. 92 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC.

Escalating. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: So, again, there is times that if there's information about drugs or other sort of criminal activity, they would go out there and do an intelligence, do an evaluation and talk to the children. It's to try to prevent things from happening. So as soon as they get the phone call, they will go out there. I mean, we had one incident where a mother was concerned about her child is going to get beat up by another child. They intervened by going out there and talking to both parents, talking to the children to prevent anything from happening. So, again, if there's information about it's going to be a big fight with a weapon or anything like that, we go out there to prevent that. They can get information based on their information what they can do instead of 93 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. going out there themselves. Say, for example, it's narcotics. Then they will assign the narcotics unit. If it's something involving guns or weapons, they would let other people know. If it's about a fight, they will let the uniformed people know that there might be a possible fight, so they will put actually uniformed police officers out there that particular day. So they get the intelligence and they share the intelligence with other agencies within the Philadelphia Police Department.

So in cases where -- and I do know of a very specific case that I'll leave nameless I do want to discuss at side-bar. In cases where you have a principal who, in my view, is not doing the necessary follow-through, because parents have brought to their attention that their children are being threatened to be jumped and the like, the 94 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. instruction for the parent would be to write a letter to get the attention of whom since the principal is not doing the follow-through? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: They wouldn't even have to write a letter. All they have to do is make a phone call.

To? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: To this unit. And I will give you that number. All they have to do is make a phone call, and sometimes they don't even have to leave a name. We act on anonymous phone calls to make sure that nothing happens. That's the whole purpose of the units being informed.

Okay. All right. Thank you. I will be back on the next round. Thank you, Madam Chair.

You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco. 95 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC.

Thank you very much. Commissioner, I'm sure Councilman Nutter will come back to this, and I just want an answer on this. How much does $10 million in overtime buy? What does that buy us? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Deputy Commissioner Jack Gaittens. Looking at $10 million, at a rate of 38.26 per hour, that would give us the ability to hire officers for 250,000 hours of overtime, and utilizing that in four-hour-tour extensions, that would be a total of 62,500 extended shifts. Now, in our collective bargaining agreement with the FOP, there is a requirement that when an officer works more than 11 hours, they get $7 meal money. So looking at 62,500 shifts, that adds up to over $400,000. So all together, we would have the ability to hire the officers for 250,000 hours. 96 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC.

Well, how much time is that? How long is that?

Councilwoman Tasco, I can share with you the budget analysis take on this that went behind the $10 million overtime, if you wish, in terms of hours to hours.

I just want to know how long does the $10 million last.

Because if you walk through how dollars actually get spent, starting with for overtime, the Office of Budget and Planning Evaluation's estimate of hours purchased on $10 million was about 333,000 hours purchased -- I'm sorry; versus the purchase of 270,000 hours of straights if he were to do it as an FTE. So with using 10 million in overtime rather than buying new -- the time of new officers gets you about 20 percent more hours with overtime than you would get paying for new officers, 97 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. because you have to take into account, first of all, when you talk about police personnel spending, what percentage of your total payroll is available at any given point. And even in private industry, you have about 85 percent of availability, meaning at any point about percent of your workforce you're 10 paying, but is unavailable. 11 You also have to take into 12 account benefits are not necessarily 13 proportionate to salary dollars. So you 14 pay less benefits for the additional hour 15 when you're paying for overtime than you pay when you're on the first dollar of a normal salary. And then things like equipment also you only buy once in the case of overtime as opposed to the additional equipment and supply cost of new personnel. So the Office of Budget Planning Evaluation --

I'm sorry. I don't mean to interrupt you. I 98 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. don't know if the Councilwoman is really following what you're saying.

Well, really, what I want to know is how much -- all I want to know is, how long does it last?

How long does it last, and I would like to know what was the average salary that they were using to get to this figure if you have to consider time and a half. What is the baseline salary that you've been using? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Deputy Commissioner Jack Gaittens. One year out of the Police Academy, the annual salary for an officer is $65,000 a year. That's what it costs with salary and benefits. So we would get approximately --

What is the base salary?

My name is Marian Tasco, not Michael Nutter, and all 99 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. I want is the bottom line. How much time does it buy? I don't need all the detail. You'll give that to Michael. I'll ask him. Just tell me -- I want to know, what does million buy, for how 7 long and also -- well, let's just get 8 that answer. 9 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Okay. 10 Councilwoman, with the $10 million -- and to be very honest and candid with you, I'm not sure exactly how long it will last. It depends on what's going on. It depends on the crime. It depends on if there is an incident. It depends on so many other things. Like last year when we had 2001 with the Mardi Gras, we had a riot, and then all the sudden -- it depends. If we get a Live 8 concert that we had a month to do it, it cost us a million dollars. So I think it's hard for anybody at this point to estimate how long that $10 million will last.

And different 100 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. budget people may make different assumptions about what the salary is that you're working off of, but the Budget Office's estimation of the value of $10 million is 333,333 hours of overtime hours compared to only being able to buy 270,270 hours through new police officers.

But the police officers will remain. I mean, they stay. For what time period is --

This is looking at how many hours of service you buy, and you get anywhere from to percent 16 more hours in that first year with 17 overtime dollars than you would by 18 investing in new officers. 19

But you 20 have the officers in those hours beyond those first year hours, and in terms of what Councilman DiCicco stated, the growth in Center City and the extension of Center City to Girard Avenue, you're going to have more people, and also, you 101 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. can't forget the need for additional manpower in the neighborhoods. And so the whole analysis of what the Police Department should look like and should be should be calculated based on what's happening in the City -- and he knows the crime spots -- what's happening in the neighborhoods and what would be an adequate number of police officers we need in this City to help us maintain some sense of safety. And I think that would be better than trying to fight over, Well, he asked for police officers, but he was given $10 million and said, Look, use this and make it due until 2008, then I don't have to worry about that anymore. The other thing I want to ask a question -- so that's my take on that. On of your testimony, you talk about the 9-1-1 calls. Sometimes when I'm at community meetings, my constituents complain that when they make phone calls to the Police Department 102 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. or to the dispatcher, to 9-1-1, the police will show up at their door. And we've told, No, that doesn't happen, but I hear it too often to know that maybe sometimes they do go there, because maybe what the person called for is not happening on the street, so they might want more information. The other question, though, how is this 9-1-1 identification of cell phone callers going to impact whether people begin to call now from their cell phone 9-1-1 if you will be able to identify them calling? I know it has a value to it, but what is the downside? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Deputy Commissioner Jack Gaittens. The idea behind this is, the number of cell phone calls that we're receiving is drastically increasing over the years. It's replacing the land lines more and more.

And people say, Well, I'll use my cell phone because 103 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. they don't know who I am, and won't use their land line phone because you do know who they are. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: And that is correct as of today's date. The Phase One Wireless Technology Program is working with the different vendors to identify the specific phone number of the cell phone that's calling in. When we get into Phase Two, we will be able to get the triangulation to find out the exact location, which will help us in different types of investigations as we go on. Sometimes we have instances where people call pizza delivery shops or other food delivery shops with the intent of robbing them, and then the only thing we have is a cell phone number. We don't know. Or we're getting bomb scares or bomb threats at schools or other locations. All we know is that it's coming from a cell phone. We have no 24 idea who that individual is. Or on the other side, if somebody is having a 104 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. medical emergency and they just get to the point where they can call 9-1-1 and haven't been able to identify who they are, their problem or where they're located, once this technology is fully in place, we'll be able to get the XY coordinates and know where that person is within 30 feet. So it will be a very good benefit for us.

Well, again, I do agree with you on that value of it. I just always look to the other side of it where we hear from the neighbors. I just want to say, Madam President, to the Commissioner and to the Police Department, I thank them so much for what they're doing in the City and particularly in my district. I want to thank you for helping us close down the Jaguar, and I appreciate the task force's participation and the wonderful things that we're doing in the Ninth Councilmanic District. I 105 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. want to say to you that I do appreciate your comments about the whole activity around crime. There are societal issues that impact on the increase in crime, and dealing with the prevention and your having to deal with stopping crime, I appreciate your understanding that there are other issues, such as parenting and drugs and lack of home supervision and a lot of other problems that contribute to crime. And I do think those thoughts on your behalf are meaningful, and I don't discount them. I agree with you. So while we put more money in police cameras and that kind of thing, I do think we need to focus on early childhood intervention and family intervention. So I thank you. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Thank you very much, Councilwoman.

Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney. 106 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC.

Thank you, Madam President. Part of the unsettling nature of this discussion on staffing and costs is that I look at the table and with the exception of Deputy Commissioner Fox, who is not at the table, and I look at the people who are sitting here, including Deputy Commissioner Fox, there's a lot of experience at that table that I have a lot of confidence in, confidence in the deputies, confidence in the commissioner. And in some ways, the professionals are telling us what we need, and the non-law enforcement professionals are telling us what we're going to get. And when it comes to public safety, the Fire Department, the Police Department and the like departments, I think we should be listening to the law enforcement professionals who have practically between the three of them 100 years of experience in this business. I mean, Councilman Nutter 107 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. commented to me, it's like your accountant telling you when you should be discharged from the hospital, despite what your doctor says. And I also find it somewhat unsettling that these three people can't testify on their own. When it comes to staffing and cost issues, as soon as the issue is raised, the Managing Director starts moving towards the table. I mean, I'd like to have a discussion about policing, and I can't think of three better people that I'd rather have the discussion with. So just for the record, I find it a little bit -- I won't go as far as offensive, but I find it a little unsettling that I can't get a straight, honest answer, which I know they would love to give, about what our needs are. And they're the professionals and they're the people we should be listening to. So with that said, Commissioner, in a homicide where the 108 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. people are not related, what's one of the most difficult factors in trying to bring that case to closure? I'm not talking about somebody -- COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Witnesses.

What is the issue relative to the witnesses? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, one, I think there's a fear factor, the fear factor that people don't want to come forward and testify in court, with the idea they might be injured or hurt themselves.

Do you think -- and I think I know the answer to the question -- there would be some value in people having confidence that either through extensive protection or relocation, that these witnesses would have the freedom to come forward as the investigation and trial comes, which often takes a period of time, to not be in the same neighborhood where the killer 109 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. is? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

I have recommended that through the District Attorney's Office, with the help from the Police Department and from the U.S. Attorney's Office, that we seriously look at a significant Witness Relocation and Protection Program. I know that there's been discussion in the media with the state doing some reduction in those resources and allocating it a different way, but these are our people and we have responsibility, and I know you agree with this, to protect them. And sometimes we're going to have to potentially relocate or protect a bad guy, but when I think about all of those people who are watching the stuff from behind their curtains or through the crack in their door, and they're good, honest, hard-working people, who will never come 110 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. forward -- I would never expect them to come forward -- and risk their own death or the death of their family or the fire bombing of their home because we don't have the ability or the resources to protect them. So I'm going to continue to push for our own Witness Relocation and Protection Program. And I know we're going to have the accountants tell us that it's expensive, but I can't think of a more important spending of resources, to protect honest people who have the courage to come and testify against people who kill other people. I would like at some point your input. We're going to have a hearing with the District Attorney when she comes in about this potential, but I can't think of a more basic right that a person has, to be protected from a criminal when they have the courage to stand up in court and point them out. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, 111 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. sir. I agree with you.

Thank you. Let me talk a little bit about -- how much time do I have? MR. McPHERSON: Four minutes.

Can we talk a little bit about port security? I know we've had a lot of discussions in the national media about this contract with the United Arab Emirates, and Philadelphia is one of the ports involved in the discussion. What is the Police Department's responsibility, role, input in the issue of port security? And I want you to answer the question, if you can, from the perspective of the neighborhoods that border our port. We have a pretty long linear port and there are many neighborhoods, from South Philadelphia all the way up to the Northeast, that have some impact from port operations and potential port disasters. What do we do and how are we 112 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. involved? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, really not a whole lot. I think what happens is that we have the marine unit that's out there that actually goes from one location to another location. And we work very, very closely with the Coast Guards and we work very, very closely with the FBI and our intelligence units to get the intelligence. Since I've been Commissioner, we used to have one person assigned to the FBI for our counter-terrorist unit. We now have close to 60, 70 people that's involved in the terrorist unit in the department, and it has six or seven that are assigned specifically to the FBI on a continuous basis. So we try to -- I think the important thing is get the intelligence and communicate. We now communicate very, very closely with the federal sector and with the port people meeting with the U.S. Coast Guards and other 113 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. people. The districts that monitor or are on those areas go over there basically if there's crime. If there is no crime -- but the intelligence is from our intelligence people and basically from our terrorist unit.

Do we have any type of plan or do we contemplate plans relative to evacuations, people surrounding port areas in the event that there is some terrorist activity? There's very compacted, close rowhouse neighborhoods all along our port, from South Philadelphia through Center City up into Port Richmond and Tacony and places like that. Do we have any types of plans as far as a terrorist attack, either biological or otherwise, that would -- COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir, we do. The Police Department has a very sophisticated plan. The Managing Director and the Mayor have now informed the whole committee that analyze the 114 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. entire thing at the marina, but as it stands, we have plans in place right now and we have talked to people, that no 5 matter where in the City of Philadelphia we designated or have identified certain spots that we feel as though there might be a biological or chemical incident that may happen -- and some of our plans is not so much to evacuate, but to stay in place. We don't want them to come out. We're in constant communications with our Sunoco and other areas possibly that these things may happen. So we're constantly monitoring, we're constantly getting intelligence and we're constantly training for these type of things happening.

Do we have physical jurisdiction on the port facilities? I know many of them are owned by the Commonwealth through the Regional Port Authority and some are privately owned, but do we have jurisdiction to enter onto a facility, 115 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. whether it's Packer Avenue Marine Terminal or Tioga Marine Terminal or any of the other facilities? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: As far as I know, we do, unless it's a federal installation. If it's not a federal installation and it is an installation inside the City of Philadelphia, that we have jurisdiction.

And do we coordinate with the Coast Guard at all? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, we do. Matter of fact, our marine unit is located with the Coast Guard.

All right. Fine. Thank you, Madam President.

You're welcome. Commissioner, could you explain why civilian overtime is increasing by over 100 percent, from $2.1 million in 2006 to $4.3 million in 2007? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: 116 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Deputy Commissioner Jack Gaittens. There are several reasons for that. We had civilian layoffs the year before, as you are aware. Certain positions were cut. We are in a position right now with corrections officers that we have to use mandatory overtime to staff the positions down in the Police Detention Unit. Additionally, at this time, we're going through the CAD upgrade, Computer-Aided Dispatch, so we are sending our dispatchers through a training program that's lasting a little while. While that training program is going on, we are unable to hire more dispatchers. We are down about 15 right now. So for those vacancies, to fill the vacancies that we have and to cover the people who are out on training, we must pay overtime to replace them. Additionally, with the advent of all of these different CSI programs, there is becoming a great demand for 117 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. forensic analysis and evidence. So the people in our chem lab are working a significant amount of that overtime, both on evidence intake and on processing.

But is it cost effective to be spending that kind of money on overtime when we could be rehiring many of the employees? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: It is better to hire some more employees. In the short term, overtime is very effective. I do believe there is a need to increase the staffing in certain civilian positions.

Well, has that request been made of the Administration? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Not formally, no. 21

Well, what do you think it would take to be more effective? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: What we would like to see is some more 118 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. corrections officers, some more people in police radio and additional personnel for the chem lab.

How many people are you short in police radio? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Right now about dispatchers. 10

11 That's a lot of dispatchers. 12 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: 13 Yes, ma'am. Unfortunately, even if I 14 could hire them today, I couldn't train 15 them, because we're going through the CAD upgrade. We do have plans to hire those 15 personnel in April. So we've already got the backgrounds done. We're ready to go. As soon as we're able to train them, we will be hiring shortly. The same goes with the corrections officers. Our background unit now is doing the background checks on individual candidates. So hopefully 119 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. we'll be able to start the hiring process within the next few weeks.

So if you are able to rehire many of these employees, would you still need that amount of overtime in your budget? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Well, no. The overtime would go down as we have more people on straight time. However, as I said, the demand for forensic evidence and analysis is going up continuously.

That I could understand, but I'm talking about -- no wonder people complain that they call 9-1-1 and they can't -- if we don't have enough dispatchers, how can we even respond to the calls? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Well, our manpower level stays the same. As I said, we have a required minimum mandatory staffing level in police radio. So the number of call-takers and dispatchers remains about the same. The 120 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. amount of people who are sitting in those chairs on overtime varies depending on the day.

While I have the mike and while you have the mike, there's just one puzzle that I have here. On of the detail, you're requesting a $444,515 increase for delay in filling positions. Can you explain how a delay can cost you money? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: I don't see what page you're on.

That's , the top of . Is that a mistake? Or maybe you can explain it. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: I'm being told that is a mistake, yeah. Delay in filling positions would save money, not cost money.

That's what I thought, and that's why I said I was somewhat puzzled.

What line 121 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. was that?

6. It's on the top of , Line 28. So that is a mistake and will be corrected? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Yes, ma'am.

Thank you very much. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.

Madam President, Councilman Kelly has his first round and I'll defer to him.

Well, see, then I lose you on the board, but that's okay. Councilman Kelly.

Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Clarke. Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Good afternoon, Councilman. 122 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC.

Let me just say, first of all, I think that you have a very, very difficult job to do. You really you do, I think you and your deputy commissioners and the entire police force. You do a commendable job under really, really tough situations sometimes, and I think it's unfair to see that just the number of homicides, the way they print them and whatnot, it seems to be a negative impact on the Police Department, and I don't think that if you could have 10,000 police, it would prevent some of the homicides that go on. For instance, between spouses and whatnot, you can't prevent that any more than anyone can at this point. Let me just say that I agree with Councilwoman Tasco when she says I think that they would rather see a lot of things done to prevent people to get into your hands to begin with, and I think that's where we really should be providing more of an effort and more 123 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. financial aid to these youth programs and a lot of other things to get people off the streets. I think that's one of the things I would like to see. But in your questioning -- and I apologize if you have already answered this in previous questions, but you mention that you were currently spending funding for overtime now to attack the homicide problem that we have in this City. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, what we're basically doing is that we're using the overtime in areas, especially in our hot spots, to go out there to try to prevent some of the crime. Actually, in homicide --

Well, are you budgeted for that now? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes.

Are you budgeted for the overtime for this year? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Deputy Commissioner Jack Gaittens. 124 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. The overtime that the program is costing us right now is more on the form of investigative overtime that is coming from arrests that are being made and from shootings there. The overtime is not actually being spent for deployment at this current time. We are aware of the fact that we get the $10 million as of July 1, and then for deployment purposes, the cost will go up, because then we're in the middle of summary vacation period. So the bodies won't be there on straight time. We will have to replace them with overtime. So the overtime costs in the summer will be a lot higher than what they currently are now.

Okay. I have another question on cameras. I don't know what the Police Department's position is on cameras, on installing cameras and using cameras. Have you done any studies on this to see what hot spots you could put them on? Would there be a 125 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. pilot program? How much would each of these locations cost? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, I'll say this, because we have different opinions: I talked to the Police Chief in Chicago when I was in Florida, and matter of fact, we both gave different presentations. The presentation that he gave, I was impressed with. I can't argue with success, and it appears like in Chicago, it has been successful. At least in 2004 it was successful. Now, their homicide rate went up a little bit in 2005. But I am not opposed to putting cameras here in the City of Philadelphia. I know Wilmington has cameras, Baltimore has --

Excuse me, Commissioner. When they did those studies, in other words, did they prevent the homicides from those areas that they have cameras? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, 126 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. see --

In other words, did the number go down? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, their numbers went drastically down, but that's the same as our numbers went drastically down when we put up Operation Safe Streets. It's like a chess game. As we put things in place, the criminals put things in place, and we're still changing. The facts are that when you put those cameras up, can you move those cameras? Because they're going to realize the cameras are there. They use the cameras for court presentations. They use the cameras for a whole lot of different things. So the cameras were successful in Chicago, at least during that year, until the criminals will adjust to it. I didn't go to Baltimore, but I understand that they're being used in Baltimore. At least the Baltimore Police are saying that it is a positive thing for them. 127 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Wilmington said it was a positive thing for them. So I'm not objecting to putting cameras.

Well, the neighborhood that has the cameras, their crime rate is going down, but is it going up in other areas which doesn't have the cameras? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, Chicago is starting to go back up.

Okay. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I think Councilman Clarke is having Chicago and Baltimore come in here on Thursday. I will be here, and I think we really have to listen to the people where the cameras are at to really get a true analysis of what's going on with the cameras.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Commissioner.

Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman 128 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Clarke.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioner, I would like to talk a bit about Safer Streets. The Administration had a series of meetings to announce the roll-out of the program and one was in my Council District, and a big part of the process was the community component, but in all honesty, to date, I haven't really seen that on the ground level. A lot of people came to the meeting extremely optimistic about being able to participate, and while you may not be in charge of that part of the process, you're here and I need to ask you about where is the follow-up. Because a number of people have called me and said, Well, Councilman, we had a great meeting with the Mayor and Police Commissioner. We haven't heard from anybody since. Where does this thing go from here? 129 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I've been to approximately three meetings since then down there myself. I mean, we didn't bring all the different groups in there. I went to one of the meetings in North Philadelphia. I went to some of the community groups and I'm scheduled to go to three or four different churches, I am along with some of my deputies. The Mayor through the Managing Director's Office is planning something additional, and I think that will be very, very soon, but as far as the Department is concerned, our outreach program, I had a meeting over on Erie Avenue not too long ago, maybe a couple weeks ago. I had two meetings up in Germantown. So I'm constantly going out with our deputies and talking to the people in those communities, because I think that at these meetings -- we didn't have a lot of dialogue there, but I think at the meetings that we're having now, there's dialogues on both sides of about 130 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. quality of life. And I know that Mothers in Charge, Men United, the Managing Director and the immigration program and a lot of other groups, Friday I met with about ten different groups in my office to make sure that we're all on the same page, because we have different groups doing different things and going all kinds of different ways. I thought it's important that we call that meeting, because we all have the same goal in mind, that's to eliminate the violence in our city, and we have to get rid of the egos. There's a lot of egotistical self-centered people in there. It isn't about individual people. It's about us working together and all the groups working together and supporting one another. So that meeting was in my office on Friday. We had scheduled another meeting for later on this month. I've asked them, say, for example, if there's problems in your area or anybody else's 131 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. areas, that we just not need to send one group, we need to all go as a group. I also met with Reverend Moore, the leader of the Black Clergy, and one of his people last week also, who has committed to getting involved and getting the churches involved on a continuous basis. So I really believe that it has to be a wholistic type of approach. We met with people from the DHS and other people to form those groups. But the answer to your question, that is still a plan that we have all the community groups and all the Police Department and other people coming into the communities and tell the community what we're going to do, because we need their help. We need everybody's help. I also have scheduled a meeting with some of the business people who want to get involved. I also met with the leader of the business wards of the Chamber of Commerce. He wants to bring 132 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. some of the business people, say, for example. What I've asked them to do -- what I asked the churches to do basically is to do things in your church, in your community, to have outreach programs for people who are ex-offenders, people in recovery.

I asked the business people to put money into youth groups, kids that don't have -- give summer jobs to them to prevent them from going out there and doing certain things, because we need those things. They have the money. They take a lot of money from the neighborhoods. A lot of these communities that have a lot of business in their community, the business people need to put back into those communities to help the kids out there, help for training, help for other things. So I'm going to every area that I can possibly go to and ask them for their help, and a lot of them have agreed to get involved with this, which is something totally different than happened 133 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. in the past.

So by and large, we're getting a positive response from the community, the groups that you've met with? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir. And even from the business communities and even from the clergy. I see in the last month or two months they're doing more now than -- and I don't want to say the wrong thing. They just opened up their churches on Wednesday for prayer and Sunday for collections, but they're starting to get involved and they're reaching out to us. And I've gotten calls from other churches to say, Can you come to our church, come in there with the HEADS UP Program, come in to talk to the youth, come in there and -- now, there's one thing that we've never done before that I've gotten a lot of calls from a lot of different people, and these are the people who are so-called thugs, who want to meet, and 134 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. we're setting up a meeting with them. And at that meeting will be Bernard Hopkins, who is an ex-offender who wants to get involved, and other people, because they basically said to me that, We try to do things, but we have a bad past and the police don't want to talk to us, but we have the answers, we have solutions, we want to help, we want to go to the corners. We don't want to go help with the kids and we get locked up. So we're having a City-wide meeting. I don't have a date or a time, but it's in process of planning right now to meet with the people who are doing more damage to our cities than anybody else. The one group that we never sat down and talked to now are saying, We want to help. And I also got calls from Graterford Prisons from the Lifers Association that say, We want to help. When you have prisoners who are incarcerated who want to help, then we need to get the men out there in the 135 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. cities who are free to help.

That's encouraging. Commissioner, getting back to the policing side of this Safer Streets Program, in terms of the police presence on the street on a daily basis and your ability to create a quality of life within the law, where are your limitations as it relates to loitering but full well knowing -- and I'm assuming the police know, everybody in the community knows it -- these people are selling drugs? You don't see it, or these people are gambling on the sidewalk or they're doing whatever. What are your limitations in terms of your ability to limit it? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: We can't break the law to enforce the law. So we don't go out there and just do stop and frisk, but at the same time, since December 19th to the present, I guess our pedestrians in our car stops have went up 136 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. almost 500 percent that we're stopping people, and when they stop a person, they can't profile. They have to put down on their incident report why they stopped and the reason they're stopping them. Our curfew has went up almost in the short period of time well over a thousand, almost 4,000. We're enforcing the curfew laws. We're enforcing the truancy laws. What we try to do, those who are gambling on the highways, we're enforcing those. Those who are out there drinking 40's on the highways, we're enforcing those. So we're enforcing quality of life laws that we really didn't enforce a whole lot the last time, but we're enforcing them a lot more now. We're being more focused. So there is no limitation. If there is a complaint of a neighborhood -- and I know we had a discussion at the last two or three, four Council meetings -- that we want to make sure that people can walk through the streets 137 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. and walk to the stores and kids can sit on those steps. So we're enforcing things now, more quality of life issues, than we've done in the past.

Okay. My time is up. I'll come back. Thank you.

Thank you. Councilman Rizzo.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioner, you said something that got my attention. You said a lot today that got my attention, but one area specifically. You talked about the $10 million that we're going to use for overtime, and the focus is prevention, to hopefully stop crime, because when President Verna asked the question about possible ripple effect with cost, courts, et cetera. I'd like to know, seeing the activity in the Philadelphia Police Department, it's just incredible the 138 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. amount of activity and the amount of crime that the Police Department responds to, but let's use homicides as an example of a particular issue that we want to discuss. Is it safe to say we had somewhere around 380 homicides in 2005? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

Many of the homicides we talked earlier were people that knew each other. So there was an apprehension made in most cases almost immediately? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: No, sir.

No? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: No. 18 There was 380 homicides that happened last year, and 215 were arguments. Ninety-seven percent was victim specific, somebody meant to kill that person. Seventy-one percent or 76 percent of those who were the victim of crimes or victim of homicides had a criminal record, and 74 percent of those who 139 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. committed those crimes that we arrested had a criminal record. There is times that there's a homicide happen, and there is about close to 100 -- I think it was 97, 98 -- of the homicides happen indoors. But we are just not concerned about the homicides. We're concerned about the shootings, because there was over 1,700 shootings, which means there was a potential for 1,700 people to be killed. A lot of times it depends on how bad a shot the person was or how close to a good hospital he was. So we're going to the overall big picture of the shootings and everything else. I think we solve approximately 64, 65 percent of the homicides. Probably close -- 62.86 percent of the homicides we've cleared by arrests, but probably close to 98 percent or somewhere in that area, we know who did it. We just can't get the person to come forward to testify. The family normally gets the 140 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. information exactly who committed the crime. They will call us up and give us the information, but they won't come forward. And for even a child homicide, you know, we got numerous amount of calls who gave us the names, and they don't have a problem giving us the names, but we have to have probable cause to make the arrest. We just don't want to arrest them on a conviction. At the same time, what's happening is that people are afraid to come forward. We know who did it, but we don't have enough evidence to arrest the person.

So in our City, we obviously have a lot of people that have committed violent, vicious crime that are still walking the streets of our City. So that is obviously a startling issue here. Clearance rate in our Police Department -- and, again, that's a word I don't like to use a lot, because sometimes people think that the wrong 141 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. person could be scooped up or arrested and incarcerated. Based on like all the crime you said, all the shootings and everything that happens, burglaries, robberies, all of that stuff, I know we do a great job in bringing those people to justice. Do you have some numbers that you could share with us on how good a job we're doing? Because 65 percent is okay, but I understand what you just said in the area of homicides. You would hope that it would get better and a lot of those folks would eventually be arrested and tried, right? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir. Okay. Last year we had a total arrests of 352, and 264 of those were actually charged with murder. Now, last year we arrested 68,000 people, but this is just for homicides. And the person may possibly be arrested for -- in our statistics of homicides, they may not have necessarily been arrested for the 142 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. homicide, but been an accessory or some other areas that was involved in that particular case. But people who was arrested for the actual homicide last year in 2005 was 264 people we arrested.

Arrested, but -- COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Arrested and charged with murder.

Convicted? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I don't have the conviction rate here, sir.

That's pretty good. That's good. We would like to see how many of them have actually been convicted, though. That would be an interesting number. But clearance rate in the Police Department for all the time that goes on, from car thefts to -- my point is that we're so busy responding to crime, I'm always curious about the other side of the coin. What's the follow-up? What's the investigative side of it? 143 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Does it just continue just to pile up? I just can't imagine how like a Detective Division just stays -- are they putting out fires? Do they have active ability to have -- Monday a crime occurs. Is the crime that occurs on Tuesday still -- does it replace the job that happened on Monday? How do you stay current on all of this violent crime that goes on and really have a quality investigation? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GIORGIO-FOX: Councilman, Deputy Commissioner Fox. I'll be happy to forward you the UCR clearance rates. I didn't bring them with me, but I will tell you this, that one of the things we've been doing with the Detective Divisions for a while now, and I think you'll recognize this when I show you multiple arrests, is that we attempt to try to find immediate patterns of crime, and so that when we have a burglary, one of the things we do on a regular basis is, we process those 144 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. scenes, the purpose of which is that we all know that a small percentage of people are committing a large percentage of the crimes in this City. And so what we attempt to do in the Detective Divisions right now is combine assignments, look for trends, and then when we make an arrest, either try to use evidence or get a statement for multiple clearances. And I can tell you without having the figures in front of me the number of multiple clearances has arisen in this Police Department as a result of both investigative work and technology that we have now that we didn't use in the past.

Is part of that 10 million, Commissioner, is that overtime being spread to the investigative areas of the Police Department? Because earlier you said something which I mentioned, that you were going to spend a lot of that money to extend tours to prevent crime. What 145 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. about spending some of it to solve some of the crime? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, it has, and I think that -- every person that we arrest, especially in our hot spots, we debrief by crimes that have happened in that area. In addition to that, I believe, and Deputy Commissioner Fox can speak for herself, the detectives were using some of the overtimes to go out there and serve these warrants, that we have the Detective Bureau going out there serving warrants on a daily basis now. In addition to that, we now have detectives for the first time that I can recall patrolling in the streets of Philadelphia. So we use it for a lot of things, but we definitely cannot use it for patrol. We don't use it for the detectives. It's used both ways.

Great. Thank you both, Commissioners. 146 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Thank you, Madam Chair.

The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioner, I need to go back to the earlier discussion, because I'm not exactly sure that we reached a conclusive answer. You indicated with regard to the $10 million that you weren't exactly sure how long it would last. There were a series of numbers laid out. I think there was an attempt at a calculation with regard to $10 million, number of hours or cost per officer leading to a certain number of hours, I guess then divided by eight, which gets you a certain number of shifts. Can we maybe go at it from a different direction? For the hot spots, I guess, that you have -- and I don't know how many there are and you may not want to say here under this situation -- 147 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. how do you figure out or how do you even get close to figuring out how long these funds will last? They come in July 1st, as Deputy Commissioner Gaittens mentioned. You're going to have the summer schedule, vacations. Is it true crime tends to go up a little bit in the summer? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

So, I mean, what exactly will happen with the $10 million? How many officers can work, I guess -- are they working eight-hour shifts? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: No. 18 Normally -- well, it really depends. I mean, right now because there's no 20 vacations, we're using most of the overtime that we're going to use for extended tours. Probably during the summertime and during vacation --

An extended tour is what? You work your -- 148 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: An extra two hours, an extra four hours. Probably in the summertime, we will use it for replacements for probably an eight-hour tour.

Okay. Let me go at it from this perspective. How much money was spent on overtime in the original Operation Safe Streets? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I have no idea. Let me say this, though: The original plan of Operation Safer Streets did not involve overtime.

What did it involve? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Straight time.

Straight time? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir. The original plan of Operation Safer Streets.

That's Safe Street No. 2? 149 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, we had about three or four of them since then, but the original plan, the initiative that we have in place right now did not involve overtime. The additional overtime -- because if we put them in hot spots, we would still have warm spots all over. So our original plan that we had was all straight time. The $10 million will let us suspend our tours of duty and anticipate during the summertime that we will have people who will either be on vacation and we have a number of officers who are injured or out sick. So they would give us a replacement. With the overtime, we can probably keep the same level of officers that are in these areas on a continuing basis.

If you plan to run the program on straight time and you're not increasing the number of officers, how do you do that? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I said 150 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. the original plan, our original plan of Operation Safer Streets, was all straight time. We identified what --

That was about two weeks ago? I mean, Safer Streets came into play about two, three weeks ago, right? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: No. The Police Department came into place in December. The policing began in December 19th of 2005.

Okay. But we were all -- COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: This was prior to the budget.

-- together at a church just a few weeks ago when the big -- COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: That was the comprehensive plan. That was the whole plan, but the Police Department's plan began December the 19th of 2005. We were on the street.

Okay. 151 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Let's go back. Operation Safe Streets, my recollection is that operation started on May 1st, 2002; is that correct? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Correct.

Now, when did it end? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: It hasn't ended.

We have overlapping operations? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GIORGIO-FOX: Excuse me. Operation Safe Streets is a program whereby we placed officers on corners. We identified 306 corners. As of about ten days ago, my latest survey is, there are still 114 corners that we periodically cover on straight time in an effort to ensure that those corners never again become problematic.

Deputy Commissioner, what do you mean by "periodically"? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER 152 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. GIORGIO-FOX: Periodically, we call it random interval coverage. So the captain will identify the hours where that corner is most problematic, and then for some period of time each night, I'm assuming it's an evening hour, the corner is covered. An officer may be given three corners in an eight-hour tour to cover. So they drive to a corner, they get out and they walk for an hour and a half, they then get back into their car and they drive to a second corner. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: If I can say, with Operation Safe Streets, and we analyzed Operation Safe Streets, we identified 300 of the worst corners in the City of Philadelphia based on our intelligence, based on data and based on a lot of other things to go after open-air drug marketers. When I talk about an open-air drug market, I'm talking about corners where people line up like car washes to sell their drugs. And during that period of time, that's 153 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. when we put 600 police officers on 300 of the worst drug corners on May 1st to eliminate the open-air drug corners. I think that was very, very successful. That was the purpose of Operation Safe Streets, to eliminate the open-air drug market, not to always just keep police officers there on those corners forever. If there is no problems going on -- you know, realistically, and I try to be as realistic as I possibly can, as long as you have a person who is going to buy drugs, somebody is going to sell them drugs. Have we eliminated all drugs? No, we haven't. Have we eliminated almost all of the open-air drug corners? Yes, we have.

Okay. Is Deputy Commissioner Gaittens, is he like the finance person for the department? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

Deputy, I know you were getting your documents and 154 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. papers together there. Can you tell me on a yearly basis since May 1st, 2002 what the yearly overtime has been for Operation Safe Streets? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Yes, sir. In Fiscal Year '02, we spent $12 million; '03, $36.8 million; '04, 23.2; '05, 6.7. So far this fiscal year for Fiscal '06, we spent about 2.6 million. We estimate it will come in a little bit under $5 million for this fiscal year.

So let me go back through that. FY02 was 12 million. FY03? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: 36.8.

FY04, 23.2; FY05, 6.7. Your year to date on FY06 is 2.6 and you think the end-of-the-year number is going to be 5. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: It will come in around 5 million, yes, sir. 155 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC.

Okay. That's about 71? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: 81,464,141.

I'll take the 81. Has there been an independent analysis of Operation Safe Streets? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I believe there was one by Temple University, which we disagreed with.

Is it available? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GIORGIO-FOX: I can get you a copy of it, yes.

Could you forward a copy to the Chair? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GIORGIO-FOX: Absolutely.

Okay. Am I done?

Yes.

Okay. 156 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC.

We'll get back to you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.

Thank you, Madam President. Just a couple of follow-up questions. I too was struck by the stats you shared in response to Councilman Nutter and Councilman Rizzo's questions; namely, you mention, and forgive me if this is a misquote, 97 percent about are crimes done indoors. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: No. I didn't say 97 percent. What I said was that out of 380 homicides last year, 97 were committed indoors.

And to narrow the question even further, you mention that in many instances, they know each other. They're victim specific, is what you said. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Right. That's the same figure. Ninety-seven 157 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. percent of those who are killed either are relatives, friends or associates. They know that person.

Okay. So let me narrow it further. Do you know of those how many are domestic relations related? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, ma'am. Last year there were ten, which came to 2.6 percent. Now, let me say this: This year, the same time period that we compared last year to this year, we had one domestic homicide last year. This year we have seven.

Okay. So if you tie that to the questions raised about more police officers when so many of the crimes are indoors, and if there's an interest in the preventive or intervention arm of this, if you know now that there are ten, when there are domestic arguments reported, is there some kind of follow-up, if you will, with that family of an intervention type of 158 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. nature so that it doesn't end up in ultimately a killing? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, we have a Domestic Violence Committee that I'm Co-Chair. And I don't do much work because I think Tracy does all the work. We have a group that goes out there on a continuous basis for education and for training. With the Women's Group, we really have partnered with them. In the orders of the Department, if they go to a house and there's indication of domestic violence, there's an arrest. There's an immediate arrest. So the Police Department takes it very, very serious, and we approach it in that way.

Okay. Finally, I, too, was curious by the comment that we know the priorities are huge and the list is long, but I was curious to know the why, for why cameras don't rank as high in terms of priority attention. 159 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, I mean, I don't want to say, Well, it's a priority, because I think with all the other things that we have in the Department at this point, we really have to analyze that. I mean, the reason -- and I appreciate Councilman Clarke bringing the people here -- because cameras are stationary and criminals are not, and criminals will leave where they feel as though they've been identified and go to different areas. So I think we're still in the process of evaluating whether they work or not work based on the amount of money that they will cost, because we just can't take these expensive cameras and just put them in each place. And as long as cameras are stationary and criminals are not, then we have to look at that.

Surely. Finally, on of your testimony, you give discussion to the professional development opportunities 160 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. that you have in the Department. Can you just speak to how many officers and civilian employees take advantage of the program that you have ongoing with the colleges and the universities and tell us which colleges and universities are currently involved in that partnership? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Deputy Commissioner Jack Gaittens. The current times we don't have the exact statistics. We'll be able to get them for you, but Deputy Commissioner Council has made contact with several different colleges in the area. The ones that are actually participating in the program now include Widener, Immaculata, Eastern, Cabrini, DeVry, Holy Family, Rosemont, Chestnut Hill, Peirce, Arcadia, Philadelphia-Wilmington, Phoenix and Mountain State. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: And Community College.

Sure. There's a lot of options. 161 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Who pay for what exactly? When it comes to the professional development, who pays for that? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: For the college education, that's basically on their own. Now, we do have department training within the Philadelphia Police Department, and that is through a request from the commanding officer. The officer fills out a memorandum identifying the particular type of training, seminar or whatever it is they're looking for. It goes through the commanding officer. They make a recommendation as to whether or not this is a benefit to the Police Department, whether we offer this type of training in-house or if we have a contract with anybody to provide that type of training, and then it would come up through me through the budgetary process. We do have funds available for training. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I think 162 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. in addition to that, we have Kal Rudman who has paid tuition for approximately 100 or more officers to go --

Repeat that. I can't hear you, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Kal Rudman has paid for approximately over 100 police officers to go to Community College and pay their tuition. And that's just a figure I threw out there, but it's probably more officers. Each semester officers can put in a request to go to Community College. Their tuition has been paid by Kal Rudman.

Okay. And whom shall I speak with with regards to young people who are intimidated outside of school areas for follow-up? Whom on your team should I speak with related to the task force? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Deputy Commissioner Fox.

Okay. Thank you for your testimony. 163 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, ma'am.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.

Thank you, Madam President. Quickly, Commissioner, you had indicated in your previous testimony that car stops and ped stops are up about 500 percent? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

As a result of that increased activity, what were the number of guns that have been -- COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, I can go by since December the 19th. I think I may be off one or two figures. This time last year we had approximately 36, 37. We're now up to like close to 80 164 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. just in that time period just by car stops and pedestrian stops. Our weapons procedure has definitely went higher.

So obviously it's a very effective tool used in a legal way. It's very effective in getting guns out of people's hands. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir. And what we try to do is, we're not going to break the law to enforce the law, but sometimes when robberies and shootings, they're on the corners drinking 40's or gambling and doing other things, and we can make these type of stops just -- there is a probable cause of stopping them. We're finding weapons, we're finding drugs, we're finding all kinds of things.

I mean, I think you agree that a car stop and a ped stop does not have to be a violent act. It can be done in a professional and considerate manner, but getting that gun out of that waistband is a huge 165 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. accomplishment. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

So we haven't had any push-back from the community? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Not at all, and one of the things that I monitored based on the car stops and pedestrian stops, I monitored the complaint on police, which has been very minimal.

Are the numbers, are they staying stagnant or are they going up, too? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: They're going down.

So obviously it's not been a major civil rights issue as far as citizens are concerned. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: No, sir.

So we're going to continue that high level of 166 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. activity? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir, we will.

Great. Thank you. One other issue on enforcement. Councilmember Brown had been talking earlier about safe corridors and crossing guards. Do we have any indication as to the number of tickets written for speeding in school zones? Can we find out whether or not we've had increases, where they've been? Because it seems to me to be an issue that would be best promoted by the captain of a district telling people that, Be aware of what's going on in schools zones and write these tickets. I know, for example, on North Broad Street coming down, I dropped my son off at school, there's a school speed zone outside of Ben Franklin High School. I mean, no one pays attention to it. I get honked at because I'm going 15, and 167 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. I'm pointing up to the sign. So I'm trying to get an idea as to what we're doing enforcement-wise, because, as I said, when we had this discussion earlier on crossing guards and school safety, in the suburbs when you hit a school zone, you automatically put your foot on the brake and get down to 10 because you know you're going to get a 11 ticket if you don't. Here we have a 12 different, I guess, cultural experience 13 that people seem to ignore school zones, 14 they ignore crosswalks, they ignore red 15 lights and stop signs, and it creates an environment in the community that's pretty dangerous in itself. As you know, you have a better chance of getting killed getting run over by a car than being shot. What do we do about this kind of traffic enforcement? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, I know last year what we did, and I'm not sure whether it's still going on, we have 168 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. assigned to problem schools and problem areas our traffic people. Even the State Police had came in to assist us and help us to make sure that citations were being issued in those areas. I'm not sure whether it's still going on, but I believe we had a whole committee. I think the Managing Director was involved in it, where we analyzed all the different schools and the areas where there was kids hit at. So I think that committee is still going on, but we put additional resources into those areas to prevent those things from happening.

Could you try to break down the numbers a little when you get a chance as far as how many have been written and actually where they are? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GIORGIO-FOX: Sir, every week a detail of Traffic Division officers choose five or six or seven schools, depending upon what 169 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. else we have to do that week, and they forward me the statistics every week. And so I can give you from the inception what's been written and where.

Finally, cities like Houston, Los Angeles and Boston -- I'm not sure. We're still researching what New York and Chicago do -- have field training programs for their cadets where at some point in time at the end of their training process, they're actually on the street in a limited capacity. Some cities certify their cadets early on in the firearm process; some wait until the end. It occurred to me that it would be a good experience for our officers to have some citizen contact in a regular environment, in a normal environment, not necessarily in high-crime areas like some of the high-crime districts, but the Center City area, the Penns Landing area, South Street, Manayunk, places where it's more personal contact with people. 170 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Do you find any value in that or potential value? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: We did that. I'm not sure whether we're still doing it. I'm sorry.

You're not. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, what we used to do is put the officer out there. Before he graduated, they would put him in the streets with the senior officer for a month and then come back to the Academy before graduation. And I think that that's a good program. If we're not doing it, then I will look and see into reimplementing that.

Do you think there's any value in having higher visibility of police in areas that are not as crime ridden but have a tourist and hospitality effect? I mean, for example, one of the things that impresses me about New York when I go is the Theatre District always has officers directing traffic, getting people across 171 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. the street safely. Sometimes as the Academy of Music empties out, people are dodging cars that are making right-hand turns running through people. To me, it's a better environment, even if the officer doesn't have a firearm or isn't allowed to have a firearm, either not have the firearm or be with someone who has a firearm, so that you can have this kind of additional presence. And I think what the value of it is, these recruits or cadets have a chance to interact with people, which is going to be their main responsibility on the force, is interacting with the public. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, I think that's a good idea. They're like ambassadors. We give them an idea. Because what happens sometimes, at least in my opinion, you have a lot of officers who go to the Police Academy and graduate and are assigned to areas that they never even rode through before, that there's no 25 interaction. 172 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. So we will look into that, and I think that would be a good idea.

And my staff will provide some research information on what other cities do and forward that to you also. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I appreciate that, Councilman.

Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioner, I'm winding down. I think I have maybe four or five questions. Did you indicate at the beginning of the testimony, is there a class at the Academy now? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, 173 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. sir.

How many recruits are in that class? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I believe it's 70.

70? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir. 73. I'm sorry.

73. And can you share any information on average class size in the past? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, if I can recall correctly, we had over 100 and sometimes we had less than 70. One of the problems that we were having is that -- and we're going by attrition and maybe to keep our numbers that we have agreed to keep, but sometimes it's hard to get a class. It's hard to get a class for a number of reasons. They put a lot of things in place now that they didn't have in place before. Say, for example, the agility test now has to be done before the class starts. 174 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC.

The what? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: The agility test. When the recruits went up to the Academy, before they graduated, that had to do agility. They have to do sit-ups and runs and stuff like that. Now they have to do them prior to getting into the Academy. The candidate who is --

So is that eliminating some people? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: The person who was number one on our list could not pass the sit-ups, who was number one on the list, came up number one. He did it five times, could not pass. And we're losing so many people with that. Surprisingly, and probably discouragingly --

So I guess just from your perspective, how many sit-ups do you have to do? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I think you had to do 35 in one minute. I'm not 175 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. sure of the exact figure, but I believe it's 35 in one minute. Then you have to do the run. And this is all state mandated.

Okay. But stay with me for a moment. You're 42 years in the Department. You're a highly decorated officer. My recollection of your background is, I think you've spent a little bit of time at the FBI Training Academy. You've been to Quantico. You've literally guarded various presidents of the United States and possibly other foreign dignitaries. How critical is it, in your opinion, for overall police work that you be able to do 35 sit-ups in a minute? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: My personal opinion, I don't think it's very critical, but the point, unfortunately, is that the state mandates these things and we can't get around them.

I understand. 176 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I think we should be flexible.

Okay. So in some classes you've had more, in some classes you've had less. Is this a class that started in 2005? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: It started in 2006.

Started in 2006. How many more classes do you expect in 2006? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Jack Gaittens. The next class would be Class 346. We intend to start them around May 7th, and after that into Fiscal '07, a class --

Fiscal '07 but post -- DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Fiscal '07, but the starting date is tentatively July 17th of '06. And the next class still starting in '06 would be Class 348, and that would start around 177 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. October 9th of '06.

Hold on for a second. There's 73 in a class now. That started when? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: That started February 13th of '06. We started with 75 recruits. Two have dropped out already.

How many anticipate to be in the May class? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: We are anticipating another 75.

How many in the July class? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Based on attrition, we are anticipating possibly up to 125.

And how many in the October class? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: 100.

So you are trying to bring in a total of 375? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: 178 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. That's correct. Again, that depends on the attrition rate.

I understand that. How many police officers do you expect to lose from retirements or other reasons in the course of Calendar Year 2006? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: The class schedule is based on maintaining the same level of manpower, that as we lose --

62/24? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: Yes, sir.

Okay. Now, how many non-Philadelphia police officers do we train at the Academy? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: That varies depending on the time of the year. Sometimes it's 12 to 14. Sometimes it could be only three or four.

These are for other police departments? 179 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GAITTENS: That is correct. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: We train SEPTA police.

Okay. Do these other entities pay for the service? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

Now, Commissioner, is it fairly accurate to say that the Police Department would be considered, in essence, a paramilitary organization? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

And it functions primarily based on command and control -- COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

-- methodology? How many individuals, based on the current provisions of the Home Rule 180 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Charter, how many people do you directly appoint to positions? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, going by the Home Rule Charter, I believe --

I'm sorry? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I'm allowed to appoint two deputy commissioners, and we now have two who are assigned to the Managing Director's Office detailed to the Philadelphia Police Department.

What was that last part again? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: There's two officers who are assigned to the Managing Director's Office detailed to the Philadelphia Police Department.

What is their rank? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Deputy commissioners.

So what are they, like assistant managing directors 181 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. or something? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Deputy managing directors.

So they're in exempt positions, and then we reroute them to get around the two-deputy limit? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

And is that it? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: That's all I can appoint.

So two deputies directly and then you get two assigned from MDO. You've known many police commissioners from across the country. What's the experience in other cities with regard to how police commissioners are able to put together their top management structure? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Almost every other major city that I know of are allowed to pick their own executive staff of the 35, 40 people. 182 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC.

So how does your management staff end up in place? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Civil service test.

They take a test? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

And they move up through the ranks and then -- COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: In the police --

What's after the four deputies? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Chief inspector. So in the Philadelphia Police Department, every promotion is by civil service test. So up until the rank of chief inspector, it's all by civil service.

And so chief inspectors would be considered a part of the -- what was that term, executive? 183 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: It's part of our executive staff.

Part of your executive staff, okay. To your knowledge, have there been discussions in the past about whether the Police Commissioner of Philadelphia should have more authority with regard to appointing the executive staff? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I believe -- not to believe. I know for a fact that it has. It's been going on for the last 10, 15, years. 16

What 17 happened? 18 COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: It's a 19 Charter change. 20

Well, I understand that. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Nothing has happened.

Well, I know that, too. 184 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. From your perspective as a Police Commissioner, a long-time officer, should the Police Commissioner of Philadelphia have more control, authority and then accountability over the top executive staff? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: My opinion is that if I'm going to be held accountable for everything that happens in the Police Department, I should be able to have my executive staff that thinks like I do, going to the direction that I go. Not that I'm saying the people there don't right now, but I think he should have the ability and the authority and the capability of putting his own executive staff in place.

And how far down in the ranks does -- down to what rank is the executive staff? I mean, I understand the police commissioner at the top, then you have chief inspectors, and then how far does it go down? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: In most 185 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. cities, it's captains and above.

So the police commissioner -- COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Or above the rank of captain. Every city is different.

Above the rank of captain, the police commissioner, what, makes an appointment or issues an order or directive, or how do you -- COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: He makes an appointment. Say, for example, Commissioner Timoney went from captain to first deputy in New York.

Okay. And then what? Police Commissioner Timoney situation in New York City as, what, first deputy? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: First deputy commissioner.

Do you serve at the pleasure of your appointing authority at that point? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: That's 186 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. correct.

So if you did a good job, you get to stay, and if you don't do a good job, what happens? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: He can have the authority to put him back to his previous rank. Now, when the new commissioner comes, he also has the authority to put him back to their previous rank.

Well, that gives you a lot of incentive to -- COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: To do a good job.

-- pay attention. Right. Interesting. Do you think a structure like that would better serve the Philadelphia Police Department? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir. That's my opinion.

That's your opinion, okay. All right. Last question. 187 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC.

Point of information on that. Madam Chair, point of information.

Yes. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo for a point of information.

Commissioner, I was confused. A year or so back when there was a rank in the Philadelphia Police Department that was for many years eliminated, I think it was called staff inspector. And you made some staff inspectors. Is that still a current rank in the Police Department? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir, it is.

How did that rank ever come back? Was it some court thing, or what? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: The FOP filed suit and they won it, and what happened is that at the time that they won it, it was like last year, I believe 188 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. it was, and there was some negotiation, because at the time, staff inspectors in the Department more or less did our internal investigations, and up until two years ago, we had one. When they won in court, we did a civil service test and I promoted so far seven.

So that is part of our organization chart, staff inspector, progression? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

That's captain, then staff inspector? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Well, you can go from captain to staff inspector and then you can skip staff inspector rank and go to full inspector. When you take the test, you take two tests, staff inspector and inspector. Say you don't score high enough to be inspector, but you score high enough to be a staff inspector. So you can actually skip the staff inspector rank 189 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. and go to full inspector.

Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Councilman.

You're welcome. Councilman Nutter, are you finished?

One last question. Commissioner, I've read news accounts, but I'd like get it directly from yourself. Since July 1st, 2003, how many officers is the Police Department down? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: I believe it's 544, but I'll give you the exact number. 617.

617 officers fewer since July 1st, 2003? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir. 190 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC.

617, did you say? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Yes, sir.

Okay. Thank you, Madam Chair.

You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.

Thank you, Madam President. I just want to make a public comment that last year's budget hearings were not a particularly pleasant experience for you and your staff, because your numbers were switched up at the last minute and you weren't aware of it. I just want to compliment you on tremendous testimony this time. You had both financial numbers at your fingertips, staffing numbers at your fingertips, very few things you're going to have to get back to us on, and I just 191 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. wanted to compliment you on the quality and substance of your testimony this year. I know you would have done the same last year had your numbers not been removed from you at the last minute. But I just wanted to make a public comment that I thought it was a tremendous set of testimony. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Thank you very much, Councilman.

Thank you.

Any other questions or comments from members of the Committee? (No response.)

Seeing none, I thank you very much. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON: Thank you. MR. McPHERSON: The next witness is Rob Dubow from the Pennsylvania Intergovernmental Cooperation Authority.

Good 192 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. afternoon and welcome. Nice seeing you again, Mr. Dubow.

Thank you, and thank you for inviting us to come today to give our comments on the Plan. My name is Rob Dubow. I'm the Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Intergovernmental Cooperation Authority. With me today is Uri Monson --

Mr. Dubow, just a minute, please. We are still trying to conduct our hearing. Please proceed.

With me today is Uri Monson, our Deputy Executive Director, and in the audience is Chairman of our Board, Lauri Kavulich, and our Director of Capital Analysis, John Daly.

We welcome you.

What I wanted to do is walk through the letter that we distributed to Councilmembers yesterday 193 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. that summarized our views on the Plan.

That would be fine.

Thank you. In reviewing the Plan, PICA asked two basic questions: Is the Plan balanced and does it address the key long-term financial issues facing the City. I'll talk first about whether the Plan is balanced. As presented, the Plan appears balanced, but it contains a series of speculative revenue enhancement and expenditure reduction assumptions that we believe do not meet the tests of reasonableness included in the PICA statute. If those speculative items were removed from the Plan, it would not be balanced. Unless the Administration can demonstrate either that those items are not speculative or that the Plan would be balanced even without those items, PICA staff will not be able to recommend to the PICA Board that it approve the Plan. 194 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Among the speculative items in the Plan, perhaps the most significant is that the Plan assumes state reimbursements that are $132 million more than the amount that's required by law. 3 million annually beginning in Fiscal Year '09 for increased reimbursements for the costs of social workers. The prevention services funding is above the amounts that the Commonwealth is required to pay under existing matching formulas. The adoption services subsidies increase would require state legislation, and according to the Plan, the increase in social worker reimbursements would require state and federal legislation. The PICA Act requires that 195 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. revenues from other governments that are included in a five-year plan be consistent with historical patterns, currently available levels, or levels in the state or federal budget. None of these revenues meet that test. The Plan also assumes that PGW will be able to repay the City's $45 million loan in Fiscal Year '09. There's a strong possibility that PGW will not be able to repay this loan during the life of this Plan. In fact, PGW's fiscal health and the repercussions of its potential financial failure are perhaps the biggest threat facing not just the Plan but the overall health of the City. The Plan also includes about $60 million for future fee increases in future government efficiencies. The fee increases would add 12 million annually beginning in Fiscal Year '09, and the future government efficiencies would provide 12 million annually beginning in Fiscal Year '10. 196 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. The Administration has yet to demonstrate that either of these assumptions is reasonable, given the cuts to departmental budgets made over the last years and the City's recent fee 7 increases. Last year, PICA was so 8 concerned about the future government 9 efficiencies that the FY06-FY10 Plan was 10 approved only when the Administration was 11 able to demonstrate they did not need 12 those savings to balance the Plan. PICA 13 further required that the Administration 14 no longer include these savings as a means to achieving a balanced budget in future plans. The Plan also assumes that the state will provide funding to completely eliminate the City's costs for the Convention Center beginning in Fiscal Year '09. While state legislation allows the Commonwealth to assume the City's share of funding for the Convention Center, it does not require the Commonwealth to assume that funding. 197 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Convention Center authority officials project the authority will require about $65 million in subsidies from FY09 through FY11. The Plan also assumes that the City will receive more than $18 million annually from the Philadelphia Parking Authority, but the Parking Authority's budget includes an $18 million payment to the City, and Parking Authority officials have told PICA staff that the City will not receive more than that million for 14 the foreseeable future. The Plan 15 includes up to 24 million a year by 2011.

16 The Plan also assumes the 17 Administration will reduce health 18 insurance costs by $46 million over the last four years of the Plan by implementing reform such as self-insurance or consolidating prescription drug purchases. It does not appear that either of these initiatives would produce the kind of savings that the Plan projects. 198 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. The combined value of the speculative items included in the Plan is over $386 million. If all of the speculative items were removed from the Plan, we would have a negative fund balance in FY08 of $51 million and then would have negative fund balances in each succeeding year reaching $330 million in Fiscal Year 2011. In addition to those speculative items, the Plan has a number of other risks that could threaten the City's ability to maintain positive fund balances. While any long-term spending plan will contain some unknowns, the substantial amount of speculative revenues in this Plan greatly increases the threat posed by these additional risks. Among the risks are the following: That the City will successfully implement a strategic marketing initiative and begin to receive revenues from the initiative in Fiscal Year '07. The Plan projects that the 199 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. 5 million in FY07 and million annually thereafter. While 4 there is clearly revenue potential from 5 this initiative, it has been under discussion for several years with no 7 tangible results. The Plan also assumes the Administration will be successful in appealing the health/medical insurance award provided to the Fraternal Order of Police. If the Administration's appeal is not successful, the award would cost $57 million over the life of the Plan. The Plan assumes the City will be able to stop the increase in the prison census and not see any increases in the cost of its prison health contracts. The Administration projects that the prison census will grow three percent in FY06 and would grow about four percent annually thereafter if the Administration took no action to slow that growth. While the Administration intends to work with the consultant to 200 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. develop ways to stop that growth, until those prison population management strategies are developed and implemented, there will continue to be a risk that these costs will exceed the Plan's projections. The Plan assumes the City will receive $25 million annually in gaming revenues beginning in Fiscal Year '09 from the state tax imposed on gaming institutions. The Plan also assumes the City will receive those revenues but does not include any increased service costs that may be associated with that gaming. The Plan also assumes that the number of shelter beds will stop growing. The Plan projects the number of shelter beds, which grew from 2,109 in Fiscal Year '03 to a projected 2,763 in FY06, will grow slightly in FY07 and then remain stable for the rest of the Plan period. Stabilizing the number of beds is dependent on the implementation of initiatives that are still being 201 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. designed. In addition, the Plan assumes there will be no increases in employee salaries after FY08. This is consistent with earlier plans, but does present an additional risk. If all of these quantifiable risky assumptions were removed from the budget, the Five-Year Plan's gap would grow to $480 million. The gap would be even larger, however, if future collective bargaining agreements contain any salary increases. Each one percent annual increase City workers got would add about $80 million over the life of the Plan, which means that future labor contracts that had one percent annual increases in salaries would push the gap to over $550 million. And that gap could get even larger in the years immediately after the end of the FY07 to FY11 Plan. By FY11, the size of the deficit is growing by over $120 million annually. If the gap 202 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC.

continued to grow at that rate, it would near a billion dollars by 2015. I'm going to move on now to our second question, which is does the Plan address the key long-term financial issues facing the City. PICA has spent much of the last six months highlighting the key long-term financial issues facing the City. We believe the Plan could have proposed any number of steps to address those critical issues. While the proposed Plan does have some limited steps to address these issues, it largely ignores them. Specifically, the Plan responded to concerns in the following ways. The first one we'll talk about is long-term obligations. The City's long-term obligations have grown much more quickly than its revenues and are putting an increasing burden on the City's General Fund. Instead of reducing the City's long-term obligations, however, the Plan 203 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. increases them. In addition to two new standard general obligation bond issues for basic infrastructure, the Plan includes $150 million for a bond issue to fund improvements to cultural assets and commercial corridors. Debt service is projected to be at least $13 million higher in each year of the Plan than it was in last year's Plan. From FY07 through FY10, the Plan includes $73 million more in debt service than did last year's Plan. And the Sinking Fund's purchased service line, which consists primarily of repayments of debt issued through authorities, is projected to be at least $92 million in each year of the Plan. 6 million. The next issue is the Rainy Day Fund. PICA has long recommended the City should establish such a fund. A Rainy Day Fund would help the City build a contingency against the effects of downturns in the economy or other 204 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. potential events that could have a negative impact on the General Fund. This Plan does not recommend the establishment of a Rainy Day Fund. The City's tax structure: As has been documented in a number of analyses, the City's tax structure puts it at a competitive disadvantage. For a variety of reasons, taxes in Philadelphia are substantially higher than taxes in other cities. In order to narrow the gap, the City must realign its tax rate so as to be in line with other jurisdictions. The Plan slightly accelerates the business privilege tax cuts included in last year's Plan, but does not significantly narrow the competitive disadvantage. The total value over five years of the accelerated cuts is $24 million. The Administration has proposed legislation that would lock those rates into place for three years, but as described during testimony before City Council in November, PICA believes 205 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. the benefits of having a predictable set of tax rates makes it prudent to have tax rates that are set in law for the life of the Five-Year Plan. The Plan also proposes to eliminate the low-income tax credit that was enacted two years ago. If that credit is not eliminated, the Administration will have to reduce revenue estimates by million in FY10 12 and 30 million in FY11. 13 The next issue I want to talk 14 about is the unfunded pension liability, 15 which is too large and has been growing. As PICA recommended, the City has lowered the fund's investment earnings assumption from nine percent to eight and three-quarters. That change reduces the risk the City will miss its earnings assumption, but even at eight and three-quarters, the City's earnings assumption is well above the median of eight percent in other cities recommended. 206 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. And while we're happy that the City took that action, the Plan does not propose implementation of any of the pension fund benefits restructuring recommendations included in the pension paper. Changes to the pension benefit formula are essential if the City is to reduce its unfunded pension liability without incurring dramatic increases in pension costs. And, finally, infrastructure.

The City is grossly underfunding its infrastructure maintenance and improvements. The FY07 to FY11 Plan includes the same insufficient level of funding for infrastructure as did last year's Plan. An analysis by the City Planning Commission said the City needed to invest $185 million annually to keep its infrastructure in good condition. Instead, the Capital Program includes only $52 million in FY07, with slightly lower amounts from FY08 through FY11. It's likely that there will eventually be 207 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. substantial costs stemming from the Administration's failure to invest in its infrastructure. That concludes my testimony, and we'd be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you very much. Mr. Dubow, you did not include the $25 million the Administration has included in the revenues of the Five-Year Plan for patrolling state highways. Does this mean that PICA believes the City will receive these funds? And I know that's one of Councilman Rizzo's questions.

From our discussions of people and from looking at last year's state budget, we believe that what the state will do is patrol the highway with its own officers. So what the City would need to do is take those revenues out of the Plan, because I don't believe they're going to get them, and to 208 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. keep the Plan balanced, make a corresponding reduction in the number of officers who would have been patrolling the highways.

Thank you. The Administration has proposed the repeal of what has become known as the Cohen bill. I'm sure you remember that.

Yes.

Is there any reason as to why you have not included that in your list of concerns?

Our assumption was that one way or the other, that issue will resolve during the Council process, and if the bill is not repealed, then the Administration would have to make changes to the Plan to keep it in balance.

What is that, $46 million?

It's roughly $45 million over the last two years of the 209 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. Plan.

Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.

It's 45 or 42?

It's about 45 over two years.

That most likely would go immediately back into the economy, in my estimation. I mean, it's going to be a lot of money for people that are getting back to buy treasury bills. I would suspect that the necessities of life will be purchased as a result of that tax reduction, things like appliances and clothing and things that people need to survive, right back into the economy. So I think the analysis on that particular bill needs to be done in that regard as opposed to just the loss of the tax revenue. I may be alone in this, but 210 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. isn't his testimony somewhat scary? I don't get the impression that the same level of urgency that should be here relative to this testimony is here. I mean, these revenues that he has articulated are extremely speculative, and I don't know how we even in good conscience allow this to go forward. The question I have for PICA and the Board is, as Sean Connery said to Kevin Costner in the Untouchables, what are you prepared to do? I mean, we've heard this kind of testimony before, not I guess at this particular urgency, but what is within PICA's ability or authority to effect a change in this whole situation?

Let me try to answer it this way: If the Plan is not changed from the way it looks now, we as a staff would propose to the Board that they not approve the Plan.

What happens if the Plan is not approved by 211 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. the Board?

The City then has to take corrective action to demonstrate that it can bring it back into balance. If it doesn't, eventually the state begins withholding funds.

Do you see that scenario as a potential?

It's a potential if the City doesn't make changes to its Plan. Our hope is that the City does.

And what is the time line you're looking at to make this decision?

We have 30 days from when the Plan is officially submitted to us to make that decision.

And how many days have ticked off the clock?

It has not been officially submitted to us.

It doesn't have to be submitted until we pass it?

Right. 212 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC.

So if we send this over, the clock starts ticking and you guys will decide whether to approve it or not?

That's correct.

I want to go back to another looming fiscal concern. That's the City's pension liability. We had extensive debate when the Pension Board was here, and the Administration gave us the impression that by changing the earnings assumption and investing in, of all things, real estate at a time when real estate is beginning its slide the other way, we would correct the unfunded liability problem. Could you share your thoughts on that issue?

I think that's overly optimistic. I don't think that those actions by themselves would correct the unfunded liability problem. They might help around the edges. I think in the long term, in order to get at that 213 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. problem without increasing the City's costs exponentially, you have to look at changing the benefits.

I know you talked a bit about benefits for pensioners going forward.

Yes; not for existing pensioners. It's not really clear that you can do that under existing law, but for new employees.

Has PICA attempted an analysis of that --

Yes.

-- what would be necessary going forward with new employees?

We have. We did a paper that we released in December that contains a number of recommendations for changing benefits.

Has that been circulated to anyone?

It was circulated to Councilmembers and it was put on our 214 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. website.

I want to go back to the issue now of infrastructure and capital expenditures. I mean, it seems in many ways that -- I have this discussion with Councilman Nutter -- that we're asking to go into debt for an additional $250 million or so and only putting 50 of that towards what we already own and need to maintain, and most of the other money is going to projects that may be or intended to go to projects that may be well meaning and worthwhile, but we seem to be ignoring totally, almost totally, the existing infrastructure of the City. What effect is that going to have on us long term?

Over the long term, it will mean that the condition of City facilities will decline.

And get more expensive to correct.

And get more expensive to correct or get to the point 215 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. where they're not usable. So you'll have a choice of putting in major investments or not using facilities.

That's all for now. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.

Councilman Kenney's statement just reminded me of a statement this morning. So I don't know. Maybe when Mr. Dubow is finished, the Budget Director can come forward. This morning in the media, the Capital Programs Office Executive, Mr. Hess, was quoted, and the report, and I'm paraphrasing, is that there's parts of the building, City Hall building, that are falling into the sidewalk and that they had to go to the extreme to put netting around some of these attachments, architectural attachments to the 216 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. building. Obviously they're concerned about the public safety of the building falling into the footpath. I just can't imagine that there isn't money available, and we have to have an executive of the Administration go to the media and say that the building is falling onto the sidewalk. I mean, that really gives a lot of confidence to people that walk around this area, that they had to put nets around this stuff because there's no money to repair it. I mean, I think that's your point.

Yes.

So when you're finished, I'd like the Budget Director come and explain why we can't take care of public safety. I mean, that's all we need to have, is someone injured or killed as a result of an object falling from this building. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'd appreciate that after Mr. Dubow the Budget Director come up to address the 217 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. fact that we've got a dangerous condition here at City Hall reported in the media today, what we're going to do about it.

Okay. Do you want an answer now?

I can wait until Mr. Dubow is finished.

Okay. Fine. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Dubow, thank you for your comments and for your letter. I'd like to focus in on two areas. One is on the unfunded pension liability. Either based on the Five-Year Plan or any discussions that you're able to discuss, has there been any proposal to significantly attack this particular issue in the current Five-Year Plan?

The Plan includes a 218 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. proposal to reduce the earnings assumption on the pension fund, which will help make our earnings assumption look a little more like those on other funds. I don't think they were really proposals that got at the structural -- the long-term unfunded liability.

And in your opinion, what kind of actions would need to take place in order to get to the long-term structural problem?

I think you need to look at the benefits that new employees receive and look at changing them. I think you also probably want to start offering a defined contribution plan in addition to the defined benefit plan. The key benefit of that is that it really switches the investment risk over from the employer to the employee. At the same time you do that, you need to make sure that you make investment counseling, good investment counseling, available to employees. 219 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC.

And are you suggesting that solely for new employees or for any current employee who might want to make -- I mean, why would a current employee make a shift?

It depends on how long they've been in the system and how old they are. Depending on your age and your years of service, it may make sense to go into a defined contribution if you think that investing in yourself will be better for you in the long run. And to answer the first part of your question, I think that should be offered to new and existing employees as an option.

Short of that, it sounds like there needs to be some -- we're presently at what's referred to, I guess, as the minimum municipal obligation level --

That's correct.

-- in terms of payment? And the current unfunded 220 3/7/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060001, ETC. liability level is?

We are at about 60 percent funded.

Is there a standard in the pension industry as to where we should be?

I think --

Other than 100.

Well, I think it's 70 percent you're able to pay for all current employees and retirees, but not future employees. So you want to be at at least 70 percent.