Thank you, Madam President. I certainly agree with all that has been said here in terms of our Commissioner raising -- trying to raise money under very difficult circumstances. And I, too, hope that we can find a way to process these issues and give her the help she needs to do a job. She does a wonderful job for us under trying situations, and it shouldn't be as trying as it is. So I agree with all that has been said from my colleagues, and certainly commend Vivian Miller on the job shes does. Thank you.
You are welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter. 41 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 Ms. Reed, just bear with us a minute, please. I can't believe that year after year the Clerk of Quarter Sessions comes in here, and it is the same issue. When the office is generating over $3.8 million, I don't understand what the problem is for her to get the employees to fill the vacancies that she has so that, in fact, we would be collecting more revenues. It just doesn't make sense to me. Are there any other questions or comments from members of the committee? I thought Councilman Nutter wanted to ask questions, but I understand his light was on and he has left. I would suggest, Ms. Reed, that you get together with the Clerk of Quarter Sessions before the end of the day, resolve this issue. Because I think we are all of the opinion that something has to be corrected here for not just the moment that we sit here and talk. So would you please make certain 42 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 that this is corrected.
Thank you. I see no other questions. Ms. Miller, I would appreciate your getting back to us and let us know how this works out.
We do have copies of your testimony. It will be given to the stenographer and transcribed in full. I would ask you, if you will, to please abbreviate your testimony.
Good morning, Madam President and members of City Council. Before I start my testimony, I would like to introduce some of my staff. To my left is Mr. Ralph Wynder, my Chief Deputy. To my right is Anthony DeRose, my Finance Director. We have Jim Tangert 43 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 here, our Administrative Officer. And I have one of my new deputies here, who has been in my office for over 27 years, we just promoted her, Alba Collazo.
I submitted, as you stated earlier, my testimony. And I am glad to report that this year we project, if I could just be very brief, revenues of approximately close to $3.8 million. And our total approved budget for this year is $3,304, 493. We are going to be showing a profit to the city of almost close to half a million dollars. Next year, keeping the same pattern, our present staffing level, but increasing our services, as you are aware -- and I want to personally thank the Council President and that gentleman to your right, Charlie, for arranging a meeting with Dianne Reed and everybody last year to help us get our productivity monies for the computerization of our office, which, if everything works out, 44 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 hopefully in 60 days we will be up and running. We are just going through the little glitches right now, some last-minute items of machinery -- I mean, hardware. If anybody wants to go online now, you can see, basically, our website. And it is under Philadelphia.gov/wills. You can see -- any citizen can go on now. And there is questions that people always call our office, why should they have a will, and different questions which is very helpful to the citizens of Philadelphia. Our next year budget, our request is within our present staffing levels, and it shows a 3 percent increase, which is a union -- or, I am sorry, all city employees, rank and file, will be receiving. So we are not asking for any additional employees. We will be doing additional services. And if everything goes well, we will be showing another profit to the City and County of Philadelphia next year. I just wanted to state that we are one of the most user-friendly offices, as you 45 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 are aware. We are open Wednesday nights to the public for marriage licenses. And we still provide citizens to the citizens of North Philadelphia and Northeast Philadelphia, where we have our probate clerks go several times a week to make it easier for people to probate estates.
Great. So, based on your testimony, it appears that you are satisfied with the Administration's proposed budget; am I correct?
Well, I think this is my 26th time here, and I think we have -- with respect to our new Budget Director, Dianne, and Charlie from your staff, who is a former budget director, so, you know, we have opened up the line of communications. And I think we all are on the same page. If you spend some money and fund an office correctly, you will make money.
And this is not really affecting the citizens of Philadelphia directly. So we get the proper funding, we will bring additional monies into the city.
Well, we congratulate you and your staff for a job well done.
Congratulations. You better get out while you are ahead.
I hope tonight's meeting is just as good. MR. McPHERSON: The next department is the Sheriff's Office.
I just wanted to know how much a marriage license costs now?
Maybe we should raise it to $1,000, and it will help a lot of people, I'm sure.
What are you trying to say? Please identify yourself, proceed with your testimony. The stenographer has a copy of your testimony, it will be transcribed in full. I would ask you, if you will, to please abbreviate your testimony. SHERIFF JOHN D. GREEN: Good morning, Madam President and members of City Council. My name is John Green, I am the Sheriff of the City and County of Philadelphia. In brief, the Philadelphia Sheriff's Office is in need of additional personnel. When we opened up the Criminal Justice Center, we had an agreed number of deputies to be assigned to that facility at 156. We are currently 27 positions short. And through reassignments, change of job classifications for new hires, we have -- we 48 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 are in the position of hiring new deputy sheriff officers, and we are in the process of doing that right now. We are going to need an additional deputy sheriff officers. 6 So our formal request this morning 7 is for an allocation of $14,398,362 for Fiscal 8 Year 2007, of which $665,552 will be used for 9 the hiring of 16 new deputy sheriff officers. 10 That concludes my testimony. 11
I believe you are requesting additional funding of $655,552 for additional deputies. 14 SHERIFF GREEN: That's right. 15
Was this included 16 in your budget request of the Administration? SHERIFF GREEN: Initially we requested 57 additional deputies. We met with the finance department last week, and we agreed on the hiring of 16 new deputies.
Did you say 57, and then you agreed to 16? That's a big difference. SHERIFF GREEN: It is a big difference. And sometimes when you are 49 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 negotiating, you have to look at reality. And the fact of the matter is that our immediate concern is the Criminal Justice Center. Without going into too many details about our staffing level and the processes we use to accommodate the needs at the justice center, that is our immediate need. But the 57 deputies reflected being able to place additional personnel throughout our office.
So, with that being said, what did the Administration say about your additional deputies request? 15
Dianne Reed, Budget 16 Director. We had a lengthy discussion about deployment of sheriffs to several offices. And it was my understanding that, in acquiring additional sheriff's deputies, that in fact the department would cut its overtime so that the additional staff would be budget neutral. And some of that could include redeployment of staff from some of the places where they are posted which are not mission 50 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 critical. So that it would be up to 16, but not necessarily 16, but the entire amount to be budget neutral through reduction of overtime.
What is your overtime? SHERIFF GREEN: Right now we are running about $1.5 million.
I beg your pardon? SHERIFF GREEN: I think we are running about $1.5 million. I will tell you in one second.
In the current year, I believe it is -- I am just being told it is 2 and a half million dollars, and 2.6 in '07. That's a lot of money for overtime. So your 16 additional deputies could be taken from the overtime money, and you are still going to have plenty of overtime money in your budget. SHERIFF GREEN: We are going to have overtime. And I was very candid when I met with the finance department that the Philadelphia Sheriff's Office does not control 51 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 the amount of overtime that is needed in carrying out our functions. For example, last week we received a phone call from a judge who had been threatened. That required using our sheriffs, our deputy sheriffs, to escort the person to and from home. We may have judges who are working overtime; that is, beyond the traditional hours. We have had judges work on holidays. If they have a jury sitting and they didn't -- they do not want to inconvenience the jury by keeping the jury any longer than is necessary, they will work through the holidays. So many times --
Does that happen very frequently? SHERIFF GREEN: Not frequently, but it happens enough to impact on our overtime usage. We also have a number of people who are requested in court. As you know, the more risks require more people coming into court. So whenever the police department enters into 52 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 an aggressive approach to -- in arrest, the final byproduct of that is, you have more people actually going to court, more people being transported from the various correctional facilities, and that also requires the use of overtime.
Yes, the Chair recognizes Councilman Ramos for a point of information.
Thank you, Madam President. But, Mr. Sheriff, is not your overtime more in the transportation of prisoners? Is that where your overtime, big overtime, is at? Correct me if I am wrong. SHERIFF GREEN: That's where the bulk of our overtime is, is in the transportation of prisoners. And, as I stated, we do not control the number of people who are requested each and every day by the court system.
That's what I 53 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 suspected. That this is something you have no 3 control because, when you have to move prisoners, you have to move them. SHERIFF GREEN: That's correct.
And it could be before 5:00, it could be well after 5' clock. And, in addition, you have these other things that come up, the security of judges and other matters, that add to that burden. Thank you, Madam President. I will ask some questions in round.
Hi. Good morning. Thank you, Madam President, good morning, Sheriff. SHERIFF GREEN: Councilwoman.
I have a followup question to Council President Verna's. And really just a question, actually. Do you provide the same escort and security services to DHS workers that are -- 54 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 feel threatened for some of the home visits? Because that's been a question that one of the supervisors actually has called and talked to me about. They say they need security. Would the Sheriff's Office be the agency that would provide that type of security? SHERIFF GREEN: Well, any law enforcement or security issue that is court related, we would handle. So if a family has been adjudicated through the court system in any way, it would be the Sheriff's Office's responsibility to provide security. Of course, we do not have enough people to provide security for DHS. And, in an ideal world, that would be an area of our responsibility. Quite frankly, in the ideal world, it would be the responsibility of the Sheriff's Office to provide security for witnesses. And recently we have seen a celebrated case where there was some criticism 55 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 about the number of witnesses who felt insecure and were threatened by the mere nature that they would have to testify. So in an ideal world, we would have enough people to provide adequate security and enforcement for the court system. Unfortunately, we do not have an ideal world.
So, then, only if a family is -- or the parents or caretaker is an adjudicated person -- SHERIFF GREEN: That's right
-- would you be able to provide security for a caseworker SHERIFF GREEN: That's right. Which means, if a DHS worker was going to a home as a result of a court order or some court regulations or some court supervision, then we would be responsible for that. Technically, we are responsible.
You are welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Ramos. 56 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06
Thank you, Madam President. Sheriff, are you requesting an additional $600,000 plus for the extra deputy sheriffs, apart from the response that -- or, at least the way I understood it from Ms. Reed, where the Administration has asked you to take -- bring down the overtime and use that money to be able to fill the -- was it 11 16? 16 positions? 12 Or are you asking us that, apart 13 from what we heard from Ms. Reed, that you 14 still want $600,000 to add 16 more deputy 15 sheriffs? 16 SHERIFF GREEN: Here is what my understanding of our agreement was: That we would request, and the Administration would support that request, for an additional 600,000 plus to hire additional deputy sheriff officers. Of course, the more people you have, the less need you have for overtime. Meaning that, if you have an additional 16 deputy sheriff officers, then you may be able to put 57 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 two vans, two additional vans, on the road. And the two additional vans will handle more prisoners, thus you will not need to have two vans doing three and four runs, which requires overtime. And, so, needless to say, that, if you hire more people, of course your overtime should go down. And we have demonstrated that we can control our overtime. I think the Administration would agree that, for a period of time, we really controlled our overtime as a result of a request by the Administration. But sometimes it becomes problematic because of the nature of our job and the volume of work that comes from -- comes to us by way of the police department, by way of prosecutions by the District Attorney's Office, and by way of circumstances, as Councilwoman Miller raised, where you have families, you have children who are being affected by whatever, and there was a need for the Sheriff's Office to provide its services.
I am sorry. Would 58 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 you interrupt me a minute, please, because I didn't think your question was answered. SHERIFF GREEN: The answer is, we want an additional 600,000 plus, specifically $665,552.
Understood. SHERIFF GREEN: And then, as a result of hiring more people, the overtime should decrease.
So are we saying you are going to hire the additional 13 deputies, and you are going to subtract that 14 amount from the million whatever point 15 million dollars that you have in overtime? Is 16 that going to come out of the overtime money? It is a simple question. SHERIFF GREEN: Well, all things being equal, I can sit here and say that you should see a decrease in the overtime in proportion to the number of people that we hired, all things being equal. But that's not factoring in possible events that may occur. For example, if we have a situation where there is a need for a more deputies to 59 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 work in Family Court, or if there is a need to transport more prisoners, then, of course, you will not see that proportion in overtime to the number of people we hire.
Madam President. Sheriff, I am with you on that, if you need more deputy sheriffs, you need more deputy sheriffs. And at least I understand you have made this case before. I understand that. What I am hearing is that you still want $600,000 in addition to your budget because you have a lot of overtime that comes, and some of it comes unexpected, the transportation, security, DHS, and so forth. But I believe that what I heard from Ms. Reed -- and maybe Ms. Reed can come to the witness table -- that the Administration's response was -- Ms. Reed, you feel free to correct me. What I heard was the Administration said, take it out of your over time money to be able to do the 16 new hires. Am I correct in that understanding of your statement, Ms. Reed? 60 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06
Dianne Reed, Budget Director. Yes, sir, you are. The sheriff is running over $660,000 in overtime this year above budget. I mean, that money would pay for these positions. As the sheriff stated, he can control his overtime. And we shared with him the fact that, because it is critical to the First Judicial District that the courtrooms over there at the level of 156 positions be manned, that it was important in this case, unlike the police department, to hire the people to man -- to person those courtrooms, or staff those courtrooms, rather, than to spend money in overtime.
Okay. So, Sheriff, are you still requesting an additional $600,000, apart from -- different than what the Administration is saying now? They are telling you to use your OT money to bring in 16 new deputies, and you are saying -- and I am with your argument, Mr. Sheriff -- that you never know when -- there has to be -- there is overtime in the work 61 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 that you do, and that overtime money has to be there.
The overtime money is there. There is $2.6 million for '07, and I believe in '06 it was over $2 million in overtime. SHERIFF GREEN: May I just have a minute, please.
That's a lot of money in overtime. And I understand that a lot of things happen.
Councilman Ramos, the answer to your question is that we are not asking for an additional $600,000. What we are going to do is hire people and use the -- part of the $2.5 million.
I just want to make sure that you have got what you need to do the work that you do.
I got what I need. I got the okay to hire 16 additional people, and 62 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 that's the bottom line.
Thank you, Madam President. Sheriff Green, I just have a question about the deputies that you had to 14 remove from the Criminal Justice Center to 15 take over the staffing of Community Court and 16 Traffic Court. 17 Where are the Community Courts? 18
It is one Community 19 Court. And, actually, the Community Court 20 deals with, quote, unquote, nuisance crimes. And they are meeting in an office building, I think it is at Broad and Race.
There is only one 63 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 Community Court?
Now, it is my understanding that the police department were always -- they were always located in Traffic Court. Are they still there? In other words, the police liaison officer is in each courtroom.
There is a police liaison person who actually presents the police officer's case, if you will. Police officers, as a rule, are not summoned to Traffic Court to present the case against the motorist, and that is the responsibility of the liaison person.
But I don't know how they justify of having one of your deputies in there, when they have a police officer already present. And you already have -- you just have one Community Court. How many officers, 64 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 your officers, are scheduled for that Community Court?
Two. Two police officers -- I mean, two deputy sheriff officers. But, Councilman --
Councilman, I think I can answer your question by simply saying that we have revisited deployment of personnel to Traffic Court, and there will be a change in that scheme. We are going to have to make the hard decision about deployment. And Traffic Court, of course, as you said, because there is a police presence in the form of a liaison person -- and while an argument can be made that if a person is busy presenting a case, he or she cannot monitor what's going on in the courtroom in terms of security -- the fact of the matter is that there is a police officer there. 65 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 And, because of that, we are going to, in essence, bottom line, reduce the number of people that we have at Traffic Court.
Point of information on that subject, please. Madam President, point of information.
Yes. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo for a point of information.
Why aren't we being reimbursed by the state for your services?
That is a good question. I can tell you that in the past, when the Sheriff's Office does work that allows for reimbursement, we really do not see the money. The Philadelphia Sheriff's Office doesn't see the money; the money goes into the General Fund. 66 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 And, so, that will not impact on our individual budget. And, quite frankly, I don't know if it helps the city.
They are city employees? I think there is some confusion on 67 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 who is on first, and whether it is -- I was always led to believe that it was a state agency, Traffic Court. But it is under the -- Charlie, I would never question Mr. McPherson's knowledge of who is what and where. But I think we will need to talk about it later to clear it up and see exactly what's what. Because if we are entitled to some reimbursement -- but Mr. McPherson just pointed out to me that the state contribution has never really developed. And I will come back around. I apologize for taking Councilman Kelly's time.
I got the impression from the past that Traffic Court is self-contained; that they raise their revenue, and that they have the ability to spend money.
Now, of course, as you said, Mr. McPherson knows more about the 68 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 budget than you and I put together tenfold. And, so, I would have to yield to him. But the answer to the question, and the answer to the concept, is that we are going to move people out of Traffic Court and assign those people to the Criminal Justice Center.
So you are going to be bringing them back to the Criminal Justice Center?
When did you take over the responsibility of the Community Court and Traffic Court? Was that just recently?
Community Court was about a year ago. Traffic Court may have been about three years ago.
What was the -- well, I would like to know what the rationale was in doing that. In other words, was it the police department or was it the judges or who initiated that request that you, the Sheriff's Office, take over the responsibility of 69 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 safeguarding the courts?
The request came from the Traffic Court judges. And the argument was that it is a court, one; two, as I mentioned before, the police officers assigned to Traffic Court was there primarily to present the case of the police officer; three, that there was an increase in volume of people going to Traffic Court. And, so, those arguments were made. And because we take our responsibility very seriously as far as being the enforcement arm of the court system, we agreed to handle Traffic Court's security. We also, if I may add, we also have prisoners each and every day that we take to Traffic Court, and we maintain a cell room in Traffic Court. Now, we would have done that regardless of this agreement that we made with Traffic Court. And the people who are taken to Traffic Court are people who are already incarcerated; but they have Traffic Court matter, as well as their criminal concerns. 70 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 So we will transport them many times from the CJC, if their subpoenas are coordinated, or, if necessary, from a correctional facility to Traffic Court.
Now, I just have the opinion that Traffic Court does have city employees there, primarily. And what happens is that, they do come to -- they come into City Council each and every year with their budget request and whatnot. And I know that most years that I know of, that there has always been a surplus, and it goes right into the General Fund. And that has been happening over the years. I just wanted to know why all of the sudden they wanted to shift the responsibility to the Sheriff's Office. Because I know for years they have had police presence in Traffic Court. And Community Court, I'm not too familiar with that. But they still have police assigned to Traffic Court, I believe.
Liaison officers and additional officers. So I think that maybe you could -- and I think you are doing it from your testimony today -- that you are bringing some of those officers back into the Justice Center.
Which we need them more so. Thank you, Madam President.
In your testimony and in the following questioning and answers, you said the $665,000 will be used to hire 16 additional deputies, and after conversation said that is to be offset by a decrease in 72 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 over time spending. Are there any other additional increases in your personnel budget?
Well, there is the 3 percent that was mentioned earlier, that is going to all city employees. There is no 8 other increase. As a matter of fact, if you look at the personal service contract area of our budget, you will see where we have -- we went from -- and I am just approximating -- maybe six or seven vendors, to maybe three at this point. So we are working real hard to decrease other aspects, the cost of other aspects of the Sheriff's Office, too. Now --
-- quite frankly, I would love, I would love -- we have people who are not Civil Service appointees, people who have gone without a raise for five years. They are people who are Civil Service exempt. 73 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 And I would love to give those people a raise. And, hopefully, if we demonstrate that we were able to do a better job with our overtime with the new hires, in some manner or form we will be able to get additional monies to give a raise to the people who have been without money for the past five years.
The reason I ask is because I don't have the budget detail in front of me, it is not presented in your testimony. So I was just wondering what was your budget last year and what is your budget this year, and what was your budget in terms of Class 100 last year and what's your budget this year.
Excuse me. This is Tyrone Bynum, who is the Finance Director in the Sheriff's Office.
Good afternoon. Tyrone Bynum, Finance Director, Philadelphia Sheriff's Office.
Last Fiscal Year, 2006, 74 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 our total appropriations was $12,580,038.
Next fiscal year would be $10,238,668. And that's without the additional deputies.
Sorry. I don't know where you are getting your information.
But we are looking at the budget in brief, and the figures that you are giving are --
I am generally speaking in terms of salaries. I am not including the overtime or the temporary seasonal. I think that was the question. In Class 100.
Actually, in Fiscal Year 75 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 2006, we were appropriated, it looks like, $12,982,075.
That's includes Class 200, 300, and 400. I thought you were asking just in terms of Class 100.
The budget in brief we have shows $13.3 million last year and $13.7 million proposed for next year.
Let's just deal with personnel services right now. And let's, actually, just deal with your numbers. And if we use your numbers for a second, the increase of 9 point -- roughly $9.8 to $10.23, it is an increase in Class 100 of approximately how much?
And all of that is attributable to the 3 percent increase? 76 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06
Now let's deal with the discrepancy between the budget book and your numbers. If it was $13.3 in the budget in brief for the last fiscal year, why are your numbers at $9.8? Because even for personnel services, it is at $12.5.
According to the budget in brief book for Fiscal Year '06, the total was $13.3. But even the personnel services is at $12.5, almost $12.6, but the numbers you gave us were $9.8.
Yes. That's including the overtime. I thought we were talking about 77 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 strictly salaries. But including overtime, yes, it is $12.5.
The uniformed personnel and the civilian personnel. That would be city employees, Civil Service, through arbitration.
So in terms of the increase in overtime, how can you spend that money?
In terms of overtime costs, how can that money be spent?
Yes. If there is seemingly not necessarily -- well, the numbers for last year say $12.58 in terms of personnel 78 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 services. The numbers for next year say $12.95. But you are looking for $665,000 to hire additional deputies. 5
There is not, 10 according to the budget in brief book or 11 according to your numbers. 12 Even if you are going from $9.8 for 13 last year, to $10.23 for next year, that's 14 still only $350,000. That's not $665,000. 15
As I stated, we met 16 on -- we met last week with the city. And this document reflects what was going to be presented and what was the city's projection prior to the meeting that we had last week. Now, if your question is, how is the overtime going to be spent, it appears that --
I guess my question is real simple, I am just trying to figure out, because some of the budget detail 79 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 wasn't in front of us, if you can convert overtime for the hiring of those additional 4 deputies, can you convert overtime for other 5 personnel services? 6 Because clearly your overtime costs 7 are increasing to hire 16 -- clearly your 8 personnel costs are increasing for the hiring 9 of 16 additional deputies, but it is not 10 665,000 more money in your budget, according 11 to your numbers or according to the budget in 12 brief. 13
You want to know if we 14 can use the overtime -- if we are going to use 15 the overtime to hire 16 additional deputies, 16 can we use the overtime in another capacity?
For other personnel services. Dianne, can we do that? If we are using the overtime to hire 16 additional deputies, can we use the remainder of the overtime or a portion of the remainder of the overtime for other personnel services? 80 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06
Dianne Reed, Budget Director. We are hoping that the sheriff will work with us to achieve a bottom line that is the same as what we have budgeted, that that is the critical issue for us.
I got that part, Ms. Reed. But if the number in the budget testimony says $665,000 for additional 12 deputies, the budget for personnel services 13 does not increase by that amount from the 14 current fiscal year to the next fiscal year. 15 What has been said is that somehow 16 the $665,000 will be used to hire 16 additional deputies, hopefully will be offset by a decrease in overtime.
The implication there is that, one way or the other, it will be covered. So my question is that, clearly in terms of the budget in brief, you are saying somehow you are going to provide money between 81 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 overtime and the other cost to hire your additional deputies. I am asking -- and this is supposed to be offset by decreases in overtime. I am saying, whatever other overtime can be decreased, is that money available or should it be available for other personnel services?
It would depend on 11 whether the services are justified. 12 I mean, we are trying to keep our 13 work force costs down overall because of all 14 the nonwage costs that go along with new 15 positions. 16 So that, really, to agree in the case of the sheriff to increase the number of positions, you know, kind of flies in the face of our general approach to other departments. And that is because of the assistance that the First Judicial District really does need from the original agreement in the courtrooms. So I would hope that there would not be additional hiring. Although, since every position would have to come through the budget 82 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 office, we would look on it on a case-by-case basis.
Case-by-case basis. I understand the need for the 7 deputies. I am not questioning the need for 8 the 16 deputies. I am not questioning the 9 665,000. I am not questioning an overtime 10 figure because, of course, that's not totally 11 predictable. 12 What I am questioning is why a 13 personnel budget cannot be increased for 14 exempt employees who haven't received a raise 15 in five years, when exempt employees within 16 other parts of the government, who seemingly work overtime, but are not paid for overtime, are compensated in a number of other ways and, more importantly, have received increases.
Well, I am a little confused by that. Because our records show that the department got a 7/1/04 3 percent increase. There was a percent increase on 7/1/05. There is a planned percent increase for 7/1/04 and a percent increased for 2007. 83 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 So I do not know who those people are who did not receive increases.
My record doesn't show who received it, just that these -- this in the aggregate was granted.
I can clear that up. That was -- they were, actually, changes in positions. They were not salary increases; they were, actually, people who changed positions and changed responsibility, and there was an increase. And those increases were made possible because we had -- we would have someone resign or leave the Sheriff's Office. And we would take a portion of the person who has left, their salary, and give it to the new appointee; that is, for someone who is taking on additional responsibility. But, in answer to your question, if the Administration agrees, I would be more than glad to use the remainder or a portion of the remainder of the overtime costs for other 84 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 personnel services, as you described.
Just in general, I mean, I am just really trying to look at what the budget detail is and what the increases are. And if there is a 3 percent -- if there is budgeted a 3 percent for nonexempt and exempt, I think that it could be included or should be included. Or, as we approve a budget, we know what's budgeted and what's not budgeted in terms of personnel costs.
The raises that have been budgeted are for all Class 100 positions, which would be all the positions. And, you know, the difference between the budget in brief and the detail really is indemnities in Class 500, which don't show up in the budget in brief.
You are welcome. 85 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 Are there any other questions or comments from members of the committee of these witnesses? Thank you all very much.
The County Commissioners Office was supposed to come in at 1:15. We received communication that something has come up, and they have asked us to schedule them for another day. Therefore, this committee will stand in recess until 1:45, at which time the City Controller will be in and, at 2:15, the Board of Revision of Taxes. So we will stand in recess until 1:45. (Short recess.)
The Committee of the Whole will now reconvene with the Public Hearing. MR. McPHERSON: Our first department is the City Controller's Office.
Good afternoon. Welcome. Please identify yourself for the 86 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 record, proceed with your testimony. THE HONORABLE ALAN BUTKOVITZ: Good afternoon, Madam President.
And, excuse me, before you commence. We do have a copy of your testimony, it has been given to the stenographer. She will transcribe it in full. I would ask you to please abbreviate your testimony.
Good afternoon, Madam President. I am joined today by my First Deputy Controller Harvey Rice, our Post-Audit Deputy Al Scaperotto and Pre-Audit Deputy John Thomas, as well as the Administrative Services Director Andrea Rose. The Mayor's proposed budget for our department is $7,835,000, which was, essentially, a repeat of last year's budget, with a 3 percent increase for nonexempt employee salaries. That proposal doesn't allow for any of the new initiatives that I am interested in embarking on as the new controller, first initiative being an increase in the number of 87 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 annual performance audits. Controller Saidel brought the performance audit to Philadelphia, and the office has been performing two a year. New York City, by contrast, performs 36 a year. It is our goal, since we audit 40 agencies, financial audit during the year, to, during the course of my term, get around to performing a performance audit on each of those agencies; therefore, the objective is to get to ten performance audits a year. We are making efforts to contribute towards this goal by reducing the number of hours that we are investing in other audits. Right now we do a single audit, we do a citywide audit, we do departmental audits, and there is some duplication in that process. The managers in our office have developed a plan which will result in a reduction of 9,000 man-hours a year on the departmental audits, which will be contributed towards this performance audit goal. We would probably need about 20,000 hours to reach our performance goal audit, of 88 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 which we have developed almost half out of those cuts. The office has had a highly successful record of accomplishment in the performance audits that it has performed. For example, in its audit of the recycling program, we found that only 6 percent -- 6 percent diversion unit in terms of recyclables that were recycled; whereas, 40 percent was the achievable goal. The difference between those two figures yielded a potential savings of $17 million a year, if the city was able to achieve that goal. 6 million. It has been a rule of thumb in our office that an investment in an auditor generally achieves multiples of that employee's salary in savings to the city. By the same token, the review of the $60 million homeless program demonstrated the lack of certain long-term solutions for the 89 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 homeless with mental and substance abuse problems, and our audit served as a template for significant reforms in that program. Secondly, we are interested in getting a better handle in my role as a member of the city's Board of Pensions. Not only with respect to enabling the Pension Board to have a very sophisticated approach to investment decisions, but also making use of the city's ability to use proxies in corporate governance battles. There has been an increasing trend in the country to regress from the defined benefit pension, for example, and there is even some discussion of that being a goal in city government. We are highly critical of that approach. We believe those funds have been earned and are part of the compensation that has been promised by corporate America to employees in the future for work that they have already performed. And that the forum for these battles will be moving out of legislative chambers and 90 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET - 3/21/06 into corporate Board and shareholder meetings. And Philadelphia should be prepared to move forward along with other progressive pension funds, like New York City and California, and be a very aggressive actor on those situations. As school controller, we are engaged in a pretty extensive audit of the school district right now, which has not been performed for many years. There is a very ambitious school construction program underway.