COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING COMMITTEE ON LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - - - Room 401, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Thursday, February 15, 2001 1:10 p.m. - - - BILL 000065 - an ordinance amending Section 9-208 of the Philadelphia Code... BILL 000184 - an ordinance amending Section 9-103 of the Philadelphia Code... RESOLUTION 000555 - A resolution authorizing the Committee on Licenses and Inspections to hold hearings on vacant, abandoned and blighted properties in Philadelphia... RESOLUTION 000612 - A resolution authorizing the City Council's Committee on Licenses and Inspections to hold public hearings to investigate the current methods utilized by the Department of Licenses and Inspections to enforce Section PM-102.6.2... - - - PRESENT: COUNCILMAN RICHARD T. MARIANO, CHAIRMAN COUNCILMAN FRANK J. DI CICCO COUNCILMAN DARRELL CLARKE COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN ANGEL ORTIZ - - - VINCENT VARALLO ASSOCIATES, INC. Registered Professional Reporters Eleven Penn Center 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 (215) 561-2220 I N D E X BILL 000065 OTIS HAIGLER, JR., L & I .................... TERRY MASINO ................................ FRANK MASINO ................................ 14 ANDRE SMITH, South Street Neighborhood Assoc. 16 BILL 000184 OTIS HAIGLER, JR., L & I .................... 21 TERRY YOUNGBLOOD ............................ 23 JUDITH ROBINSON ............................. 30 3 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000065
Committee on Licenses and Inspections wants to open a public meeting. I have Councilman Frank DiCicco, Councilman Darrell Clarke, Councilman Angel Ortiz, Councilwoman Blondell Reynolds-Brown. The Clerk will read the title of Bill 8 000065.
An ordinance amending Section 9-208 of the Philadelphia Code entitled "Sidewalk Cafes," by permitting sidewalk cafes to be maintained on East Passyunk Avenue, both sides, between Broad Street and Federal Street, under certain terms and conditions.
Mr. Haigler, are you here to testify on behalf of the Administration.
Good day, Councilman Mariano and members of the committee. I am Otis Haigler, Jr., Legislative of Regulatory Affairs Manager for the Department of Licenses and Inspections. Today I am here to provide testimony on 4 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000065 Bill 000065, which if enacted will amend Section 3 9-208 of the Philadelphia Code to allow sidewalk cafes to be located on east Passyunk Avenue, both sides, between Broad Street and Federal Street. With respect to this bill, the Department offers no objections to it's enactment. Thank you. I will be happy to answer any questions you have at this time.
Is there any questions from the committee for Mr. Haigler? Councilman DiCicco.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don't have any questions yet, but there are some people here, I believe, who want to testify. If you can just sit there, Mr. Haigler, I think it might be easier. Al, you and Terry want to testify?
Step up to the witness seat and state your name. You both can come up. Even though bites Mr. Haigler doesn't.
My name is Terry Masino and my husband beside me, Al Masino. We are owners of Roselena's Coffee Bar at 1623 East Passyunk Avenue 5 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000065 in Councilman DiCicco's district. We have -- I think it was back until 99, we had two sidewalk tables out to enhance the neighborhood area and we received unbeknownst to us a court order subpoena to appear for a hearing because we were not licensed or zoned, none of which did we know about. We were told when we -- we were in the area. We were actually number 1 coffee house and restaurant in the nation, and I don't want to put anyway where but in the City of Philadelphia right on Passyunk Avenue. Just some of the obstacles that are presented to us are somewhat baffling. But anyway, sir, we thought we were working under Ordinance 9-205, sidewalk sales. We were told by the association that sidewalk sales meant selling your wares. When we received the -- we also received a notice to cease operations from L & I. They were actually going to close us down. We took a year to determine from people in Licenses and Inspections what the license was for. We didn't even know that there was an ordinance existing to have the tables out there. There are also other businesses in a radius of two or three blocks from Roselena's on Passyunk Avenue that have cafe tables 6 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000065 out in South Philadelphia that are not being harassed as we are. And I'd like to question that also. Anyway, it says in the case when the business owner is engaged in the use of sidewalk selling on his or own business property, their sidewalk sale license will be eliminated. I believe that the tables that we put out are an extension of our business. We already have licenses and permits for the sale of food. We're licensed by the Health Department, etcetera, etcetera. We've been there for seven years now. When I called and spoke with many, many people and L & I, no one even knew what to tell me as to why I was -- I believe the amount was close to a thousand dollars, 8 or 900. Robin Schatz from Frank's office helped us. To keep a table, we have to put up a bond. And we are here, my husband and I, today to refute or to actually determine why in fact we feel we should be determining whether the sidewalk cafes are good for the general well-being of Philadelphia; and if they are, there should be set regulations. If these regulations are not adhered to, then I could understand the appropriate 7 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000065 penalties. But to put out these licenses and permits just for an extension of a business or a sidewalk sale is something that we don't understand.
May I interrupt you for you minute. I think Councilman DiCicco being the district councilman, we're losing what you're saying. There's a consensus here. We're not exactly sure -- Councilman DiCicco wants to explain. Just bear with us.
We have a bill in front of us, and your issue does not refer to the bill which we're hearing today.
Let me attempt, if I may, Mr. Chairman. What the issue at hand is, a couple of years ago Councilman Clarke and I introduced legislation that would provide for a more convenient and expeditious way in which restaurants in the Center City corridor of the City of Philadelphia could apply for and obtain outdoor sidewalk cafe licenses. Prior to that, Mr. Haigler, correct if I'm wrong, there was an application process that 8 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000065 required you to go in front of the zoning board. What we have basically done is removed some of the obstacles that made it, I thought, too bureaucratic for most people who desire to have an outdoor cafe to actually go through that process. So it was my attempt to make it easier basically, in simple terms, for people to be able to get those licenses. In the interim, what has happened, I think what Ms. Masino's trying to explain is that several years ago legislation was enacted for the same street that we're talking about now, East Passyunk Avenue, that would allow for businesses along East Passyunk Avenue to sell products within 40 inches, I believe, of the face or facade of their buildings. What Mr. and Mrs. Masino are saying that their product is coffee and pastries and, therefore, the sidewalk cafe -- they don't need go through this process in order to be able to have a sidewalk cafe. I'm not saying that that's correct, but I believe that's what you're arguing is that there was no need for you in your particular business to have to go for a special license for a sidewalk cafe because you fall within the guidelines of the previous legislation of several years ago that entitled you 9 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000065 as a business person along East Passyunk Avenue to vend your product. Is that what your statement is?
So I think there is an issue -- Mr. Haigler, here's where we're going to need your expertise. Vending versus outdoor cafes and stuff like that. That's the confusing part for some people. I understand it. And I also understand the Masino's dilemma saying, well, you tell us we can do one thing, but why can't we do all things? And obviously, we need you, Mr. Haigler, to an explain that away for us.
Yes. There are two separate sections of the Code apply from what I hear here. From what I understand from the persons here, they're siting Section 9-205 of the Philadelphia Code that deals with sidewalk sales. There's a specific section of the Philadelphia Code, 9-208, that deals sidewalk cafes and under that section 21 9-208 of the Philadelphia Code it specifically states that sidewalk cafes are only permitted in certain areas of the City, Center City primarily and certain areas up in the Manyunk area, Manyunk Roxborough area. If anybody wanted to add 10 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000065 additional sidewalk cafes in areas that are not listed under section 9-208 of the Philadelphia Code, they would have to come before Council to get an ordinance to do that. And I believe that's what Councilman DiCicco's ordinance is doing here to permit sidewalk cafes on East Passyunk Avenue because under the current provision of 9-208 of the Philadelphia Code, it's not one of the permitted locations for sidewalk cafes. So from what I gather from these persons here, there's a misinterpretation of the two sections that are required. Sidewalk sales primarily deals with vending; vending and vending locations. That's primarily Section 9-205 primarily deals with vending and vending locations in areas of the City other than Center City. 9-204 deals specifically with Center City. And 9-206 deals with neighborhood business districts. Anywhere else outside of those two areas, neighborhood business district or Center City you would comply with 9-205 for vending, but it doesn't apply to businesses. There's provision there where you can extend what you sell in your business to the outside of your business if it's sales, sales of merchandize. But 11 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000065 cafes and the selling of food, it primarily relates to restaurants.
But they can do what they're doing because legislation is there that says they can, right?
Legislation is already in the books that says that they can do what they are doing?
Well, Frank DiCicco says that he introduced that legislation that is in the books.
It primarily dealt with certain parts of Center City, but it did not extend down to Passyunk Avenue. Passyunk Avenue is not part of Center City.
I think that's what Councilman DiCicco is saying. The legislation we are talking about today has nothing with what she's talking about.
Absolutely. That's correct. 12 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000065
And we're discussing something here that we should not be doing.
I believe what we need to do is for you and the lady and the young man here to get together with Councilman DiCicco, look at the legislation that's already in the books and fix that.
We can meet outside with Frank and us because Councilman DiCicco said this legislation to permit the activity that they're doing was passed at his behest a few years ago. So it's something that is there, maybe we haven't put it into the books yet.
I don't think -- the legislation that he's talking about that was 1passed a few years ago was passed related primarily to Center City. This legislation that we're looking at today primarily permits sidewalk cafes, not sidewalk sales, but sidewalk cafes. 13 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000065
But that's what I'm saying. What she's talking about is not the issue of this hearing. Mr. DiCicco says that what she's talking about has already been taken care of previously by this Council.
The confusion is that there are -- what the Masinos are saying is under previous legislation several years when that legislation that was enacted permitted and allowed for the vending of merchandize along East Passyunk Avenue that they in their business, even though it's a sidewalk cafe, that they're vending their particular merchandize, which is expresso and coffee and pastry; they shouldn't be treated any differently than the merchant next door who is vending clothing. But Mr. Haigler, there are two issues, sidewalk cafe and vending of merchandise are totally two distinct issues.
There's specific section 24 of the code that primarily deals with sidewalk cafes and restaurants. That's different from sidewalk 14 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000065 sales where you vend merchandise.
So what Councilman Ortiz is saying, this is for the Masinos, is that it's really not the purpose of the hearing on this bill. This is, do we want to permit sidewalk sales on East Passyunk Avenue or not. It's not the issue of whether you fall within or without of this bill 9 or the other bill and which bill is right for you or not. That's what Councilman Ortiz is trying to discuss here.
It's a technical thing we're going through. But I appreciate the fact that you took the time to come here. So for the record, please state your name.
I'm Al Masino from Roselena's Coffee Bar. So I'm to understand from what you've all been saying here today, if this ordinance is passed and the bill is amended, sidewalk cafes are allowed on Passyunk Avenue and that Roselena's will then have to pay a fee to have the tables out on the sidewalk. And that mainly is what we're objecting to.
I understand that. 15 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000065
As a courtesy because you came here you can discuss it, but it's really not germane to the legislation. Your objections is to the fact that you would have to pay for the right to do what you thought you should have the right to do under the previous legislation.
And that's where the confusion is or the misunderstanding or the disagreement between the two. My attempt was to make it easier and encourage more of what you did. You're the only people that used outdoor cafes. And I still don't know why nobody is doing it, but that's a business decision on their part.
Well, I've talked to a few of them and they're not doing it for other stupid reasons, in my opinion, but it wasn't the fees. They don't want to have to hire another waitress or waiter to go outside and take care of 16 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000065 the tables.
Excuse me, Councilman. Now I'm totally confused. Is this germane to the bill that we're working on right now?
Only as a matter of information. Mr. Smith wants to approach.
Mr. Smith, you want to talk about this? Because I want to get this going. I happen to know Councilman DiCicco is a good councilman hours a day, just go down on his 12 house on 11th Street, he'll talk to you. 13
Andre Smith, I'm chairman of 14 the Zoning and Code Enforcement Committee of the 15 South Street Neighborhood Association. We have our 16 share of sidewalk cafes on South Street and we've 17 had to deal with the regulatory issues and the code 18 enforcement issues of sidewalk cafes for many years, 19 including right when the first bill that allowed 20 sidewalk cafes in the City was passed. It was 21 simply a bill that said it was okay to have sidewalk 22 cafes but no regulations in it. The Department of 23 Licenses and Inspections and the Street Department 24 wrote a whole series of regulations which was designed to establish licensing, develop guidelines 17 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000065 for the protection of the public and protection of the property owners and protection of the City from liability which is a very key ingredient. If somebody gets injured in a sidewalk cafe, you know Philadelphia will be one of the defendants in the lawsuit. However, the requirements of the regular sidewalk identify the City has to have a bond for removal of the cafe in the event of a utility emergency and all those practical things that those of us in the architectural and engineering business understand and appreciate whereas someone who just simply thinks putting a couple tables out on the sidewalk should be simple and easy. It's never simple and easy, particularly when you're dealing space that doesn't belong to you, is not owned by you; it's owned by the public. So the regulatory procedures which are being objected to here have been around for years and it's part of the price you have to pay if you want to do this kind of thing. And fortunately for the Masinos, this bill is being passed in order to allow for them without having to get a special ordinance for their particular business to locate a sidewalk cafe there. They simply, unfortunately, have to comply with the 18 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000065 regulations that have been around for many years that every sidewalk cafe in the City is supposed to comply with, although as we know given the problems of enforcement in the City of Philadelphia, many of them don't.
Just one point of clarity. Did you say that the sidewalk does not belong to the property owner?
The property line in the City of Philadelphia, 99 times out of a hundred is right at the face of the front of the building and the sidewalk is public right-of-way owned by the City of Philadelphia. However, the responsibility according to ordinances in Section 11, I believe, of the City Code general ordinance to repair and maintain that sidewalk is the owner of the adjacent property. Even though they don't own it, they still have the obligation to keep it repaired unless, of course, the Redevelopment Authority does it or there's a utility issue wherein the City would pay for it.
I know this has 19 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000065 nothing to do with what we're talking about, but I got to say this. Seeing that Councilman Nutter is sitting over there, there's been discussions about the sidewalks and the repair and the reconstruction of sidewalks and at some point in time during that discussion, we were told that it's the property owner's responsibility and the property owner actually owns the sidewalk, therefore, we can't spend capital dollars, we can't spend Redevelopment Authority money. I just wanted to get some clarity from you.
As Mr. Smith stated, the property owner is required to maintain the sidewalk, as any property owner would be required to shovel the snow, to make sure that you don't have any cracks in the pavement so that somebody would trip on it. So you're required to maintain it, but the sidewalk is considered public way.
My good friend Councilman Clarke is angling for something in the future. We understand that.
Point of 20 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000065 information, please.
Councilman Clarke is absolutely correct, this has been a point of contention for some time. Although, that I know that the Councilman is also aware that there is a fairly large document, which is the City Capital Policy which is determined by the Mayor, the City controller, and I believe either the Finance Director or the City solicitor. There is a provision in that policy that does allow for, for instance, curb and sidewalk repair -- not so much repair, usually replacement or reconstruction, for instance, in business corridors as distinguished from residential properties. So all of that is more a function, I believe, of policy to be determined by the people who have the authority to determine that policy as opposed to so much a legal issue, and that's oftentimes what we're struggling with. Thank you.
And we're the policymakers. 21 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184
Seeing none. Let's move on here. Thank you. DiCicco's going to try to get to the bottom of this on his own time and not in my committee. Thank you for your time. We understand the problem. It was just confusing for us at first. Would the Clerk read the title of Bill 9 000184.
An ordinance amending Section 9-103 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Enforcement and Appeals," by providing that appeals to the Board of License and Inspection Review shall not stay proceedings in furtherance of the action appealed from, under certain terms and conditions.
I'm Otis Haigler, Legislative Regulatory Affairs Manager for the Department of Licenses and Inspections. I had prepared three pages of testimony for this bill, but at the present time, I'm not going to read that testimony.
And at present time -- the 22 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184 testimony that I had prepared would be contradictory to the testimony I'm giving now. From what I understand, there has been amendments to the bill that was originally introduced into Council. I have a copy of the amendments here that was prepared at the direction of Councilman DiCicco's office. I guess you will read the amendments in.
Proposed amendment to Bill No. 000184, amending section 9-103 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Enforcement and Appeals," by providing that appeals to the Board of License and Inspection Review shall not stay proceedings and furtherance of the action appealed from certain, under certain terms and conditions. The Council of the City of Philadelphia hereby ordains Section 1, Subsection 9-103 of the Philadelphia Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Subsection 9-103. Enforcement and Appeals. (3) [Except as otherwise provided, compliance] Compliance with an order shall [not] be required while an appeal is pending before the Board of License and Inspection Review or before a court, 23 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184 except that the Board of License and Inspection Review, upon application of the appellant, shall have the power to issue a stay upon a showing of good cause and likelihood of success on the merits of the appeal. [(4) When on order requiring immediate action is issued, the person to whom it is directed shall comply immediately even though an appeal is pending before the Board of License and Inspection Review or any court. The Board shall give priority to appeals from order requiring immediate action.]
Thank you, Councilman. We have Terry Youngblood and Judith Robinson in the room. Do they want to testify? Anyone else? State your name for the record.
As a community leader and activist in the Northern Liberties and Fishtown area for the last 10 years, I can honestly say the biggest impediment to neighborhood revitalization and residential quality of life is the ability of people to blatantly disregard the law, the Philadelphia Code, and then be permitted to legally continue to continue to flaunt that law by going 24 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184 into the appeal process. Well, this law pertains to both residential and commercial issues. It is most egregious in relation to commercial enterprises. Homeowners using their backyard pool for the most part do not rise to the level of danger created by, say, a night club operating five to seven nights a week with a thousand plus occupancy but no dance hall license or certificate of occupancy or other licenses. The current law allows dangerous situations to continue unabated while the issue is on appeal, thereby permitting deaths, rapes, drug sales, etcetera, to continue. Two of the most obvious and notorious of this are the clubs Gotham and Baha on Delaware Avenue. Because of the current law, the Northern Liberties Community has had to continue to fight violators and these particular violators of the Code for five years. Meanwhile, the owners of these clubs have been able to operate, make money, but not have to pay fines, not have to deal with any of the corrective action of the laws that they're breaking. But the neighbors are forced to move out and leave the City and we're losing 25 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184 money. For the health, safety and welfare of our communities and to improve our City, I have to say this has got to end. I, therefore, strongly support the changes to Bill 000184 as presented and request that Council do the same. Thank you.
Thank you, ma'am. Any questions for this witness? Councilman DiCicco.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Youngblood, you mentioned two establishments within the Northern Liberties boundaries. Could you just briefly describe some of things that occurred and what the community attempted to do and what you were not able to do as a result of the existing legislation?
Sure. Gotham at No. 1 Brown Street was originally got zoning to be a restaurant. They became a night club. And because at the time that they started, there wasn't the law that Councilman Kenney had presented a couple years ago about having the valet parking and seating, so that's whole other issue. But they didn't have correct permits. They would overbook things where 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184 you'd have more than the Fire Code allowed for people in the clubs. So there was a lot of infractions that continued to happen. And the one thing they did to try and to get out of it was file 6 bankruptcy. They've used the appeal process to go through it. And in the meantime, they had a bouncer get shot and killed because of the way they operated the club. They had numerous violations with the police. And meantime, they could continue to operate. Baha just recently ended up in court. They had a rape, they had drug sales. Narcotics was in and out there. L & I was in and out of there. And again, they did the procedure of file bankruptcy to avoid paying any of the legal fines and then also filed for appeal with L & I Review claiming that L & I wasn't doing their job and were able to keep operating. The club was open. They weren't under any kind of restriction until the City Law Department managed to come up with some kind of agreement. They still violated that because they were still in the appeal, they were still in the court process. So they were still allowed to be open even though they were in violation of the order 27 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184 and in violation of the law. It's just a never-ending process because they can circumvent it.
If I hear you correctly, you're saying that when the community made complaints and those complaints were followed up through L & I and other City agencies, under the current law, you, the communities had to continue to suffer hardship for a considerable amount of time even though these establishments were not -- and Mr. Haigler and I had a little disagreement on what we mean legal. For me, if you don't have the proper licensing and you have serious violations that would put you noncompliance, for me, that means you're not legal. Someone else may have a different interpretation of that. And the community has to suffer through a long hardship. I know Gotham because I was very involved. It was a few years, three or four years before we were finally able to convince I think the LCB and others that this place should not remain open, but in the meantime, considerable harm is being placed on the people who live in that community. You basically, I guess, feel frustrated and powerless to say, well, if you 28 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184 don't have everything and you're not meeting code and you're not up to compliance, why should you be allowed to continue to operate your business and why is the burden on the community and not on the establishment? Is that kind of what your dilemma was?
How many years did this old shell game go on for? How many years did this all go on with these two establishments?
These two establishments, it has been over five years, from '96. And there's always an appeal.
We've gone through four new club owners and managed to shut them down each time but, again, it's where you have to keep going back and fighting it.
And Baha, the LCB actually pulled their liquor license because they 29 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184 were in violation of the court order, and they have just re-filed for a new liquor license. And in the mean time, they've been open, so it's a never ending process.
Do you believe the amendments will take care of the problems?
I believe that -- and if I could clarify a couple things. Currently, under provisions of our codes, if there's an area where it affects public safety and health, it does not act as a stay against our enforcement action currently. So we do have those provisions currently in our code. They're in the Administrative Code under Section 18 A-805 or something like that. But the amendments we have here, we can enforce the amendments.
And they do speak to certain problems that were addressed here today.
Thank you, Mr. 30 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184 Haigler. Anyone else?
You know what, I'm going to let Ms. Robinson testify first because my question I think it relates to what she may say, so I will defer to her at this point.
Hi. My name is Judith Robinson. I'm here on behalf of Bill 000184, but I'm tying to get some clarification. I received a public notice saying that Bill 000555 and 000612 were also to be heard today.
000555 and 000612 are not bills; they're resolutions. We heard them on November 15. We're just giving a report on what came out of that.
Excuse me? 31 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184
We have to present them to the -- the committee has them and then we're going to read them. Then you can have a copy of it.
Okay, thank you. I am concerned, to be honest with you. I live in the 5th District, let me state that first. And I'm here as sort of an advocate for the citizens of the 5th district and other communities that have suffered the devastation of the actions of License and Inspection over the last years or more. And 12 I'll tell you what I mean. 13 If Licenses and Inspections had been 14 enforcing the code violations for the many years in 15 my community, it wouldn't look as it does. And I 16 want to know what is the process that has changed? 17 I know the Mayor is trying to deal with this blight 18 elimination and I certainly want to be helpful in 19 that regard, but I want to know what has changed in 20 their process over the years to make these 21 amendments really enforceable and also how are they 22 going to be a benefit to folks like us that are 23 homeowners in areas devastated because these 24 violations have not been enforced? What has changed 25 and how can this benefit us? So I'm really more so 32 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184 looking for answers and willing to give some suggestions. I know most times this is a testimony and not so much where we get answers as citizens, bt Licenses and Inspections is very important as it relates to how our community can move forward to be maintained and stabilized. So I really think it's very important that that 000555 resolution and that 000612 and this 000184 all be coordinated so that have we in our community can understand better when we call Licenses and Inspections how they can benefit us and be effective. Not so much just to change things around as you are all concerned and then they not be understood when they come to the community. When we call somebody about having, say, for instance, trash left or a building bay is falling or the City of Philadelphia Licenses and Inspections, for instance, has properties that are in violation, how has that process changed so that we can know what we need to do? What are the steps, for instance, to determine who we talk to after we call Licenses and Inspections about a violation? I don't really see that coming together. I don't see it all connecting. 33 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184
I don't live in the 5th Council District, but I leave in the 7th and that's right next to the 5th. The councilman for the 5th is sitting next to me, but what I would do is while I call L & I, I would call him.
I would call your district councilman whom in your case is Councilman Clarke and let him be your advocate. You can call L & I too, but -- you work for him? Well, good, then you understand the process, right? What happens is, he has to be your advocate. I'm sure he is. I know in my district, if you call about an L & I problem, a specific location, I'm sure everybody here does the same thing, the people in my office call L & I and say, what's going on with that particular property? And then they call back in three days and in five days till it's taken care of. I don't find out most of the time. If I find out, it's probably a problem then I have to call him. And if I don't get what I need out of him, I call his boss and then his boss. I can't tell you and I don't think anyone else here unless they would like to, why stuff 34 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184 hasn't happened. I don't know what's going to different. They're the experts for L & I. They asked us to pass legislation. We bring it here, we look at it and we say this is either good or bad and we vote. The resolutions that you were talking about, we have public testimony. We brought in a previous L & I commissioner that sat right where you are and said, "This it is the problem in my opinion," in his opinion. I don't if that's the problem. You got it right, it's a testimony here. But out of that testimony, we try to make sense of these laws. You're doing the right thing by letting us know.
Right. I respect what you all are doing and I don't want to bog my councilman down, which I do respect him and do call him whenever I --
I do, but I want to be as a citizen able to handle some things for myself because I don't think we should bog our councilperson down with every little detail about something with License and Inspection, for 35 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184 instance. Only those things like a law being passed, I understand your roles and constituent services and all of that. But I want to be able to as a citizen call License and Inspection and have a clear understanding of how I as a block capital can help my community move forward. And I see these laws being passed and I get- I'm on the mailing list. I read each one of them. I come down here and get the information. I don't see them connecting, sir, to really make it better for what we can all admit has happened in the past. They haven't done the job of enforcing the codes that are already on the book. So I want to know with all these amendments and changes, how are they going to better help us as we move forward in this new millennium better our communities? How are these laws going to better help us? Now, just to get specific about 000184, I don't want License and Inspection alone to determine, okay, you had enough appeals, you had enough stays, we're going to move forward. And I'll give you an example of why that concerns me. 26th Street, 1700 block, License and Inspection came down there and just devastated the block. And I have a 36 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184 petition which I'm circulating but I'm giving it to anybody yet because I want to make sure --
By devastating the block, you mean they tried knocking everything down? I'm not familiar with it.
Well, it was a good stable block. There were some violations on the block.
They went in there and demolished about eight properties. And I did call my councilman's office and I did also contact License and Inspection. I got the information, and from what I read as far as the violations were concerned, they were not strong enough to knock down all of those buildings. So I want to make sure that the citizens, although we do call -- and I don't want to skew the picture and say when we call and want something done that License and Inspection has to be micro managed before they do it; I'm not going there. But what I'm saying is as a community, we're concerned that certain properties not be knocked down. 37 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184
Who knows better than the people live in the community. We understand that.
There should be like some standards set. For instance, if a block is 75 percent stable that before any property is demolished there will be some input significant number of neighbors, etcetera. I just want some kind of guidelines in place that the average citizen can understand before License and Inspection is let loose on our community because I see what they have done over many years and I'm not impressed. I'm really, really concerned that these laws are being changed, amendments are being added, and here you have a hearing at or o'clock in the afternoon. When it came to stadiums, you all did those hearings at night when people could come out. I own my own business so I can come here today and say what I know many of my fellow citizens want to say, you know, because I do go to the meetings and do talk to them about how we can really change our community. And we're really serious about trying to stabilize our community. We do not want License and Inspection coming in with these laws as their 38 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184 foundation to just do as they choose to. Especially when we look at the Mayor's plan, which he got you all in a private setting, gave you all lunch and told you all about what he wants to do.
I didn't get lunch. Did anybody else get lunch? I got a Diet Coke and they told me to get out. (Laughter.)
You have a really good view -- I wish it was as nice over here as it looks like from sitting over there.
I understand that. But we want to get you all uptown and we will give you lunch and show you some other ideas about what we want to do with our community. We do not want our community demolished, and that's just really the bottom line.
We understand that. You're absolutely right. Councilman Ortiz is excited because you 39 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184 mentioned about the hearings on the stadiums. You're right, but what happens is if we have them on Saturdays, somebody complains. If we have them on Tuesdays, somebody complains. You get to the point where you say, we schedule it. It's in the paper and we want to try help people and do it. Councilman Clarke wants to say something.
Ms. Robinson, you and I have a good working rapport and I'm glad to see that you continue to come to these public hearings. I just want to kind of summarize in terms of what I think you're talking about is that for years living in North Philadelphia when properties were owned by individuals, they were allowed to deteriorate. Apartments were -- at one time, single family dwellings were cut up into structures four and five family in a structure that code violations were not enforced. There was not any adequate zoning associated with those facilities. And then as those facilities continue to deteriorate, we could not get code violations that were enforced. Now we find ourselves in a position where those properties have deteriorated to some degree or the 40 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184 other when they started falling this past summer. In the midst of that, I think L & I, because of concerns raised by residents of the community and the media and myself, they got a little frisky out there and they wrote up every code violation imaginable and they started demolishing properties that possibly if given some thought could have potentially been encapsulated, particularly on the 1700 block of 26th Street because that is an extremely stable. It's a shame what happened over there. So as we move ahead in the hearings that we had over the last couple of days, those questions came up and were asked by these Councilmembers extensively and the responses that we got back from the Administration that prior to us going out and coming up with the demolition strategy and implementing that strategy, there will be individuals and there will be project managers that will either work for the department of L & I or for the Managing Director's Office that will have community discussion about what buildings are potentially eminently dangerous. And prior to that demolition process, there will be some strategies associated with potentially saving some of those 41 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184 through an encapsulation process, but at some point, some of those are going to have to come down. But there will be a reuse strategy associated with that. We will not let L & I -- and Otis, I don't mean to beat you guys up, but it's kind of what's going on today. We will not let L & I assault the community/ that's not going to have happen because I live in that community and I'm not going to let that happen. So I really appreciate you for continuing to come down, and we will make sure that laws are enforced equitably in this Council.
That is my main concern. You capsulized it perfectly. The community is really concerned about it. As I said, I am circulating a petition, but I want to make sure they are homeowners and voters on that petition, not just any old body. And we're really concerned that License and Inspection be let loose on our community at this time after what has happened in the past. We can't go back to the past, but we can certainly stabilize our communities and I do think communities should be involved in determining which properties will be saved. I just want to put this address on 42 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184 record. 2603 North 33rd Street. And the reason I why I do that, again, in front of this committee is because that is City-owned property, the only City-owned abandoned property on the block two minutes from a school, near Fairmount Park. Two bus routes run within a half a block from that property. It's a very sellable property. I will volunteer my time. If the City rehabs that property, I will sell the property and make that whole block stable. So I just want that to be on the record. The City-owned properties should be like the first course of action as it relates to License and Inspection and then next PHA and other quasi governmental-owned properties, and then we do know we do have a lot of estate properties that need to be addressed. But the citizens definitely should be a part of this process. Thank you very much.
Ms. Robinson, just a moment. I have to commend you. Most people come here and complain and then take off. As Darrell told you about the capsulation and blight program and what's going to happen is Darrell and I as district councilpeople and rest of us, even the at-large councilpeople, we live in a house on a 43 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000184 block and it's hard to get beyond that block. We see when we go through, but we're phone, we're doing everything. We want them to come to us. I want them to come to me about my district. Not Councilwoman Brown, even though she's a good councilwoman, she's an at-large councilwoman. If she lived in my district, it would be different. She lives someone else's district. But I don't know the particular neighborhoods and neither does Darrell. He just knows his neighborhood. You happen to know people like. But, again, I commend you, and I'm sure Councilman Clarke does, for coming and letting us know this stuff. Because we do know it, but it's drilled into heads like it should be. If there was people like you, it would be a lot easier.
Well, that's why I come because I do support my councilman. And I just want to make sure things that he doesn't have time to micro manage, that's we're here, we're all working together. Thank you.
I anyone else want to testify on this bill? Seeing none, any other questions? 44 2/15/01 - LICENSES AND INSPECT. - RES. 000555, 000612 The Clerk will read the title of Resolutions 00055 and 000612. We will not be hearing testimony on these resolutions today, however we will be considering a report based on the testimony taken by committee on November 15, 2000.
Resolution 000555, a resolution authorizing the Committee on Licenses and Inspections to hold hearings on vacant, abandoned and blighted properties in Philadelphia and to take testimony on improving the process of vacant and abandoned property disposition, property code enforcement, and demolition of dangerous properties in Philadelphia. Resolution 000612, a resolution 16 authorizing the City Council's Committee on Licenses and Inspections to hold public hearings to investigate the current methods utilized by the Department of Licenses and Inspections to enforce Section PM-102.6.3 of the Philadelphia Property Maintenance Code.
This concludes the public hearing of the Committee on Licenses and Inspections. - - - 45 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC MEETING COMMITTEE ON LICENCES AND INSPECTIONS - - - Thursday, February 15, 2001 - - - Public Meeting conducted by the Committee on Public Property and Public Works, held in Room 401, City Hall, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on the above date, to consider action on the following: BILLS 000065, 000184 RESOLUTIONS 000555, 000612 - - - PRESENT: COUNCILMAN RICHARD T. MARIANO, CHAIRMAN COUNCILMAN FRANK J. DI CICCO COUNCILMAN DARRELL CLARKE COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN ANGEL ORTIZ - - - 46 2/15/01 - L & I - PUBLIC MEETING
We will now enter a public meeting. This opens the public meeting. The Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco for a motion on Bill 000065.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move for the approval of Bill No. 8 000065. (Duly seconded.)
The bill has been read and seconded. All those in favor? (Aye.)
All those opposed? Seeing none, that bill passes. The Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco for a motion on Bill 000184.
Mr. Chairman, I move for the amendments that were previously read into the record in relation to Bill No. 000184. (Duly seconded.)
It's been read and seconded on the amendments on Bill 000184. It's been second. All those in favor? 47 2/15/01 - L & I - PUBLIC MEETING (Aye.)
I move that Bill 6 No. 000184, as amended, be recorded out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and that the Rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next Session of City Council. (Duly seconded.)
000184 has been read and seconded. All those in favor? (Aye.)
Mr. Chairman, I just want to go back to the first bill. I will also ask for rules suspension on Bill No. 000065.
Okay. 00065 he makes a motion for suspension of rules. (Duly seconded.)
00065 passes with a 48 2/15/01 - L & I - PUBLIC MEETING suspension of the rules. The Chair recognize Councilman DiCicco regarding reports of committee on Resolutions 000555 and 000612.
Mr. Chairman, I move for a favorable recommendation on Resolution 8 000555 and 000612. (Duly seconded.)
The resolutions have been read and seconded. All those in favor? (Aye.)
All those opposed? None. The amendments are passed out of committee. This concludes the public meeting of L & I. Thank you. (Council adjourned at 2:00 p.m.) - - - 49 C E R T I F I C A T I O N I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of February 15, 2001, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of the same. RE: COMMITTEE ON LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS ___________________________ Lisa C. Bradley, RPR and Notary Public