- - - COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING - COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Tuesday, May 3, 2005, 10:45 a.m. - - - Bill 050071 - An ordinance authorizing the Managing Director, on behalf of the City, to execute a mutual aid agreement, creating the Southeastern Pennsylvania Terrorism Task Force, SEPTTF, under certain terms and conditions. PRESENT: COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER, Chair COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE L. BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN JUAN F. RAMOS COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO - - - V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 2 Public Safety - 5/3/05 - - - P R O C E E D I N G S - - -
Good morning. We'll now call the Committee on Public Safety to order. We have Council member Frank Rizzo, Council member Jannie Blackwell, and Council member Juan Ramos, all members of the Committee, and that states our quorum. Would the clerk please read the title of the bill.
Bill Number 050071, an ordinance authorizing the Managing Director, on behalf of the City, to execute a mutual aid agreement, creating the Southeastern Pennsylvania Terrorism Task Force, SEPTTF, under certain terms and conditions.
Okay. Thank you. We have Mr. Nucci -- I'm just trying to find your testimony first. We have Mr. Nucci to testify on this bill. Would you please proceed with your testimony. Please 3 Public Safety - 5/3/05 state your name and department for the record.
Right. Good morning, Madam Chairman, and members of the City Council Public Safety Committee. My name is Mike Nucci, and I am the Director of Emergency Management for the City of Philadelphia. I am here to testify in favor of Council Bill Number 050071 which authorizes the Managing Director of the City of Philadelphia to enter into a mutual aid agreement with the counties of Bucks, Chester, Delaware, and Montgomery for reciprocal disaster preparedness, prevention and emergency response and recovery. The reasons for Council to approve this ordinance are both legal, financial as well as being operationally sound. Let me elaborate. The Emergency Management Code and the Counter Terrorism Planning Preparedness and Response Act of 2002 require political subdivisions in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to develop 4 Public Safety - 5/3/05 mutual aid agreements with adjacent jurisdictions, for the purpose of providing reciprocal assistance and prevention planning and emergency response and recovery. The Counter Terrorism Planning and Preparedness and Response Act also created the Southeastern Pennsylvania Counter Terrorism Task Force as one of nine regional counter terrorism task forces, and requires that one county in each region be designated to act as the agent for the planning and training funds available. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the source of all funding for counter terrorism grants, mandates that starting with the federal fiscal year 2005 appropriated funds, all grants will be contingent upon the development of a regional plan and signed mutual aid agreements. The federal fiscal year 2005 urban area security initiative funds are about $23 million for the region, plus a significant portion of the $33 million that the state gets through the State Homeland Security 5 Public Safety - 5/3/05 Grant Program. Operationally, the mutual aid agreement makes sense. As a region we are rich in emergency response capability, yet no 6 single political subdivision can afford to maintain the capacity to respond to a truly catastrophic event. The Southeastern Pennsylvania Counter Terrorism Task Force has made great progress in developing a regional response plan and enhancing the region's response capability through its subcommittees on law enforcement, fire fighting, hazardous materials, public health, school safety, public utilities, communications, explosive ordinance and urban search and rescue. This proposed ordinance formalizes the existing spirit of cooperation among the emergency response organizations in our region. It brings us into compliance with Commonwealth law and ensures a continued source of vital homeland security funding. We urge City Council to pass this 6 Public Safety - 5/3/05 legislation. I would now be happy to answer any questions.
Thank you, both of you, for working on this. It's important. The question that I have, since this is homeland security money, federal money, why do we limit this -- New Jersey's closer than Bucks County. Why do we limit this to Pennsylvania and not also include Camden County and some of the other counties that are within minutes to Philadelphia versus many minutes, when you talk about Bucks, Chester Counties?
That's an absolutely good question. Administratively, the Federal Government is dealing with the states to administer the program. So, the money comes from Homeland Security to, in Pennsylvania's case, the Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency, who then administers it on a 7 Public Safety - 5/3/05 statewide basis. We have in this region, in the area of communications interoperability, actually gotten into an agreement with the state -- with five counties in the State of New Jersey, basically the river counties: Burlington, Camden, Salem, Gloucester, and... What's the last one? For two projects on communications interoperability. First... And this one is almost complete... we've purchased a regional site license for an emergency management program that all the ten counties will have, and the hardware that goes with it, so we can share information on what's going on in each of the counties with the emergency management agencies in those counties. The second part of it, which is in the process of an engineering study, is to establish a voice communications link between the dispatch centers and each of the ten counties. As you know, everybody has a different radio system. So doing it -- 8 Public Safety - 5/3/05
-- would be problematic. So, what we're doing is having an engineering study to link the communications centers, using in some cases microwave and in some cases fiberoptics, where it exists, that the dispatch centers will be able to patch the principals in each county: Police officer in Philadelphia with one in Camden County, with one in Montgomery. So we're doing that, and that will include ten counties.
Mr. Nucci, you used a word inter... What's that word again?
Interoperability. Well, I don't think we have interoperability right now between Philadelphia and the State of Pennsylvania. I just learned something recently just within a day, that the state has spent a tremendous amount of money on an 800 megahertz radio system which we now operate on. And State Troopers in the Commonwealth 9 Public Safety - 5/3/05 of Pennsylvania are using their 800 megahertz radio system for data and using their old VHF 150 megahertz radio system for voice. That's a sad situation that for years and years and years have gone by, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania still has not activated their 800 megahertz radio system. So, as far as I'm concerned, that title inter...
Is a word because I don't think we have that. Would you agree?
Okay. Thank you. Mr. Nucci, without this agreement, then what position would Philadelphia be in if we didn't have this agreement, in case of an emergency?
We would basically technically be on our own, without help from the other counties. They would -- As we kind of intimate in here, they would respond. I'm 10 Public Safety - 5/3/05 sure they would, just as we would if they got in trouble. The problem is, there's nothing formal. And in the case of the counties responding, sending forces to help us, they would probably not be covered under their insurance because unlike the City of Philadelphia which is self insured, they have private insurance for most of their police departments and volunteer fire companies. And they are -- their policies say that they're covered within their own area and with any jurisdiction that they have a formal mutual aid agreement with. So, if the mutual aid agreement does not exist and technically support us, they're kind of hanging out there.
Let me just finish my last question. You said there are nine regional 11 Public Safety - 5/3/05 counter terrorism task force. Where are they? Here in the eastern... I'm assuming they're somewhere here on the east coast.
No. They're all in Pennsylvania. They were created by the state act.
And we are one of the nine which is the Southeast Pennsylvania Task Force.
What would this agreement cover? For example, this Council voted overwhelmingly against the provisions of the Patriot Act. And there's been no changes in that position. Now, what part of the... And that worries me. What are we agreeing to? 12 Public Safety - 5/3/05
We're agreeing to basically plan for emergency response with the other five counties -- with the other four counties. We're agreeing to provide mutual aid if there's a catastrophic incident in Philadelphia or in one of the other counties, that the other counties that are part of the agreement will respond with emergency help. That's pretty much what it covers.
Well, it would seem to cover all the provisions that the Patriot Act would cover. And currently today the revisions of the Patriot Act are themselves causing lots of concern throughout the country. There's lots of discussion on both sides of the fence. It seems to me... Aren't we giving up our rights? If those of us who may be concerned about whether or not the Patriot Act is intended fully to cover terroristic situations or whether it may be used as a means to bring about a change in general 13 Public Safety - 5/3/05 policies, unrelated to terrorist activities, wouldn't we be yielding our position of opposition, if it's just trying to bring in other policies that we don't agree with? I mean, doesn't it take our freedom of decision away from us?
No. The way -- The way the mutual aid agreement is narrowly crafted to deal with emergency situations after something has happened...
For example, I guess if we have to use 9/11 as an example, for example, if something like 9/11 occurred in Bucks County, then fire fighters and whomever from Philadelphia --
If we had a mass casualty situation that quickly overwhelmed our EMS, emergency medical service -- 14 Public Safety - 5/3/05
Right. But if -- because we don't have an agreement with Camden, we wouldn't be able --
Well, and in fact, we have sent assets to Camden for fires and things like that when they requested it. This particular agreement just covers the counties in Pennsylvania because that's what we can do under state law. What has to happen between states for mutual aid is that Pennsylvania has to sign a state pact with New Jersey first, and then we can formally have a mutual aid agreement with Camden and Burlington, et cetera, et cetera. We do do informal things, like the communications interoperability with New Jersey. It's just that for the mutual aid part, we have to let the state take the lead on that.
Okay. And basically this is -- this bill is around 15 Public Safety - 5/3/05 disaster preparedness, as you have stated in your first paragraph, prevention, emergency response and recovery, correct?
The time is limited to emergency responses? For example, suppose after the response there's some legal action needed. What protections does the defendant have? Does he have those given to him under the theories of U.S. Attorney General now Diaz or Gonzalez, rather?
It only -- It only carries -- covers emergency response and planning for that emergency response. It doesn't cover anything that really -- The Patriot Act is really something separate from this.
Seems to me that it would be a matter of very serious concern. And then, I don't understand what it achieves. If we can't have that arrangement 16 Public Safety - 5/3/05 of cooperation without this agreement, what does this agreement provide that nothing else would? Suppose we agreed with you that there should be this arrangement, but it ought to be an informal arrangement rather than a formally signed document?
Without the formally signed document... First of all, we have to have a formally signed document to comply with the state law, and also the provisions of Homeland Security. It's contingent upon the Homeland Security money continuing. The feds want formal mutual aid agreements for support. So that's basically why, you know, we have to formalize something that has really existed for decades here, as far as mutual aid.
Is this the first time we will have this mutual aid agreement?
This is the first time 17 Public Safety - 5/3/05 it will be a formal agreement.
Okay. And who designed the agreement? Was it something already maybe drafted by the Federal Government with certain provisions, certain language, et cetera?
Madam Chairman, my name is Gabriel Chart. I'm with the Law Department. I looked at state law. Basically I drafted the agreement. According to the state law requirements, there is in the state law it says that this agreement requires an ordinance. It specifies what belongs in the ordinance, and then it also specifies what should be covered within the agreements, as far as the term, liability coverage, the way the financial structure -- the way it's structured financially, which counties would be the head agent financially. I used all that information to structure the agreement.
How about the substance of the agreement? You're talking about the form of the agreement. That's one thing. I'm deeply concerned that there may be efforts being made here to incorporate provisions of the Patriot Act or other provisions, not necessarily the Patriot Act that we would not be in agreement with here.
This agreement's completely separate from the Patriot Act. They really aren't related in any way. This is strictly for first response. It's for disaster preparedness and first response. It doesn't get into at all the consequences of any terrorist action, any kind of surveillance or evidentiary requirements that might be covered in something like the Patriot Act. This is simply a mechanism to use state funds in order to purchase equipment and manage manpower through the municipality.
But how do we know how it will be interpreted later on? 19 Public Safety - 5/3/05
The scope of this agreement is pretty narrow. It's strictly for purchasing equipment, managing manpower, and doesn't get into any of those other issues. It's very narrow, as far as what the scope of this agreement is. I don't think it could be construed outside of the bounds of this agreement.
Well, but I'm not sure what the bounds of the agreement is. That's what concerns me. This is the first presentation to the City Council, members of City Council. Except for those of us here today know probably nothing about this. I knew nothing until the hearing of the notice. And I'm not much ready to trust those people who would have -- would have then and even now seem to be desirous of changing basically the rights for citizens of this country with respect to trials and evidence, and that kind of thing, and 20 Public Safety - 5/3/05 suspicious conduct. How do we know that what you're saying is actually the limits of the act?
Well, sir, I'm an attorney for the City, and I protect the City's interests. I made sure that this was not beyond the scope. This is strictly a tool so that the counties can manage their resources. It doesn't go beyond that.
Why do we need it? What happens in Philadelphia if we don't agree with it?
If we don't, first of all, we are not complying with state law; and second of all, it will probably stop the flow of Homeland Security money to this region, to purchase the resources that we need to manage a major emergency.
Have we gotten 21 Public Safety - 5/3/05 funds from Homeland Security?
In the -- And remember what I'm talking about, federal fiscal years. It takes... We're talking about when the money was appropriated. And it's usually about a year to months after that that we 10 actually get the equipment. 11 But in the 2003 federal fiscal 12 years, we got -- and this is just 13 Philadelphia -- $2,079,753 for equipment and 14 $668,000 for planning, training and exercises. In 2004, we got $3.9 million for equipment and $596,000 for planning, training and exercises. Additionally in the 2004 -- and this is the equipment which is actually just being purchased by the state now -- it included $3 million for a new fire boat to replace our aging ones, $800,000 for a van, an X-ray van, that the police can pull up between a suspected truck that they suspect may be carrying a bomb. And it will X-ray 22 Public Safety - 5/3/05 that and show you where everything is on the -- everything is loaded there, and $600,000 to replace the cameras in the police helicopters to get them to where they're somewhere close to what the news media has.
It's one of my understandings that on a national basis -- and I think it included Philadelphia. Studies showed that homeland spending was far below what municipalities were actually spending for defense against terrorism, and that municipalities throughout the country were complaining. Is there anything in the agreement which says that any fund contribution by the Federal Government will be eliminated or may not be considered unless counties are part of the agreement?
Yeah. In -- In the -- I guess it would be the regulations from the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal 2005 funding, they -- they made it contingent upon there being signed mutual aid agreements between the jurisdictions and 23 Public Safety - 5/3/05 urban area.
And isn't there also a provision in there for reimbursement to cities for some of their expenses?
The other part of this is if a major catastrophe should occur, that would occasion a Presidential disaster declaration. And say it was in Montgomery County, whatever. And we sent assets to help them out in Montgomery County. We would be eligible in a Presidential declaration to recover costs to Philadelphia, if there was a signed mutual aid agreement.
Mr. Nucci, I had a off-the-record conversation with you back there -- and now I'll put it on the record -- that I think the exposure of the City is more so than to Montgomery County. 24 Public Safety - 5/3/05 And you pointed out it's been since 1980 where a county has come to help Philadelphia. What I'd appreciate you providing to the Chair -- and I'm sure the Police Department and Fire Department -- because we may spend more money on mutual aid. It's a nice word, mutual aid. It sounds friendly and huggy, and that we're willing to go and do what we need to do. But if we're talking a few million dollars in mutual aid money that could dry up or Homeland Security money, I'd be interested to know... And you said something that's important. And I just don't want it to go over my head... is that the routine responses by the bomb squad are not reimbursable. The fire boat that may respond to a Delaware County fire is not reimbursable because none of those are national disasters that the President has declared. I'd be curious to know how frequently all of our municipal departments, whether it's Public Property or who, how 25 Public Safety - 5/3/05 frequently we respond to mutual aid and what the tab is for that mutual aid. Because we have now red light cameras at Red Lion and the Boulevard because we don't have enough police officers to monitor that intersection, and do it the old fashioned way and write tickets. I don't want to see the day when we had 80 K-9 dogs... I don't want to see the few that we have left out in Delaware County when we need one here. So, again, I want to be a good neighbor, but I'm having a little trouble with this here today, knowing what commitment we are making in the area of mutual aid, when we have one bomb squad that may be somewhere in Bucks County when we have an issue here. So I'm a bit concerned about what we're offering to our suburban friends. And I just want us maybe to slow down a little bit and know exactly what kind of numbers we're dealing with that have not been reimbursed. Again, I'd love to be helpful. But Public Safety - 5/3/05 I would like to know the tab for mutual aid and the departments that have provided it.
Up until now it's been police and fire. And mostly, I guess, in frequency it's been the bomb squad going to Montgomery County -- not particularly Montgomery County but Chester County.
There are two other bomb squads in the region. Delaware County has a small one and Montgomery County has one. They don't have the experience that ours does. Ours is probably one of the premiere bomb squads on the east coast. They've done training for the F.B.I. So what we're -- what we're attempting to do, with the bomb squad's help, is... There are a lot of calls that they get for going out in the suburbs that really do not require a bomb squad of our capacity or don't require it in an emergency fashion. There are things that the police officers can do to ameliorate the situation.
Here's what I'd 27 Public Safety - 5/3/05 like to do. Is there a scenario in this entire plan, counselor... Most of the communities that you mentioned have both affluent and poor areas, but I think they could pay for our service. Is there a way we could -- If they want us -- If they want us to come to Montgomery County -- And I'm concerned about that. I don't care how much money they would pay us. I like our assets to be here because we need them. And if they're out in Montgomery County or Bucks County and we need them, no 15 amount of money -- But even if we do respond, and maybe more selectively going forward, I think that we should have something in this that we get paid. I mean, if we tie up five, six, eight officers, a couple million dollars' piece of equipment, that they should be able to write us a check or don't call us. Call Delaware County. Use their own bomb squad or build a bigger one because -- You know what it is? I think they know we're here. 28 Public Safety - 5/3/05 I think they know that they've got this mutual aid deal. Why would you, if you were a county manager, dump more money into your operation, if you can pick up the phone and call Philadelphia. We schlep out there for free, and do their work. Again, I want to be a good neighbor, but I don't want to give away my taxpayers' money.
I understand what you're saying. And maybe the bomb squad, because that's very specialized, is maybe not a good example. But we're also involved in things like emergency medical services. Now, the assets in emergency medical services in the suburbs far outstrip what we have. We have informal agreements now with them. So, if we had a 9/11 type thing here, we would not have enough ambulances, medic units. All right. So, we have arranged informally with them to send us ambulances in blocks of ten, you know, with paramedics, the whole thing. So, although we have the bomb squad 29 Public Safety - 5/3/05 assets that nobody else has, they have huge numbers of other assets which we could use.
I'm not suggesting -- But what I am concerned about is --
Yeah, the day-to-day stuff. The catastrophic stuff I can, you know, deal with that. But I think it would be interesting to know -- And you say it's so far been limited to police and fire, but I'm sure that the Water Department has helped on occasion. You mentioned the fact that Montgomery County helped us during a water emergency. But I think that based on the limitations that we have today, that if they want our help, they need to pay us for it.
Well, the state law requires this would be on a non-reimbursable basis for this type of agreement, if this is for regional task force set up by state law to channel funds from the federal government. And what it's creating is a pot of 30 Public Safety - 5/3/05 money and resources for the counties in this region.
Until I know how much money we get from Homeland Security versus how much we spend, I'm not really too keen to be supportive of this, at least with my vote, because I think we're exposing our taxpayers to a financial hardship that I don't even know... Like Councilman Cohen said, this is the first I'm hearing about it today. And this quick study of it kind of puts my red flag up. And when that flag goes up, I sit tight. So I'm not planning to be supportive of this today, not knowing what the implications are. I need to really study this a little bit more.
I'd like to add something also, that the... According to state law, the State of Pennsylvania also indemnifies the City of Philadelphia for any damage to county or municipal property, if it's in response to a catastrophic event. So there is that provision in there. 31 Public Safety - 5/3/05
You're talking about a fire boat or something like that being damaged.
A routine -- God forbid, a routine response from one of our police units, and there's officers killed, they're off the hook. We own those officers, even if it's in Montgomery County. And, you know, I've read it as fast as I could when I got it. And I understand if we have a response to a general alarm fire in Montgomery County, that our commanders are still in charge, but there's a chain of command. You know, I've read all that. And I'm okay with that stuff. But I'm talking about the dollars of this thing. And until I see how much we spend versus how much we gain, I'm going to hold back on my vote today. I'm going to vote no for this to come out of committee. That's just me.
May I ask this: Does this change the decision making? Who 32 Public Safety - 5/3/05 now makes the decisions when calls come in requiring assistance to other counties?
In the case of the Fire Department, the City Charter gives the Fire Commissioner -- In fact, it specifically states in there that he can provide mutual aid to surrounding jurisdictions and on his authority. So, it's the Commissioner of the Police --
Does that change? Suppose he disagrees with the request.
Then he can -- he can -- he can -- Just as in the mutual aid agreement, he can say, no, I can't spare that asset.
But suppose that's not it. Suppose he just thinks it's 33 Public Safety - 5/3/05 not wise or he feels that if situation occurred within the City he would not use the aid being requested. He might use some other method. Who would have the decision? In other words, are our forces now threatened or not threatened but facing the possibility of having to obey somebody else's order, other than --
No, no, no. The way the agreements work is, if we were supplying aid to Camden or one of the counties in Pennsylvania, those forces remain and equipment remain under the control of people from the Philadelphia Fire --
Who makes the decision as to whether the request should be complied with?
The Fire Commissioner. Or the Police Commissioner if it's a police matter.
And to follow up on what the Councilman is saying is the fact that -- You know, and again, I don't want to 34 Public Safety - 5/3/05 drag in the closures of our fire fighting forces and our Police Department reduction in numbers. But I'm -- my responsibility is to worry about the people that visit and live here. And I'm okay with mutual aid, as long as somebody pays for it. And counselor can tell me. What do we need to do to change... the state legislators, our representatives, that we could get reimbursed when we're called for mutual aid if the decision is made to respond?
That would require, I guess, change in the state law, wouldn't it?
Well, we're talking about closing eight engine and ladder companies. And we have the potential of sending our equipment to another distant county for no compensation. That troubles me. Thank you.
This would not 35 Public Safety - 5/3/05 just be for ordinary... This would not just be for ordinary emergency responses, unless it's the bomb squad, like you said. That's the one that's used --
The bomb squad is probably the one that occurs most on a routine basis. The other... I said, you know, a big chunk of the police force or Fire Department outside Philadelphia, things have to be pretty bad. We've done it with Camden when they had their traditional mischief night fire-setting problem. We've sent several fire companies. But it is not... It is not routine and usual. The fact of the matter is that the fire assets out in the counties are quite substantial, to handle their own -- you know, for their volunteer firemen. But they have a lot of equipment, a lot of assets. So -- So that the likelihood on the routine basis that we would be getting this is pretty slim. 36 Public Safety - 5/3/05
I know that Councilman -- my good friend and colleague, Councilman Rizzo -- did not mean it in the way that I thought I heard it. But if I know that our fire -- our Fire Department, in the event of something that is beyond the controls of any of our neighbors, that we're more than -- we're very charitable -- Philadelphians are very charitable -- that we will use all the equipment that we have, to go and put out a fire anywhere, if it is in fact something that is beyond the control of the neighbor, the good neighbor, that we might have to the north, south east or west of us. And are you, also, reaffirming and through the Law Department, that this is one state law is requiring this of us, that this has to do more with catastrophic -- and please correct me if I'm wrong -- than our regular, you know, day-to-day routine work of 37 Public Safety - 5/3/05 when they arise, of putting out fires or threats of, you know, of local levels, and that this -- this money from the Federal Government is very well defined, is very specific in its use. Am I correct about that?
That's absolutely true. They -- They -- They give you the categories that -- that the money can be spent on. And in some cases they specify what types of equipment they approve by, and with the planning and training, there are rules on that, too. So it's very tight. For instance, we can't buy police cars. We can't buy, you know, routine fire apparatus. You can buy specialized equipment. Detection equipment, personal protective equipment for purchase from others. So, it's fairly tight.
Do you have any idea of the appropriation amount for this type of mutual agreement activities with our counties? I believe Councilman Rizzo or Councilman Cohen asked that question. 38 Public Safety - 5/3/05 I don't think I heard, you know, a reply to that. Do you have any idea what pool of money -- you know, if the pool of money is or how is it determined? If the pool of money is a million dollars, then I can see all the concerns of Councilman Cohen and Councilman Rizzo because then, you know, if something, God forbid, catastrophic happens, there's but so much resources out there for us to address it.
Right. Well, for the federal fiscal year 2004 equipment, we're talking about directly to Philadelphia, that they do the ordering, is $3.9 million.
$3.9 million, plus $3 million for a fire boat, $800,000 for the X-ray van, and $600,000 for the helicopter cameras. So -- So, we're talking about $8 million in 2004 just to Philadelphia, and probably a similar amount in the 2005. We're not sure how that's going to break down.
When do we lose 39 Public Safety - 5/3/05 the opportunity to be able to tap into these resources for local mutual agreement Homeland Security type of operations?
Yeah. Let's say that this does not come out of committee and it gets delayed. Is there a deadline that we need to get to or is this wide open, that we can -- you know, this can be delayed, this process, and still have access to that program?
Both the state and the Federal and the Home -- Department of Homeland Security are fairly firm on that for the 2005 federal fiscal year appropriation, that they want the mutual aid agreements in place.
So chances are that this might not be here. If we don't act on it, this might not be here in the next fiscal year.
What is the end of the year, federal fiscal, 2005? 40 Public Safety - 5/3/05
And actually started -- The money for 2005 has been appropriated. The difference in the timing on this is that it's appropriated at the federal level, and it takes about to months for Homeland 7 Security to make up the list of rules for 8 that money, the money to be passed on to the 9 state, and then us to supply our list of 10 equipment that we want, and then the state 11 does the procuring on the equipment. 12 All the equipment is being procured 13 through state contracts, and delivered to 14 Philadelphia and the other counties. You 15 know, there's a gap. There's a about a 14 to 16 16 month gap.
But the sooner you get it in, the sooner you can get it out.
They have already 41 Public Safety - 5/3/05 appropriated the 2005 money. We don't get to order from it unless this is in place.
Thank you. Are there any other questions by committee members?
Well, does it seem to me... When did the City first learn about this problem or this opportunity? Whichever way you want to call it. Because at this stage I don't know whether it's a problem or an opportunity for the City. But I think we need more time in it. I just think it's unfair to put Council in a position without any briefing or any information, to come to us and say, you've got to act right away on it. Most of the members don't even know of its existence. Speaking for myself, I didn't know at all of any part of this problem until I saw the notice for the hearing. Now, there should have been some 42 Public Safety - 5/3/05 contact between the administration and the Council before. We should be briefed on it. Every member of Council ought to know what he or she is doing about it. And we ought to have a feeling of confidence that it's a good thing for the citizens to do, if that's what we want to do. But if not, we've got to take negative action. I have no opinion on this, except I'm concerned about being put in a position of being asked to vote in a way that may harm Philadelphians or it may help them. I think we need more time on this, and I think we need a kind of briefing which all members of Council are free to ask any questions they want.
I'd appreciate the same opportunity, to get the information to the Chair, that I requested on the amount of activity of mutual aid, non-catastrophic, to see what exactly the cost to the City is. And also, I'd like to develop a protocol. Like Councilman Cohen said, when 43 Public Safety - 5/3/05 do we respond? Obviously, we want to be good neighbors. I'd love to see the legislature change the rules so we could get compensated for our services. But I'm also concerned that our bomb squad, a limited bomb squad, is here when we need it. So that's why I would appreciate more time waiting for the information that you'll provide or the Police Commissioner or Fire Commissioner or other municipal departments in the area of mutual aid. It sounds like a lot of money, $8 million, that we get from Homeland Security. But also I'd like to know how much we spend. I'm sure it's not $8 million, but I'd like to know. And if you could give us more time, and the Chair would consider that, it would be appreciated because I don't think you're up against it to delay, so we can make an intelligent decision. I can't make an intelligent decision here today on the limited information that I have. 44 Public Safety - 5/3/05
We also -- I think also what would be helpful for committee members is to see a draft of the agreement, to make sure that...
Are other jurisdictions like New York City, Washington, have they signed mutual agreements with their counties? Have they?
Like, can you 45 Public Safety - 5/3/05 tell me who for sure has signed this type of agreement in our northeast corridor?
I'm not sure about Baltimore yet, but Washington and New York.
So we're kind of lagging behind on this. And although I understand there's no formal deadline here, but bureaucracy being what it is, the longer we delay this, the longer it will be for us to have additional protection that we all in this country agree, you know, we definitely need, under the circumstances that we're living under; is that correct?
Okay. What I'd like to do is, I'd like to actually have a briefing, have your department, have you guys come over and open the briefing up to all Council members, so that we can become more familiar with this whole process, and have an opportunity to ask questions and redraft and whatever other information you're going to send over. So, what we'd like to do is vote the bill out, but not to have it vote on final passage until we get the information from you and have a briefing for all Council members. Okay?
We won't have it come up for final passage until we are able to schedule the briefing and also get the information that Councilman Rizzo requested and any other member requested.
For background, I drafted the agreement two years ago, pretty 47 Public Safety - 5/3/05 much, the act that was passed in 2002. It was ready for City Council probably last year. It was just held up for various reasons. Just got held up over here.
Now there's a perfect example. You're dumping this thing on us.
Where has it been, on the second floor or on the Managing Director's? I mean that's not fair to us to have --
No, no, no. I wasn't implying that at all. I was just asking if we could expedite the briefing process.
No, but my point is that this thing's been ready to go for two years. Where did it stall? Not in City Council. Just got here. 48 Public Safety - 5/3/05
Well, then, all of a sudden two years of this thing kicking around someplace, we're expected to deal with it in one day? Not me.
Yeah. Sometimes the process around here really doesn't --
-- to not have the information in timely fashion so we can at least, you know, read and get as much information as we can before coming into these hearings.
I'm sorry, sir. I didn't mean to put that on City Council. That was not my intention.
No, no; you weren't. What you were doing is, you pushed my button, telling me this thing's been 49 Public Safety - 5/3/05 sitting someplace in a pipeline. And now it comes here after two years, and you expect me to digest all this stuff and make an intelligent decision. That's not fair to me.
Right. It's not fair to Council members. So, what we want to do is have a briefing and give everybody an opportunity to ask as many questions as they need to ask, to become comfortable with this whole -- with this whole bill. So at this point we will close -- if there are no other questions from Council members or committee members, we will close the public hearing and move into the public meeting. (Public hearing concluded at 11:33 a.m.) 50 Public Safety - 5/3/05 CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the proceedings and evidence are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me upon the public hearing of The Philadelphia City Council, taken on May 3, 2005, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. _____________________________ DAVID A. DEIK, RPR and Commissioner of Deeds (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means, unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.) 51 Public Safety - 5/3/05 - - - COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC MEETING - COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Tuesday, May 3, 2005, 11:33 a.m. - - - Bill 050071 - An ordinance authorizing the Managing Director, on behalf of the City, to execute a mutual aid agreement, creating the Southeastern Pennsylvania Terrorism Task Force, SEPTTF, under certain terms and conditions. PRESENT: COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER, Chair COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE L. BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN JUAN F. RAMOS COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO - - - V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 52 Public Safety - 5/3/05 - - - P R O C E E D I N G S - - -
I'm sorry. The administration will work with Council to schedule a briefing as soon as possible, to make sure that all Council members have all the documentation that they need.
Will you please state your name for the record, please.
So what you're saying, Kia, is that the administration will arrange for the briefing.
The administration will handle it, any particular issues that Council members have with regard to topics to be discussed. We planned that the briefing will 53 Public Safety - 5/3/05 be comprehensive, but in light of some of the questions that came up today, we're going to try to tailor it and have a specific agenda to cover at least the things that were brought to our attention at today's hearing.
Okay. I'd like someone to make a motion on Bill Number 050071 to move it out of committee.
Madam Chair, I move that Bill Number 050071 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation; further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting, pending a briefing.
I retract that, at the request of the Chair. 54 Public Safety - 5/3/05
Okay. It has been moved that Bill Number 050071 be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation.
Because we're going to have a briefing. We are going to have everything that everybody wants.
I know you said it once, but we're going to hold this going to the first reading of Council, correct, until we're...
I said it 55 Public Safety - 5/3/05 twice, actually.
So we have Councilman Rizzo and Councilman Cohen voting no, Councilwoman Blackwell, Councilwoman Miller and Councilman Ramos voting yes.
I think it's far better if we didn't take a vote on this today because we're asking for information. A vote no will indicate to some people that there's opposition which may or may not exist. There may be support; if it's a good thing, we're for it. But we can not properly be asked to vote on something when facts are not made available to us, particularly under the circumstances where for more than two years this matter has been known to the administration and not imparted to the Council. 56 Public Safety - 5/3/05
I agree that the administration should have given us much more information in a more timely fashion.
But this is the precise reason I'm concerned about the thing. Are we going to forget normal rules of decency?
We're not forgetting the normal rules of decency? This is not the first time that this kind of situation has come about, where you just don't have the information. I mean, I've had this... Seems like this has happened on many, many occasions since I became a Council member. We're not saying we're going to vote it out. We're saying that we want them to send us information. We will set up a briefing with the administration. Council members will have the opportunity to ask questions and get all the information that's needed before we call this bill up. And if we don't get it, then we won't call it up. 57 Public Safety - 5/3/05
But why should we be in a position where Council is giving preliminary approval when we don't have the information?
And it's the will of the committee. And I understand. You know, I want to respect everyone's point of view. The committee has voted. And I'm trying to assure all committee members that all their needs will be met before we pull this bill up for final vote.
Okay. So the vote's been documented. The vote's been taken. The vote's been documented. This ends the public safety committee hearing. (Public meeting concluded at 11:40 a.m.)
We are taking a re-vote to make sure that everything was done correctly. Councilman Ramos has made the motion.
Second. Councilwoman Blackwell is seconding 58 Public Safety - 5/3/05 the motion to move Bill 050071 out of this committee with a favorable recommendation. All in favor? (Chorus of "ayes.")
All right. Good. Councilman Rizzo, Councilman Cohen is voting no. 13 Councilwoman Miller, Councilwoman Blackwell, Councilman Ramos is voting aye. This meeting is adjourned. Thank you. (Public meeting concluded at 11:42 a.m.) 59 CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the proceedings and evidence are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me upon the public meeting of The Philadelphia City Council, taken on May 3, 2005, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. _____________________________ DAVID A. DEIK, RPR and Commissioner of Deeds (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means, unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.)