COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Thursday, September 14, 2006 9:25 a.m. - - - PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILMAN FRANK DiCICCO COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN JACK KELLY COUNCILWOMAN JOAN L. KRAJEWSKI COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILMAN JUAN RAMOS COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO BILL 060474 - An Ordinance providing for the submission to the qualified electors of the City of Philadelphia of the proposal set forth in a Resolution approved by the Council proposing an amendment of the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter relating to the appointment of the members of the Fairmount Park Commission... RESOLUTION 060485 - Resolution proposing an amendment to the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter relating to the appointment of the members of the Fairmount Park Commission... V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services Eleven Penn Center 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 2 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485
Good morning, everyone. Can I have your attention, please. I regret the delay. This is a public hearing of the Committee of the Whole regarding Bill No. 060474 and Resolution No. 060485. I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of the ordinance 10 and the resolution. MR. McPHERSON: Bill No. 12 060474, an ordinance providing for the submission to the qualified electors of the City of Philadelphia of the proposal set forth in a resolution approved by Council proposing an amendment of the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter relating to the appointment of the members of the Fairmount Park Commission, and authorizing the appropriate officers to publish notice and to make arrangements for the special election. Resolution 060485, resolution 24 proposing an amendment to the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter relating 3 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 to the appointment of the members of the Fairmount Park Commission, and providing for the submission of the amendment of the electors of Philadelphia.
Thank you very much. I would ask Mr. McPherson to please call the first witness. MR. McPHERSON: The first witness is Graham Finney.
Good morning. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good morning, Madam President and members of Council. I am Graham Finney and I'm here representing --
Mr. Finney, just a moment, please. The noise level is much too high. Thank you.
Good morning again. My name is Graham Finney and I'm 4 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 here representing a 12-person task force called the Philadelphia Park Reform Task Force, and we are here to testify on the ordinance and resolution that is before this Council. We give special thanks to the Council for the time that it's giving to this very important issue and special thanks to Councilmembers Clarke and Reynolds Brown for focusing on the importance of the parks and its future. The Park Reform Task Force is a coalition of civic advocates that has spent the last several months looking very carefully at a basic question: What package of legislation and financial reforms are good enough to secure Philadelphia's park's bright future? After that study, we have concluded that our parks require two things: Clearly accountable leadership with the capacity and the incentive to make system-wide improvements, and financial resources that are adequate and 5 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 secure to do it over the long run. Considering the park's present situation, this is no small task. It has a backlog of $50 million in needed capital improvements to trails, facilities, structures. It depends heavily now on volunteers and friends groups to maintain many parks. Its overburdened staff has almost no time to write or administer grants. Its financial structure gives it no incentive to provide income-earning amenities, programs and events. We can say with confidence, we think, that millions of public and private dollars could go unraised or unearned every year because of this lack of capacity. For every project that is tackled -- and we applaud the ones that are -- a dozen more are left undone. Given this, the Task Force concludes that both governance and financial improvements must be implemented if either is to have the 6 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 desired effect. Governance reform, which is the topic today, alone is not enough. New leaders can't be asked to fix a system that is now grievously underfunded, nor is new funding alone enough, not when existing governance structure lacks the credibility and accountability needed to plan and implement improvements on a city-wide scale. Because the bill presented today addresses only governance issues, we deeply regret that we cannot fully support it. Our Task Force has, however, developed a plan which we believe will comprehensively address the park's needs and fulfill the park's promise in increasing the quality of life for Philadelphians and spur its future development. Under governance reform, we argue that the park must be stewarded by an independent commission whose members are appointed in a transparent manner and 7 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 whose duties and responsibilities are clearly delineated. We propose, therefore, that an independent panel of community leaders deliver a slate of Commissioner candidates for the Mayor's approval. The resulting transparency will allow the public to see clearly who is responsible for the state of the parks and hold them accountable. We also call for a budget increase. Fairmount Park's current operating budget is too low to allow even a reformed commission to implement the kind of changes that the public deserves. Currently, about 13 million is what is in the budget. It needs to be more like 30 million. While we don't expect to close that gap overnight, we believe that the City will commit to an increase of to per year. Equally significant amounts can be leveraged each year from private and other public sources. We call for an income retention agreement and a revenue management team 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 to take these improvements on their way. Opportunities for Fairmount Park to earn income, whether through vending contracts, special events, facility rentals, permit fees, whatever, simply go begging now for lack of an incentive.
Currently, any money the park earns goes directly back into the General Fund, leaving the park budgets unchanged and its leadership with little incentive to be entrepreneurial. We believe that the park must have a working agreement with the City under which income it earns is used to bolster the park's budget. With such an agreement in hand, staff dedicated to planning and income management can focus on providing the public with the exciting programs, events and amenities that could earn the park from other sources 3 million or more per year. The fourth point is long-term dedicated funding, a source to make sure that that is the case. This is the most 9 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 complicated part of the package we offer, but it is essential. The needed backlog of capital improvements is so enormous, at least 50 million, that the park must secure a funding stream with which to address it. Over the summer, we have done significant work to assess dedicated funding options. We propose that the City, the Administration and Council explore these options and commit to a solution. We honestly began our work with the hope that we could add our names to the amendments before you today and present the voters with a Charter change question on the November ballot. It is with deep regret that we conclude that is impossible. The finance questions are simply too complex for a responsible and feasible proposal to be created in time. All potential financial improvements for these parks involve multiple stakeholders, and these parties need to be given the time to carefully consider 10 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 them. An incomplete proposal, we worry, stands much too great a chance to fail here in City Council and at the polls in November. Instead, we are supporting a complete package of changes to be addressed according to the following schedule: A May 2007 ballot initiative. This spring, this coming spring, voters would be asked to vote yes or no on a ballot question proposing a new system of Commissioner appointments. Accompanying that legislation would be a clarification of the legal authorities and responsibilities of those Commissioners, as well as a solution to the park retention of its income capacity. A budget increase for Fiscal Year 2008. We urge the Mayor and Council to provide the park with a budget boosted by to million. And, thirdly, launch a process now to address long-term funding needs. We urge the Task Force's initial work be 11 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 a basis for that and we ask that the Mayor and Council commit to a long-term funding plan that will allow the park to undertake a system-wide capital improvement program. Again, we've reached these conclusions only after a lot of hard work over the summer. The group I represent consists of a diverse group of park supporters, independent park commissioners and civic advocates that have considered questions around everything from Commissioner appointments to long-term funding mechanisms. It has retained outside sources, experts, who have in turn consulted with key Philadelphians from both the public and private sectors. It has considered the recommendations earlier sponsored by the Parks Alliance, the Philadelphia Horticultural Society, the Fairmount Park President, Robert Nix's, report and the strategic plan paid for by the City and the William Penn Foundation in 2004 and 12 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 5. We recognize that this is an ambitious, complicated proposal, but the decisions we make at this pivotal moment will have a profound and long-lasting effect on our City and its parks. Our incomparable system is one of the greatest assets we have. It serves every citizen of every age, race, class and interest. It elevates the quality of life in every neighborhood.
With its wild spaces, its facilities for fun and relaxation, its history and its beauty, its critical role in protecting our water supply and our waterways, Fairmount Park should be the jewel in our civic crown, helping to attract and retain residents and businesses and visitors for years to come. So in conclusion, Madam President, may I thank you and members of Council again for the work that you have undertaken thus far on this vital issue, and urge that you consider the package of 13 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 proposals that I have just presented for the Task Force. We can assure you that we stand ready to work with you over time to make sure that this package takes full impact. We want to work with you in achieving that goal, and in doing so, we will have greatly increased the importance and the beauty and the role that in everyday life the park system plays in this City. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Finney. We appreciate your coming in to testify. Are there any questions or comments from members of the Committee of Mr. Finney? Councilwoman Brown.
Thank you, Madam President. Mr. Finney, would you concur that the amendments that Councilman Clarke and I have put forth were indeed reflective of a number of concerns and 14 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 legitimate issues raised by you and members of the Task Force, that the amendments were reflective of concerns raised by your group?
I am more than happy to concur, and when I pointed you and Councilman Clarke out for special attention, it was with that reminder in my mind, and I think all members of the Task Force fully appreciate the job that you've done in putting this before the public's attention. You may have, however, opened a bigger box than you thought you were doing, because the funding part of this strikes us as being the twin, the other side that has to be dealt with before real success and forward movement can occur.
Would you also concur that to the funding issue, Councilman Clarke and I heard that and in June of '06 of this year, Councilman Clarke, along with Councilman Nutter and myself, introduced legislation calling 15 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 upon the Mayor to appoint a Parks and Recreation Funding Task Force?
Yes. We're very aware of that, and I think we have said to you very directly that the work we did over the summer with the aid of our own experts would be clearly made available to you as that task force begins its work. From the nature of my testimony, our point would be that we urge you to do that as quickly and to think as big as you possibly can and still be responsible about how the future of the parks might be funded.
Is it fair to say that a year ago when Councilman Clarke and I sat down with you and members of your team, we made it clear that our preferred date to act on this was May and at the request of the group, we then delayed it to today, September? Is that accurate?
That is accurate. 16 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485
Thank you very much for your testimony. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you. Are there any other questions or comments? The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
First I would like to thank you for participating in this long process, that we're being asked today to extend the process, which I'm personally willing to do as it relates to the funding aspect of the bill, but there is a certain time line associated with one of the things that was requested by all members, and that deals with the selection of commission members. 17 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 Am I correct in my understanding that the current term of members expires in '07?
So if the members' term expires in '07 prior to the passage of this bill, am I correct in my assumption that the Board of Judges will elect the new Commissioners and for the next term?
I don't pretend to be the legal expert on this. I think that is correct, that absent an alternative process, the judges would still be in the process. Whether they chose to extend the terms of existing Commissioners, which would be one option I would think, or make other appointments is beyond my ability to comment.
So by you not having the legal expertise, can you acknowledge that during the course of this discussion -- and, frankly speaking, 18 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 beyond maybe a judge or two -- everyone has indicated that they would prefer to have an extremely transparent process, unlike the current process? And I'm not implying that anybody is doing anything wrong, but it is not a transparent process. The Board of Judges solicit names, they make a decision outside of the public purview. My understanding during all this discussion is that everybody thinks that process should change.
That is certainly incorporated in the testimony that I just made, that a more transparent process that would reach out and encourage people deeply interested in the park system to want to be and even compete to be a member of this body.
So can you acknowledge that if we allow the Board of Judges to select the next term and the next commission members, that it would be problematic in terms of our ability to 19 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 undo that, as opposed to simply instituting a process that allows us to have a new transparent process at the time of the expiration of their term?
I think I am unable really to speak for the entire Task Force on that particular point. I do think that the gist of what we have said is really more to the point, that to put a new commission into office without giving them more financial resources to do the job would be both to discourage the selection of those people who would want to do it and, B, would tie their hands upon taking office. I think, therefore, the persuasive point to us has been that movement on both sides must take place at the same time.
Which is the basis for our saying quite politely and with due respect to both of you as sponsors of 20 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 this legislation that we would be better off to wait until May of next year.
But you seem to not understand -- or I don't know if you don't understand or if you just disagree. There's a process in place that will allow the selection process to be transparent, which we all agree that it should be, and that process would not take place until the spring, the expiration of the current term of the members. We have a budget process that traditionally starts in around February when the Mayor submits his budget, actually in January, the Mayor submits his budget, and then we start deliberations as it relates to funding for departments, that the likelihood that that discussion could be had in that budget process -- and sometimes we tend to have some resolution to the budget by the end of May -- that will coincide with the selection of new members. So given the prior commitment 21 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 by a couple of members -- and I'm sure that all Councilmembers are interested in making sure that we have a first-class park -- if you have a budget process that runs concurrent to the selection process, that we could probably end up in a place, although it may not be the dollar figure that people are interested in, it may be more, it may be less, but if you have a concurrent process, a budget process and a process of soliciting members, that if that ended in the spring of '07, that would be the best process, as opposed to allowing the Board of Judges to select members to a new five-year term. I don't know how legally high we would be able to undo that particular selection process.
I don't mean to be off target in responding, but, clearly, I think our group would also say that the chances of having favorable passage by the voters of the proposed legislation would be greater given the time to build the movement to get the support publicly 22 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 across the City where there are very many different views about the future of the parks.
Which is why that we are saying that May 2007 makes more sense.
In the spring of '07, the Board of Judges will select new commission members for a five-year term. That's it. You don't have an opportunity to now say, We're going to disregard that selection process and we're going to create a new one. I mean, you understand the time line and all?
I do understand the time line, and I'm presenting an alternative time line.
But you 23 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 can't do that. You can't dictate to the Board of Judges how they're going to -- that's a part of the problem, that the Board of Judges don't have to answer to you, to me or any other members in this body.
We understand that. We understand, however, that the Board of Judges needs to be a party to the solution to this problem and that should be forthcoming.
Thank you. Are there any other questions or comments by members of the Committee? (No response.)
Seeing none, Mr. Finney, I thank you for coming in to testify.
Thank you, Madam 24 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 President.
Thank you. Our next witness? MR. McPHERSON: Is there anyone else to testify?
We had another witness, who left. Are there any other witnesses to testify? (No response.)
Thank you, Madam President. I'd like to put several remarks on the record prior to us taking action on this measure and to put why we are here today into context. The record should reflect that it was spring '01, my second year here in the Philadelphia City Council, when the Daily News, I believe, shined a very objective, insightful, yet informative spotlight on this quality of life issue, our parks. It was because of the "Acres 25 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 of Neglect" series by the Daily News that Councilman Clarke, Nutter and myself introduced a resolution authorizing hearings in June '01. That was followed by the Philadelphia William Penn Foundation and our City putting up dollars, matching funds, to fund a strategic plan. December '02, the City hired Leon Younger, who has a distinguished consultant operation out of Ohio, which has a distinguished record in evaluating parks around our City. From December '02 to June '04, months, our City was involved in the 17 strategic plan process where stakeholders 18 of all types and stripes were interviewed about what we needed to do differently and better to improve our parks. As a result of the strategic plan, in June '05, again Councilmembers Clarke and myself introduced a Charter change to adopt the strategic plan and a recommendation to merge Fairmount Park 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 and the Department of Recreation. In September '05, we listened to the park advocates, their legitimate concerns raised about the merger, and introduced legislation extending the implementation date. So the first request to extend the implementation date happened September '05, a year ago. In December of this year, Councilman Clarke and I then did a public forum at the Philadelphia Free Library where we invited the public to come and hear directly from us the outcome of the strategic plan and our recommendations. In December of '05, we held hearings on the Charter change legislation. Again, we listened to the issues raised by the park advocates and amended the legislation in March of this year based on language offered to us by our park advocates. In May of this year, we took the issue of merger off the table. We heard and listened to the legitimate 27 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 concerns raised by park advocates and members of the commission, and we took the issue of merger off the table and opted to focus on creating a more and fair process of selecting Commissioners. In June of this year, we introduced amendments to that order, as well as again listening to legitimate concerns raised by park advocates and a recommendation in the strategic plan that we needed to look at and address the issue of funding. Thus, introducing a resolution asking the Mayor to appoint a Parks and Recreation Task Force. As the previous witness has mentioned, there were a number of meetings this summer, all in an effort to move us to greater and broader compromise. So we want to thank the park advocates for their input. We need to acknowledge the valuable perspectives that came from members of the Fairmount Park Commission. All of us have worked 28 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 very, very hard. However, the legislative process requires give and take compromise, but eventually we have to act. And today's Daily News said it best. I quote, "Reform legislation is too important to delay again," end quote. So with that, we're asking our Council colleagues to consider the amendments before us and let's now give the voters a chance to tell us what they would like to see happen with our parks come this November. Thank you, Madam President.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, real briefly, I just want to go over the amendment to make sure there's no confusion and clarify as best as possible. Earlier this year, I think next 29 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 to our last session, there were some amendments that essentially set up a nominating panel. The nominating panel would be a diverse nominating panel recognizing the demographics of the City of Philadelphia. The nominating panel would be an independent body that would essentially recommend members based on a set of criteria for Commissioners, though Commissioners must have something that could benefit their tenure as a commission member; i.e., understanding of the park, understanding of financing, understand park lands and things of that nature that's been spelled out in the resolution. Additionally, then the process would be that the nominating panel would forward those recommendations to the Mayor. The Mayor would then, after review, forward those recommendations to the City Council of Philadelphia. There is a change in the amendment today based on the suggestion 30 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 of two of the members that as opposed to simply having a non-vote majority, that we should have a super majority; i.e., two-thirds Councilmembers voting for the recommended body. Each individual nominee would have a public hearing similar to the public hearings that we have for other boards and commissions. It would be an extremely, extremely transparent process. We would make sure that the nominating panel understands that their recommendations should reflect the diversity of the City, because we want to make sure that we have people on all walks of life on that commission. We think that this is a process that will work. As earlier indicated in the testimony, we have made a commitment, Councilwoman and myself, have made a commitment to work on helping to get some additional funding, because we clearly understand that Fairmount Park is underfunded, as are most departments in the City of Philadelphia, but if we do 31 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 not take this step today, the reality is that we will simply accept the status quo and things will never change and we'll continue to have this discussion on through the next Administration. So I'm asking for the support of our colleagues today to ask to support the amendments so we can move this process forward. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you. Are there any other comments from members of the Committee? (No response.)
Seeing none, this will conclude the public hearing. We will now go into the public meeting, and the Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke for a motion on Bill 21 No. 060474.
Madam President, I move for the adoption of the amendment to Bill No. 060474. (Duly seconded.) 32 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485
It has been moved and seconded that the amendments as circulated will be approved. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the amendments are adopted. The Chair again recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Madam President, I move that Bill No. 060474 as amended be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation.
It has been moved and seconded that Bill No. 25 060474 be reported out of Committee with 33 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 a favorable recommendation as amended.
Council President? Councilman Clarke, suspension of the rules?
I'm sorry. I ask for a rules suspension, Madam President. Thank you, Councilwoman.
You're welcome. It has been moved and seconded that Bill No. 060474 be reported out of Committee as amended. Further, that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit consideration of the ordinance at our next session of Council. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. 34 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown for a motion on Resolution 060485.
Thank you, Madam President. I move that Resolution 7 No. 060485 be moved out of Committee with a favorable recommendation, suspension of the rules, amendment.
There's also an amendment to the resolution. The two-thirds majority language is in the actual resolution.
Thank you, Councilman Clarke. I move that Resolution No. 19 060485 be amended.
No. 21 Offer approval for the adoption of the amendments.
Be adopted as amended and with the suspension of the rules so that it could be considered at 35 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485 the next session of City Council.
Move for the approval of the adoption of the amendments first, please.
Approval for the adoption of the amendment. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that the amendments as distributed be adopted. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. Councilwoman Brown.
Thank you, Madam President. I move that Resolution 22 No. 060485 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and with the suspension of the rules. (Duly seconded.) 36 9/14/06 - WHOLE - BILL 060474 - RES. 060485
I don't think we need a suspension. It has been moved and seconded that Resolution No. 060485 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation as amended. I don't believe we have to suspend the rules on that. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it, the motion carries, and this concludes our public meeting. I thank you all very much. (Committee of the Whole adjourned at 10:15 a.m.) - - - 37 CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the proceedings, evidence and objections are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me upon the foregoing matter on September 14, 2006, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. ______________________________ MICHELE L. MURPHY RPR-Notary Public (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.)