COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA2 COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY3 Room 400, City Hall6 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Wednesday, March 16, 20117 10:20 a.m. PRESENT: COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER, CHAIR10 COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN DARRELL CLARKE11 COUNCILMAN WILLIAM K. GREENLEE COUNCILMAN CURTIS JONES, JR.12 COUNCILMAN JAMES KENNEY COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO, JR.13 BILL 110111 - An Ordinance amending Title 9 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Regulation of15 Businesses, Trades and Professions," by enacting a new Chapter 9-3000, entitled "Fair16 Criminal Record Screening Standards," to establish provisions and requirements for the17 screening of criminal records by certain employers within the City of Philadelphia...18 19 - - -20 21 22 23 24 25 2 1
Good2 morning, everyone. Good morning. This3 Committee is about to begin.4 Good morning. I'm Councilwoman5 Donna Reed Miller, the Chair of the6 Public Safety Committee. Also in7 attendance is, to my right, Councilman8 Jim Kenney, Councilman Bill Greenlee, and9 to my left, or somewhere in the room, is10 Councilman Rizzo. There he is over11 there.12 Would the Clerk please read the13 title of this bill.14
Bill 110111, an15 Ordinance amending Title 9 of The16 Philadelphia Code, entitled "Regulation17 of Businesses, Trades and Professions,"18 by enacting a new Chapter 9-3000,19 entitled "Fair Criminal Record Screening20 Standards," to establish provisions and21 requirements for the screening of22 criminal records by certain employers23 within the City of Philadelphia, all24 under certain terms and conditions.25 3 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111
Thank2 you.3 I would like to begin by4 thanking those who have taken an interest5 in Philadelphia and its problems with6 individuals with criminal records.7 Should ex-offenders be given a8 chance? The answer should be yes.9 We're here today to discuss how10 to help individuals with criminal records11 get back on their feet after they have12 paid their debt to society. When we held13 them -- when we help them, we help14 ourselves.15 Those folks with criminal16 records are discriminated against, and17 nobody seems to mind. Unfortunately,18 discrimination carries many hats, and19 today we will be looking at the blatant20 discrimination in employment. It is21 somewhat disturbing that this22 discrimination is not even considered23 discrimination but rather caution or the24 exercise of good judgment.25 4 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 For many years, I've been2 working on legislation that would help3 with discrimination against individuals4 with criminal records in the area of5 employment. Ban-the-box legislation6 applies to all employers, public or7 private, with the exception of the8 employers that are required to do9 background checks by law.10 The ban-the-box legislation11 simply prohibits discrimination on12 arrests or charges without convictions.13 Nothing new. The legislation prohibits14 potential employers from asking or15 conducting any inquiries regarding16 criminal records during the application.17 The legislation prohibits potential18 employers from asking or conducting any19 inquiries regarding criminal records20 during the first interview. If an21 employer does not conduct any interviews,22 then they are not permitted to conduct23 any inquiries regarding criminal records.24 After the first interview, the25 5 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 potential employer is then permitted to2 take any action legally available to3 them. This is no different than what4 they are doing now.5 This legislation does require6 the employer to hire anyone -- does not7 require the employer to hire anyone with8 a criminal record. The legislation does9 not require the employer to hire anyone10 with conduct or inquiries regarding11 criminal records. The only harm that we12 see the potential employer encountering13 is the time and money spent creating new14 applications, reading applications and15 interviewing individuals.16 A blanket denial of all17 individuals with a criminal record is18 currently illegal under the Pennsylvania19 state law. The legislation does not20 affect current Pennsylvania state law21 that states felony and misdemeanor22 convictions may be considered by the23 employer only to the extent to which the24 criminal record relates to the25 6 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 applicant's suitability for employment in2 the position for which he has applied, 183 Pennsylvania C.S.A. Section 9125.4 With that in mind, are there5 any Committee members who wish to speak6 on this issue?7 (No response.)8
Okay.9 I'd also like to note that Councilman10 Curtis Jones to my left is also in11 attendance, a member of this Committee.12 We're going to start with our13 first couple witnesses, and our first14 witness is Everett Gillison, Deputy Mayor15 of Public Safety; Brendan Lynch,16 Community Legal Services -- okay.17 Everett, you're going to be by yourself.18 Thank you.19 (Witness approached witness20 table.)21
Good24 morning.25 7 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111
Hi.2 Please speak into the mike and identify3 yourself for the record and proceed with4 your testimony.5 DEPUTY
7 Good morning, Councilwoman8 Miller and members of the Public Safety9 Committee. 10 I am the Deputy Mayor for Public Safety11 for the City of Philadelphia. Thank you12 for the opportunity to appear before you13 today on behalf of the Nutter14 Administration to offer testimony15 concerning Bill No. " This new chapter22 will establish provisions limiting23 questions that may be asked by certain24 employers within the City of Philadelphia25 8 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 regarding the arrest record of applicants2 for employment. 19 As I have previously testified20 before this Committee, ex-offenders who21 are determined to turn their lives around22 and become law-abiding, productive23 members of society oftentimes face24 considerable barriers. I have witnessed25 9 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 the difficulties many ex-offenders face2 when they attempt to leave their criminal3 lives in the past. In an attempt to4 assist our citizens who are returning to5 our neighborhoods after a period of6 incarceration or who may be on probation,7 this Administration has established,8 through Mayoral Executive Order, the9 Office of Reintegration Services for10 Ex-Offenders, or RISE. The RISE staff11 has the daunting task of assisting those12 with criminal records find employment,13 obtain adequate housing and enroll in14 educational programs. As I have15 previously stated, one of the most16 important things an individual needs in17 order to be successful upon release from18 prison and not return to criminal19 activity is a job, a job that pays a20 living wage. "9 Our understanding of the intent10 of this bill is that it would provide11 those ex-offenders who have committed12 themselves to becoming law-abiding,13 productive members of society with a14 chance to show his or her qualifications15 and meet an interviewer before being16 required to disclose their criminal17 record. 20 This Administration is mindful21 of the concerns that the business22 community has with respect to passage of23 this bill. We recognize the dangers that24 layers of employment requirements imposed25 11 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 at solely the City level can have on our2 competitiveness as a city for attracting3 and growing jobs, including jobs we hope4 ex-offenders can compete for. We have5 particular concerns about getting6 ex-offenders to work. However, in order7 to help reduce our crime rate, and for8 this reason, we see a special need for9 this type of regulation here. 14 I also want to make two points15 very clear. This bill does not compel16 businesses to hire ex-offenders, nor does17 this bill prohibit businesses from18 inquiring into an applicant's criminal19 past and denying employment based upon an20 applicant's criminal record. The costs21 and benefits of more far-reaching22 proposals in these areas would present a23 far more difficult question for this24 Administration. The bill, however,25 12 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 merely asks that the ex-offender2 applicant be given the opportunity to3 demonstrate to a prospective employer4 that he or she possesses the skills5 necessary to perform the job before6 criminal history is considered and not be7 eliminated from consideration at the8 beginning of the process based perhaps on9 unfair assumptions about a person the10 employer has not even met. 16 Ex-offenders are not asking for17 a handout or special consideration, and18 this bill does not provide for that. 5
Thank6 you. Thank you, Mr. Gillison.7 Do you have copies of the8 amendment?9 DEPUTY
I have10 a single copy here. I believe that I11 passed it to your staff member yesterday,12 but I have an extra copy here. It13 basically speaks to defining what the14 initial interview is and just clears up15 what it means by "initial interview." We16 wanted to be helpful in defining what17 that means. And I understand it's being18 wordsmithed and it may have even been19 wordsmithed over night, but I didn't get20 an opportunity to see the final21 amendment, so that's why I prepared my22 testimony in that way.23
Okay.24 We're going to have the Sergeant-of-Arms25 14 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 make copies and give you your copy back.2 DEPUTY
Well, I5 want to thank you for coming in this6 morning to testify. I think we're all7 pretty much on the same page.8 DEPUTY
And when11 you -- as you stated in your last12 paragraph, that we just want to help13 people have a real opportunity to gain14 employment rather than to have their15 applications, which we all know happens,16 as soon as an employer sees that box, you17 know what happens to the application.18 And that's why we're having this hearing19 today and that's why we proposed this20 bill.21 Here in Philadelphia we have a22 number of folks that fit into the23 category, and we have people constantly24 returning from state prisons or local25 15 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 prisons or federal prisons that we need2 to help become what they want to be, and3 that's law-abiding citizens with a job.4 So thank you.5 Does anybody else -- okay.6 Councilman Greenlee and then Councilman7 Jones.8 COUNCILMAN GREENLEE:9 Mr. Gillison, good morning.10 DEPUTY
As far as13 being a wordsmith, isn't that what14 lawyers do?15 DEPUTY
I just18 had a question. Have there been19 statistics as far as recidivism as far as20 people who get employment vis-a-vis that21 don't?22 DEPUTY
I don't25 16 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 know if I said that right.2 DEPUTY
I3 understand. Most of the statistics will4 show you that within -- a person getting5 out of jail, if they do not have two6 critical things, stable housing and work7 when they get out or at least within six8 months of them getting out, they9 recidivate at about a 75 percent rate.10
I mean,11 it just seems to make sense, and I agree12 with Councilwoman Miller, this is just13 giving people a chance. So it seems to14 make sense.15 Thank you.16 COUNCILWOMAN MILLER:17 Councilman Jones.18
How are you,23 Deputy Mayor?24 I just want to take a second to25 17 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 acknowledge and thank our Chairperson,2 Donna Reed Miller, for her work3 memorializing this. This goes back a4 long way. It precedes my election. And5 just to give her a thank you for always6 looking out at issues that might not be7 in some people's comfort zone, but is8 definitely in her comfort zone and moving9 this issue forward. So as Chair of this10 Committee, I just want to acknowledge11 that hard work and thank you for it.12
My next15 question would be -- is the Commerce16 Department going to testify today or --17 DEPUTY
I'm the18 representative from the City, because19 we're all on the same page.20
All right.21 Can I ask you this question: Does the22 City as an employer have the box23 currently?24 DEPUTY
It was4 officially eliminated on -- the last5 vestige was on the online system, and I6 think that was taken off as of either7 Friday or Monday, finally.8
So we9 finally took that off, and I think that10 is a bold step as a government, because11 if we're going to ask the private sector12 to do something, it seems as though we13 should have done that. And I want to14 take a look at how that -- at least we15 can monitor that within our own system to16 see how that impacts our employment17 practices and what kinds of things come18 up from it.19 Currently, didn't we, even if20 people check the box in certain21 departments, ignored that or did not have22 that as a deterrent?23 DEPUTY
That's24 correct.25 19 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111
And what2 departments were they?3 DEPUTY MAYOR GILLISON:4 Streets, Water were the two primary ones,5 because we have been able to hire folks6 in those departments that have7 convictions in the last -- over the last8 years of this Administration.9
So do you10 have a recollection of how long ago we --11 DEPUTY
And how has17 that impacted your employment practices18 one way or another? Do we hire19 ex-offenders?20 DEPUTY
We hire25 20 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 them. I mean, obviously as this2 Committee and Council really knows, we've3 been suffering through both a hiring4 freeze because due to our economic5 situation in the City and we have mostly6 attrited. We're down over a thousand,7 almost 2,000 people less in the City8 employment, but where we have been able9 to hire, we have taken steps, and Al10 D'Attilio, who is the head of the Human11 Resources in the City, takes it upon12 himself as a result of the Code13 requirements that if a department wants14 to say that this person is not eligible15 because of a conviction, it is his job to16 review to see whether or not that is a17 valid matter.18 All over the country that's19 what cities usually do. They have a20 central place where if an HR department21 says a person cannot be hired because of22 the conviction, there's a rational23 relationship test that says you're in the24 Streets Department, the person will be25 21 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 doing X, what does the fact that he has a2 conviction for drugs have to do with his3 ability to do X, and it is pushed back.4 It's also consistent with EEO5 requirements of the federal government.6 We are trying to in this7 instance not just catch up to where other8 cities are but actually surpass them,9 because the Mayor feels that it is such10 an important distinction that the City of11 Philadelphia is seen as a welcoming place12 for all, and that includes persons who13 have done their time, have committed to14 turning themselves around and providing15 opportunities. So we've done that.16 The Streets Department and the17 Water Department, with Deputy Mayor Rina18 Cutler leading the way, I have both19 applauded and said thank you to them and20 to her specifically for making sure that21 we just don't talk the talk, we walk the22 walk.23
So we have24 experienced no ill effects?25 22 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 DEPUTY
And I just4 want to get that on the record. And we5 have done so for a number of years now?6 DEPUTY
At the end9 of the day, I guess the intent of this10 legislation is to not have an automatic X11 out of the equation for hiring, and in12 removing this box, it has allowed the13 City to do that and then go further into14 review to see if it's a bona fide reason15 not to employ someone.16 DEPUTY MAYOR GILLISON:17 Correct.18
And that's19 what we're intending to do for a wider20 number of employers.21 DEPUTY
That's22 correct. It's leveling the playing23 field; that's all. It just says that if24 you have the ability to compete, you25 23 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 should be able to compete and not have an2 artificial barrier to competing.3
Thank6 you.7 I too want to thank the8 Administration for taking the action and9 removing the question off City10 applications, even though we do know that11 there are some departments such as12 Recreation and other departments where we13 do need to know, you do need to know14 history.15 So I do have a question. I'm16 just trying to formulate it.17 DEPUTY
When it19 comes to enforcement, can you just help20 me understand what an individual who is21 wrong can expect to face in terms of City22 application or --23 DEPUTY
When it24 comes to enforcement? I'm sorry. I lost25 24 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 the question.2
Just in6 terms of violations of the chapters in7 this bill, at the top of , it says,8 "Enforcement. The Mayor's Office of9 Labor Standards, or such other office or10 agency as the Mayor shall designate,11 shall administer and enforce this12 Chapter."13 DEPUTY
Yes. I14 believe what we will be doing is to make15 sure that we have a process that will be16 able to be reviewed. Obviously the17 process is new. We're going to have to18 put up regulations and to find out how19 that will be done. Currently, it's under20 the purview of Al D'Attilio and the21 Director of Human Resources to push back22 if it is found that there is a reason23 that a person wasn't given to be eligible24 to compete, those things going back and25 25 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 forth. We'll actually have to write and2 see exactly how we would do it as we go3 forward. So I don't have a specific4 answer, but I'll get one as we move this5 process forward.6
Thank you,10 Madam Chair.11 Just let me say from the outset12 that I am totally supportive of the13 concept of this effort. There is no way14 that folks can get back into the15 mainstream, back into productive lives,16 back into tax-paying lives unless we give17 them an opportunity to work. If you18 eliminate -- if you remember the19 old-style movies back in the '30s and20 '40s when the guy got out of prison and21 he went and found a job at the diner and22 he worked for six months and everybody23 loved him, and then they found out he was24 a convict and then fired him and he went25 26 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 back to a life of crime.2 So from that perspective, I3 think that this is extremely important4 that we give people every opportunity to5 get their lives back in order and not to6 go back to where they were just let out7 from.8 I have one question relative to9 the amendment, and this is more of a kind10 of technical issue. The pages are not11 numbered, but in one of the sections it12 says, "In connection with the licensing13 or employment of any person, it shall be14 an unlawful discriminatory practice for a15 city, agency or private employer to make16 any inquiry regarding or to require any17 person to disclose or reveal criminal18 convictions."19 Does that mean in your mind or20 in the sponsor's mind, does that mean21 that you can't make an inquiry to a22 police or to a law enforcement agency --23 DEPUTY
-- or you25 27 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 can't ask the person?2 DEPUTY
No.3 Well, the sponsor actually has the better4 answer to that. I can tell you what --5 in policing, it's not covered by this. A6 public safety exception is actually built7 into the bill.8
So that10 doesn't apply.11 Obviously with the police,12 there are certain rules and laws that13 require a back -- and that's on (a), "The prohibition of such inquiries15 or adverse action shall not apply if such16 inquiries or adverse action is17 specifically required or permitted by any18 other law." So that section actually19 covers the specific matter that you've20 just brought up, Councilman.21
I want to22 make sure that whatever comes out of here23 is totally understandable by all the24 employers and the folks who are applying25 28 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 for the position.2 DEPUTY
So does the5 term "any inquiry" mean to you that the6 interviewer is not allowed to ask the7 person or they're not allowed to ask an8 enforcement agency that has these9 records?10 DEPUTY
They're11 not allowed to ask the person, and what12 we're trying to do -- and remember, the13 intent of this is to have the opportunity14 for the person to have that first15 interview.16
And18 once you have the first interview, if the19 job that you're trying to get has some20 rational relationship to a security21 issue, the second interview -- and now22 the employer has made the -- said, Well,23 this person not only has the24 qualifications, has the aptitude and25 29 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 everything else, I'm thinking about2 giving this person the job, if at that3 time they have a second interview or a4 second pass and they've brought them back5 and they feel that this job does have a6 secure or has some relationship to7 knowing what the criminal record is, you8 are free to ask. What we're trying to do9 is get people that first opportunity.10
I'm totally11 down with getting rid of the box. I12 mean --13 DEPUTY
I mean, if16 you don't get rid of the box, you're17 never going to get -- it's going to go18 from the desk of the HR person into the19 trash, and the box should go.20 DEPUTY
See,24 that's why we --25 30 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111
Do you2 consider the acceptance of the3 application the first one?4 DEPUTY
So at that9 interview, say I like -- there's no box.10 I like the person's qualifications and I11 call them in for the first interview. So12 at that interview, I'm not permitted to13 ask that question?14 DEPUTY
Now, what20 if I decide after the first interview21 that I don't need a second interview, I'd22 like to hire the guy or lady, can you ask23 then?24
Yes.25 31 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 DEPUTY
I2 believe it's the intent of the sponsor to3 say yes, and I think we would agree.4
Because5 what I'd like to see -- and I don't know6 if we ever get there or not. What I'd7 like to see is the employer community at8 some point embrace a piece of legislation9 that says, yes, this is fair, that we10 need to get folks where we want them to11 be. And you can't do that if I go to12 eliminate them by looking at a piece of13 paper and seeing a checked box and14 tossing the application.15 DEPUTY
You know,23 there are jobs -- I think the first part24 of your question I kind of missed, but I25 32 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 think the exemptions and -- none of the2 jobs that are required by federal law, by3 state law to do background checks are4 included in this.5
No, but9 that does eliminate what my question was.10 So that there are instances where federal11 law is going to require that that be12 done?13 DEPUTY
It's just16 that, for example, on a construction site17 or whatever -- you could give me a bunch18 of different examples of jobs -- that19 it's not required?20 DEPUTY
That's25 33 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 correct.2
Thank3 you.4 Any other questions for5 Mr. Gillison?6 (No response.)7
All12 right. Brendan Lynch, Community Legal13 Services, and Mike Lee, the NLG14 Expungement Clinic. Come up together.15 (Witnesses approached witness16 table.)17
Hi. Make18 sure you pull the mike up to you so we19 can hear you. State your name and any20 other identifying information and proceed21 with your testimony. And it doesn't22 matter to me who goes first.23
Good morning,24 Chairwoman Miller and City Council25 34 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 members. I am Brendan Lynch. I'm a2 staff attorney in the Employment Unit at3 Community Legal Services, and I'd like to4 thank you for the opportunity to testify5 today about Bill No. 11 There is a profound need for12 action to assist people with criminal13 records who need to find work. At CLS,14 by far the most common reason that people15 come in to seek the assistance of my16 unit, the Employment Unit, is that their17 criminal record is preventing them from18 getting a job. 21 CLS can sometimes help people22 with expunging a record if they were not23 convicted. Under certain circumstances,24 we can assist in expunging a summary25 35 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 offense, but, of course, people still2 face barriers if they're not eligible for3 expungement or if the judge denies our4 petition for expungement. And ultimately5 the most serious barriers to employment6 are caused by misdemeanor and felony7 convictions, which cannot be expunged for8 anyone who is under 70 years of age. The9 only way to remove those charges from10 someone's record is to get a pardon from11 the Governor. 17 This ordinance promises to be18 helpful for these workers. 4 This ordinance would help5 workers by doing two main things. Number6 one, the bill would prevent employers7 from asking about arrests that did not8 lead to conviction. Now, our state9 Superior Court has interpreted our10 Criminal History Record Information Act,11 the law that Councilwoman Miller has12 cited in her opening statement, Section13 9125, to mean that employers may not14 base -- in Pennsylvania, employers may15 not base employment decisions on arrests16 that did not lead to conviction. The17 court said that any experience with a18 criminal justice system which falls short19 of a conviction is not a fair20 consideration by the employer considering21 hiring an individual with that22 experience. 4 As a general rule, however,5 existing law does permit employers to ask6 applicants about arrests, even though7 they are not allowed to consider those8 arrests when they make employment9 decisions. This distinction, of course,10 makes no sense. Allowing employers to11 obtain arrest information only puts them12 in the position to consider it, which13 they're not permitted to do. 15 The second thing the bill would16 do is that it would prohibit employers17 from investigating job applicants'18 criminal convictions until after their19 initial application and initial job20 interview. Under this ordinance,21 employers would still have every right to22 learn about applicants' criminal records23 and to take those convictions into24 account to the extent that they are25 38 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 legitimately related to the applicant's2 suitability for the job. 8 Employers would merely have to give9 applicants a chance to fill out an10 application and present themselves so11 that they could be seen and evaluated as12 three-dimensional human beings or spoken13 to or contacted in some way so that there14 was a direct person-to-person contact and15 they could be considered and greeted and16 talked to as a human being. 20 It is true that some employers21 will still reject applicants even after22 an initial interview as soon as they23 learn that the person has a record,24 without any regard to what is on that25 39 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 record or whether it is even relevant to2 that person's suitability for the job for3 which they are applying. Such casual4 dismissal of an applicant based on a5 sweeping blanket policy against6 ex-offenders is actually illegal under7 federal and state law, but we know that8 it still goes on. That's a larger9 problem which is not going to be solved10 by this one ordinance.
19 One particular benefit of this20 system would be that applicants would21 have a much better opportunity to explain22 confusing or unclear entries on their23 criminal records. Employers are much24 more likely to be willing to listen to25 40 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 and to consider an explanation of a2 criminal record if it comes from someone3 they have already gotten to know a little4 bit. 12 I'd like -- this is something13 that often comes up in my work, which is14 why I want to address it. The ability to15 explain a record is an important one for16 many people who are seeking work. State17 police records, which are the official18 criminal records for citizens of the19 Commonwealth, are often incomplete or20 erroneous. Many people also have a21 status such as Section 17 or ARD, which22 are sometimes listed on a state police23 record or other records as, quote,24 probation without verdict. And these25 41 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 terms are confusing to employers, who2 typically assume that they mean the3 person was convicted. 16 I'd like to point out that in17 my experience, many employers in18 Philadelphia already do exactly what this19 bill would require. They put off20 consideration of an applicant's criminal21 record until after the application phase22 is complete. 9 And that conclusion is reinforced by the10 experience of other cities. More than11 two dozen other cities and counties12 around the country have already passed13 ban-the-box style ordinances or hiring14 policies, and I, for one, have yet to15 hear of any problems with any of those16 laws. In fact, the modesty of the bill17 before Council is highlighted by the fact18 that most other cities with ban-the-box19 style policies have gone beyond what this20 bill would do. Most cities with similar21 policies require that the employer,22 before reviewing an applicant's criminal23 history, actually determine that the24 person is otherwise qualified for the25 43 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 job. The hope of this bill, the way the2 bill before Council is written, is that3 employers will be encouraged to reach4 that conclusion, and we hope that they5 would. It does not specifically require6 it. In other cities it is sometimes7 required. 13 Many cities with ban-the-box14 policies also set out rules to prevent15 unfair discrimination against people with16 criminal records once their records have17 been revealed. Chicago; San Francisco;18 Berkeley, California; and Cambridge,19 Massachusetts are among the cities with20 hiring policies that specifically21 incorporate the criteria set out by the22 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission23 in its guidelines for advising employers24 on compliance with the Civil Rights Act25 44 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 of 1964. 13 Some cities, including Chicago14 and Washington, DC and Cambridge, among15 others, also specifically consider16 evidence that the applicant has been17 rehabilitated since the time of the18 offense. 21 Furthermore, the States of Massachusetts22 and Hawaii, both of them statewide, have23 ban-the-box laws that apply to all24 employers, public and private. The25 45 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 Hawaii state law applies to all employers2 of any size. In Massachusetts, it3 applies to all employers with six or more4 employees. 8 In spite of its modesty, this9 bill recommends a commendable effort to10 recognize and address the plight of our11 fellow residents who have criminal12 records. 16 I do hope that Council will17 pass this bill and join the over two18 dozen other cities and counties that have19 led the way in this effort.
25 46 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 This bill would establish or, I2 should say, would call upon the Mayor to3 establish a Fair Criminal Record4 Screening Advisory Committee to make5 recommendations to Council and the Mayor6 regarding implementation of the bill, and7 that would be one very promising avenue8 for the consideration of improvement to9 this policy. 13 First, I would recommend that14 Philly follow the other cities that have15 specifically included standards for the16 consideration of criminal convictions;17 that is to say, requirements that the18 hiring entity consider the nature of the19 offense, the amount of time that has20 passed, the relationship with the21 conviction to the job being sought and22 other factors. The EEOC does in its23 guidelines already require that employers24 consider some of these factors, but EEOC25 47 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 guidelines may not apply to employers in2 all situations, and, of course, the3 EEOC's enforcement capacity is stretched4 rather thin and the agency can't prevent5 job discrimination all on its own. 24 In our work at CLS, we see far25 48 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 too many examples of employers who are2 simply not aware that these laws even3 exist or apply to them. For that reason,4 I'm pleased to see the reference to5 Section 9125 of the Crimes Code included6 in the bill before Council, but I would7 like to see the City take further steps8 to ensure that employers are complying9 with existing law. 16 I would hope, of course, that17 the City would assist employers with18 educational efforts as necessary, because19 my goal is not to see employers get20 trapped. I don't mean to set traps for21 the unwary. 25 49 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 Thirdly and finally,2 Philadelphia should place a limit on the3 time period for which employers could4 consider convictions; that is, the City5 should provide that employers cannot6 consider convictions that are more than a7 certain number of years old. This is a8 limitation that is grounded firmly in9 social science research, which has shown10 that the longer a person who has11 previously been convicted remains12 crime-free, the less likely he or she is13 to recidivate. In fact, a recent study14 that happened to examine data from the15 Philadelphia court system concluded that16 after seven or eight years, a former17 offender is little more likely to commit18 a crime than any person who has never19 been convicted. Other studies have found20 that people who do not get arrested21 within a range of from four to ten years,22 depending upon the crime and the age of23 the person and various other factors,24 after an initial arrest are no more25 50 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 likely to commit a crime in the future2 than any random person who has never been3 arrested at all. Nevertheless, CLS4 constantly sees situations in which job5 applicants are rejected for decades' old6 offenses. 2
Thank you. Good6 morning to the honorable members of City7 Council. Thank you again for inviting8 the Expungement Clinic to testify before9 you as to criminal records and their10 effect. My name is Mike Lee and I'm the11 supervising attorney for the Criminal12 Record Expungement Project. We've opened13 in February, and I have seen over 30014 people through our clinic doors and an15 additional 300 people through a one-time16 clinic partnership with Enon Baptist17 Church.18 I brought with me today two19 people who we call survivors of the20 criminal justice system, meaning that21 they've experienced the criminal justice22 system in both a negative way as a23 defendant and person accused of crimes,24 but also now in a positive way as people25 52 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 who are applying for and eligible for2 expungements redactions, which is where3 you can remove non-conviction data that's4 associated with a charge that does have5 conviction data, which is a very common6 occurrence in Philadelphia, and also7 unfortunately some convictions, which we8 all know the life sentence that they9 impose.10 Before I let them tell you in a11 very personal way how this legislation12 can help them in their quest to become13 reactive and participants in the society,14 I would also like to note that in the15 Crimes Code 1819 Section 9125 in16 reference to the use of criminal records17 in employment, there's also a Subsection18 (c) which is about notice, and it says19 that, "The employer shall notify in20 writing the applicant if the decision not21 to hire the applicant is based in whole22 or in part on the criminal history record23 information," and this is very important24 because it allows for the factors and25 53 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 considerations, as eloquently mentioned2 by the Deputy Mayor and the gentleman to3 my left, that you can't just arbitrarily4 use arrest records and you can't just5 arbitrarily use convictions. There has6 to be some kind of a nexus between the7 conviction and the duties and8 responsibilities of the job. And unless9 we have in writing that someone is denied10 in whole or in part because of their11 record, we don't know if we can match12 their record with the restrictions and13 responsibilities of the job.14 So with that in mind, I would15 like to present Mr. Troy Morris and16 Thomas Gallagher.17
Good morning. Can18 you hear me?19 I'm just here to share how this20 is affecting me and my life and me trying21 to head in the right direction. I've22 been looking for employment for the past23 four years since I was incarcerated. I24 served my time. I did my probation. I25 54 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 haven't had any trouble since then. I've2 been trying to get work for things that3 I'm qualified for, and I'm just getting4 shot down from these jobs. And I5 basically just need another chance to6 head in a positive direction, but with no7 employment, they're almost saying as8 though I have no chance as a human being.9 So I just wanted to share that10 with you.11
Good morning.12 My name is Thomas Gallagher and I13 represent a thing called the Men's14 Overnight Ministries at Hope Outreach15 Ministries, which is at 401 East Indiana16 Avenue in Philadelphia. We are an17 overnight refuge for homeless substance18 abusers, and as the Managing Director of19 that program, I myself come in contact20 with a lot of gentlemen who are trying to21 do the right things in their life.22 They're trying to stay sober. They're23 off the streets. They're off the drugs,24 off alcohol, and reporting to their25 55 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 parole officers or just staying out of2 trouble, period, and they run into3 obstacles when it comes to employment.4 We have the housing things5 sewed up for them, but then what do you6 do after that when you can't find a job7 or if you're working in McDonald's making8 nothing?9 I see a lot of guys getting10 discouraged, giving up on themselves and11 feeling like, you know, that they need to12 return to what they're used to. And as a13 good friend of mine says, if nothing14 changes, nothing changes. You can change15 the man, but you have to change his16 situation, you know. He has to know that17 there's a better life out there, that18 there's a better way of doing things than19 what he's used to, and being employed is20 a big part of that.21 It's a shame to say, but money22 makes the world go round and you need23 money to survive. And I've seen quite a24 few gentlemen go back to jail, you know,25 56 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 back out onto the streets because of that2 fact that they can't find suitable3 employment, good employment, gainful4 employment, you know, not just a5 McDonald's job. Nothing against6 McDonald's or anything like that. They7 have pretty good food.8 I think it's important that9 Council passes this bill and if they can,10 even further the bill to, you know, like11 the gentleman to my left said about it12 being specific to the job. You know, I13 can understand why a sex offender can't14 work in the Recreation Department, you15 know, or work for the school department,16 but why can't a burglar work for the gas17 department? You know, why can't a18 shoplifter work for the Water Department?19 You know, I understand the City hires,20 but that's another thing I ran into. A21 lot of the guys -- I have a list in the22 church of employers that will take23 ex-offenders, but it's a limited list.24 They only hire so many people, you know.25 57 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 I mean, there's a very limited2 opportunity for these guys, and I think3 we need to make more opportunities.4 I myself have changed my life5 around, and I'm trying to help other guys6 do that, and it gets to be frustrating at7 times when you run into a brick wall like8 that.9 That's all I have. Thank you10 for your time.11
Thank12 you. I really want to thank both of you13 for coming in and testifying. And that's14 why we're having this hearing. I mean,15 we do -- this is not the end-all. This16 is the beginning, and we certainly are17 going to look at the recommendations from18 CLS and we also have -- we started out19 with this bill, it was much stronger, but20 through our meetings over the years, we21 weakened it somewhat. But it's a22 beginning, it's the first step, and we do23 intend to keep working on this.24 I just have one question.25 58 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 Mr. Lynch, you said that if you're 702 years old, you can automatically get an3 expungement. Is that what you said?4
Not automatically.5 There is a provision in state law that6 says if you turn 70 and you have been7 free of any involvement in the criminal8 justice system for at least ten years; in9 other words, at least since you were 60,10 you can ask a judge if they will expunge11 your records. Not automatic. I'm pretty12 sure you still need to ask and the judge13 can turn you down, but you at least have14 the option.15
Has there19 been any attempt to approach the20 judiciary relative to a special program21 that would expedite the expungement22 process? For example, we've had a very23 successful home foreclosure court that24 Judge Rizzo runs, and through mediation25 59 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 and through discussion with people who2 are in debt and the creditors, they've3 saved a lot of homes and families. I4 don't expect that the court would have5 any vested interest in keeping people in6 a conviction column if in fact there was7 some effort to -- if they were eligible8 for expungement.9 Has there been any discussion10 with the court as to kind of helping --11 having the court help clear up some of12 the stuff?13
Well, the judicial14 system has been very supportive of our15 efforts with the Expungement Project, and16 also for certain dispositions such as ARD17 and Community Court, it's supposed to18 include an automatic expungement. And19 that's the carrot on the stick. So if20 you complete your program, not only do21 you not have to face the possibility of22 jail time, but you also get relieved of23 this longer burden of having a record.24 However, our experience has showed that25 60 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 it's not as automatic as it would seem2 and, for whatever reason, not every3 completed ARD has been expunged.4
I guess5 that's the reason for my question. Has6 there been an effort to approach the7 court to have some judge or some court8 administrator supervise that process or9 at least be accessible when there are10 questions that your group may have or11 issues that you wind up not being able to12 follow through and get the expungement?13 Because I think the court might be14 interested in having help with that15 process. I know you're a lawyer, and I'm16 sure there's other lawyers involved in17 the program to help these folks get rid18 of this burden from their record, but I'm19 wondering whether or not we maybe ought20 to get a hold of the President Judge and21 see if she has some ideas as to --22 COUNCILWOMAN MILLER:23 Absolutely.24 And you did say something about25 61 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 ARD. Is there -- and you said Community2 Court. Is Community Court -- how are3 they dealing with the whole issue of4 expungement, or are they at all?5
Well, Community Court6 deals primarily with summary offenses,7 and the idea behind that is a8 quality-of-life crime shouldn't have such9 a lasting impact on someone. So they10 deal with lower-level offenses, so11 they're not dealing with felonies and12 misdemeanors, which have greater13 repercussions, and as a result, they14 can -- it's easier for them to not pursue15 the charges as vigorously as they would16 in other venues. And also the summary17 offense that someone may be convicted of18 is eligible for an expungement after five19 years from the end of their sentence even20 if they didn't complete their Community21 Court service. And the challenge that we22 face most often is that every expungement23 petition is heard before the same judge24 in Room 504, and this courtroom also25 62 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 hears criminal court motions and things2 of that nature, so they try to limit the3 amount of expungement petitions per day4 so that they can carry on other orders of5 business for the court such as motions6 for a trial that have more time relevancy7 for the trial as opposed to the8 expungement process.9
I'm just10 curious about the courtroom. Does the11 same judge sit in there or is it a12 rotating judge?13
It's been the same14 judge for about two years. I believe15 prior to that it rotated more.16
But he also21 hears other issues other than the22 expungements?23
So maybe25 63 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 another judge hearing expungements would2 expand -- okay. All right.3
Thank6 you. Because a judge does make the final7 decision, correct?8
My10 office, we were just involved in trying11 to help someone get an expungement that12 the judge ordered after they completed13 ARD, I guess. This was in Montgomery14 County. And we called Community Legal15 Services to get advice on how to do it.16 We didn't use an attorney. We just17 helped them file their paperwork. And18 actually the judge ordered the19 expungement once the community service20 was completed, but then somehow it got21 stuck and it never happened. So that's22 when they called us, and we decided to23 help him out, and we just filed the24 last -- in fact, he came up to the25 64 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 Expungement Clinic that you had at Enon,2 and when he got home, the letter was in3 the mail from the courts in Montgomery4 County. So I'm hoping that it's finally5 over. I'm not really sure. We haven't6 done a follow-up yet.7
If you have trouble8 with that, let me know, because9 Montgomery County is different than10 Philadelphia County, and they're trying11 to standardize it across the state, but12 currently in Montgomery County an13 expungement petition costs $25.25 as14 opposed to the $15 in Philadelphia. And15 also the expungement order will not be16 processed by the arresting agency or any17 other agencies unless it comes from the18 court as the original sealed copy. So19 you have to pay an additional, I think,20 $11 or $12 per certified copy, and you21 have to send that to up to 11 agencies.22 So in Montgomery County, an23 expungement for one charge can cost24 upwards of $80, whereas in Philadelphia25 65 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 County fortunately it's $15 as a filing2 fee and you can use the copies from the3 court. They normally mail you three4 copies for you to distribute to the5 appropriate agencies.6
But as the8 gentleman notes, the expungement does not9 happen automatically when the judge signs10 the order. In fact, the court provides11 the petitioner with copies of the order,12 and the petitioner then has the job to13 send those certified copies out to the14 various agencies such as the state15 police.16
All24 right. I just want to note that many of25 66 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 the Councilmembers had to go upstairs to2 a meeting at 11 o'clock. It's not that3 they're not interested. They will be4 back, but they did need to leave.5 So next we'll have Art6 Whittaker from the Prison Society, Donna7 Allie from Team Clean and Cameron Holmes8 from Philly Renew.9 (Witnesses approached witness10 table.)11
Please12 have a seat, pull the mike close to you,13 identify yourself and talk into the mike14 so that we can hear you and proceed with15 your testimony, in any order.16
Hi. Thank you.17 My name is Art Whittaker from the18 Pennsylvania Prison Society.19
You can20 proceed and then we'll just have21 questions after everyone is finished.22
5 The Prison Society and the Ban the Box6 Reentry Coalition support Bill No. 10 In my role, I'm an Employer11 Recruitment Specialist for the12 Pennsylvania Prison Society. 17 For over 200 years, the Prison18 Society has been an advocate for19 enhancing public safety through a just20 and restorative correctional system and a21 rational approach to criminal justice22 issues. 15 There are many other states,16 many major cities that currently have a17 ban-the-box policy already in place. 20 Employers that I have spoken to21 about this issue do not see this as a22 tremendous burden or handcuffing their23 ability to hire who they choose. Most24 consider this a rather fair and benign25 69 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 legislation. 10 Ban the box is very important,11 if only to give these men and women12 opportunities to interview, address their13 skills and allow these hiring managers to14 initially make a decision based on their15 presentation and work experience rather16 than a criminal background. 7 That's what I really believe. 16 I've had many positive stories17 of success over the past year and a half18 that I've been working, but for time's19 sake, I won't go into all that, but there20 is a couple that really stand out and21 come to mind to me. One in particular,22 because this is not a company that23 consistently or as a policy reaches out24 to former offenders. 25 71 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 They're a major company, with facilities2 in multiple countries. They are a major3 company in the United States and in4 Canada and I think in France. Recently5 they hired a man who had spent the last6 20 years of his life in prison for a7 multiple murder, recently released, older8 gentleman, and because of his presence9 and applied the skills he learned through10 one of our reentry programs was able to11 convince this employer to give him an12 opportunity. The thing is, they never13 asked on the initial interview what was14 the nature of his crime. They never15 asked that. 17 He didn't hide it on his18 application. 19 But what we teach a lot of times is,20 we'll explain at interview, as an21 appropriate response to that. And in22 talking with the plant manager23 afterwards, because I'm very close to24 them, he told me that if they would have25 72 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 known initially on the first interview as2 well as on the application that his3 charge was for murder, they probably4 wouldn't have considered him. Because he5 had the skills -- he had tremendous6 skills that he learned while he was in7 prison, really practical skills, where8 more of that is needed obviously -- he9 was in demand and they just liked the way10 he presented himself. Now he's one of11 their best employees. 13 So that's one thing that always14 stands out in my mind. 19 Another case is with -- and I'm20 trying to do employers that normally21 don't have a policy of hiring former22 offenders. 24 But one major employer -- and one of25 73 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 their facilities alone in Philadelphia2 employs over 1,800 people. 16 He said, Well, his supervisor17 has told me he is the best employee he's18 ever had working for him. 25 74 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 This is a company that their2 policy is not to hire, but they're3 starting to take a chance because they're4 meeting people and giving them more5 opportunities to speak, and they're6 seeing that these are not monsters, these7 are not, you know -- most of the people8 that have felonies, they're, like I said,9 drug related stuff. 12 I really want to make sure that13 employers are going to be hiring in the14 future without my direct influence, you15 know, without me having to go there and16 make these connections. 24 And one other thing.
And I'm25 75 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 sorry, it's kind of -- but I think it's2 also good to remember that along with the3 ban the box, that we have to really4 support the agencies that hold these5 reentry programs like us so they can6 teach the soft skills to people so that7 they have more opportunities and better8 opportunities to go in there and really9 impress the employers. 17
Again, I want to20 thank you for this opportunity to present21 testimony in support of Bill No. 25 76 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 I am here today wearing two2 hats. One, as Mr. Whittaker said, as a3 life skills educator and job coach for4 the Pennsylvania Prison Society. 7 Human rights are generally8 considered to include, among other9 things, the right to life, liberty,10 equality before the law and the pursuit11 of happiness. The ban-the-box12 initiative, in my opinion, seeks to fight13 for those fundamental rights on behalf of14 convicted felons as they relate to15 employment. Ban the box is legislation16 that would establish new standards for17 hiring people with criminal records. It18 is not a quota or preference. It does19 not guarantee a convicted citizen a job20 over anyone else. It establishes that21 the customary legal precautions still be22 applied. It only mandates that these23 procedures not be applied prior to the24 interview process. 5 As of 2007, one in 286 Pennsylvanians were incarcerated, on7 probation or on parole. In Philadelphia,8 an estimated 300,000 residents have9 criminal records. These people come from10 all races and classes, but are11 disproportionately poor people and people12 of color. 17 I myself went to prison in18 1984. I was released in 2006, five years19 ago. A first-time offender, I spent 2220 and a half years in prison being punished21 for my crimes. Once released,22 unfortunately the punishment did not23 cease. The nature and severity of it24 just changed. I recall applying for a25 78 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 job at a supermarket and answering "no"2 to the criminal history question, which3 asks if I had been convicted of a crime4 in the last seven years. 6 I was interviewed by phone and7 then in person and was actually8 eventually offered the job and scheduled9 for orientation. When I brought in my10 Intent to Hire document, which was11 required by my halfway house, the12 manager's face went blank. 20 I tried to explain that I had21 answered honestly, but I could tell by22 the look on his face that things weren't23 looking very well. 25 79 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 I know that's a phrase that a lot of2 people have heard. 4 As my example shows, I think5 not only is the box a bad policy, but6 it's confusing most of the time,7 frustrating and ineffective. 15 Given those emotions, it's not surprising16 that I find myself being turned down for17 numerous employment opportunities after18 that. In my mind, I had gone from being19 locked down to being locked out. 25 80 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 To add to my frustration, I was2 and am also daily confronted by the3 spectacle of seeing job ads online every4 day that say clean criminal histories are5 required, and I'm sitting here wondering,6 isn't that against the law? 11 And I consider that myself, I12 was a lucky person, because when I was13 released, I had a Bachelor's Degree. I14 had the confidence and support systems15 that were necessary to get me through16 that difficult transition period. And17 also as an aside, I want to thank the18 City also, because they were one of the19 first people who actually did give me an20 opportunity and gave me a job. 24 But, unfortunately, my25 81 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 experience as a life skills educator2 dealing with over 400 men in the course3 of the last three or four years has been4 that many more people do not have the5 support and the experience and the6 education that I had to get through that7 period. 13 Banning the box is an effort to14 grant a true second chance to all of15 those who have earned the right to16 compete for one. 19 In my opinion, the box has two20 major negative effects. 2 Two, the box creates an3 atmosphere of hopelessness and4 helplessness for ex-offenders that can5 eventually impact public safety. How6 many ex-offenders are contributing7 positively to our communities, mostly8 unpublicized, as we speak?
How many9 opportunities have been missed because10 applications have been placed in the "no"11 file before applicants even had the12 chance to present themselves? 16 How many good people have been17 nudged toward crime by the lack of18 opportunities? 20 And to those who may suggest that good21 people could never be pushed to crime, I22 would respectfully suggest that it is a23 common but flawed fantasy. 2 With the competitive world that3 we now live in, we need every capable4 person contributing. 6 And, finally, I understand that7 many do not have sympathy for8 ex-offenders, and some are even9 passionate about their animus, and I10 understand. But aren't we at a point in11 this city and in this country where we12 can no longer afford to make emotional13 decisions that are fiscally14 irresponsible? At the end of the day, we15 can choose to have men and women in a16 cell costing $30,000 a year or in society17 making $30,000 a year. Banning the box,18 in my opinion, makes the logical choice19 more viable. )24
Thank25 84 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 you.2
Well, thank you,3 Chairwoman Donna Reed Miller and members4 of the Committee on Public Safety, for5 the opportunity to speak before you today6 regarding the amendment of the7 Philadelphia Code, Title 9, entitled8 "Regulation of Businesses, Trades and9 Professions," by enacting a new Chapter,10 entitled "Fair Criminal Record Screening11 Standards." My name is Donna Allie and I12 am President of Team Clean, a building13 service company based here in the great14 City of Philadelphia. I am a member of15 the Philadelphia Workforce Investment16 Board, African American Chamber of17 Commerce and a host of other business18 associations.19 I am here to personally convey20 my support to this amendment which21 establishes provisions and requirements22 for the screening of criminal records by23 certain employers within the City of24 Philadelphia. I am sure you have heard25 85 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 from your many constituents that a2 criminal record creates a huge obstacle3 to employment. In fact, studies have4 demonstrated that employers are much more5 adverse to hiring ex-offenders than they6 are towards any other disadvantaged7 group.8 I know firsthand the challenges9 ex-offenders face when seeking10 employment, as I have interviewed and11 hired scores of individuals who time12 after time tell me the familiar tale of13 being unable to get past the application14 process, let alone afforded an15 opportunity to interview. In the end,16 this essentially means these individuals17 have little, if any, chance to compete in18 an extremely competitive job market.19 That is why passing this amendment is an20 important step that helps to level the21 playing field for individuals who have22 made mistakes but are working to lead23 responsible and productive lives.24 Now, as I understand, the25 86 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 amendments essentially bans employers2 from asking or making a decision about an3 applicant's criminal record until after4 the first interview. And if I may pause5 here for a minute, I want to emphasize6 that, in my opinion, this is one of the7 most significant highlights of these8 amendments, because it requires human9 interaction. It puts a face to a name10 and gives the applicants an opportunity11 to make a compelling argument for why12 they should be hired and articulate how13 they can contribute to the company's14 goals. This is an opportunity otherwise15 lost.16 The amendment also allows17 employers to conduct criminal background18 checks that are required for the industry19 they work in, creates an advisory20 committee that will review how this is21 being put into practice and make22 recommendations to the Mayor and City23 Council, reinforces that such background24 checks must be conducted in compliance25 87 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 with state laws that are already in2 place.3 I support each of the4 amendments, as they are not only good for5 the economic well-being of our city, they6 are good for individuals and families.7 Giving formerly convicted individuals a8 second chance is an issue that I am9 passionate about and as I interface with10 employees every day who are working hard11 to get their life back on track.12 So in conclusion, I want to13 thank you, Donna Reed Miller and members14 of Council, again for the opportunity to15 speak before you today. I thank you and16 your continued leadership on this issue.17
Thank18 you. Thank you, Donna. I just want to19 thank you as an employer for coming in20 here today. And you know that Team Clean21 has been around for a lot of years. How22 many?23 (Applause.)24
I25 88 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 remember when I worked for Representative2 David Richardson and all these young men3 on the block was driving everybody crazy,4 and you called me and said, You have5 anybody you can refer?6 I'm like, thank God, I can get7 rid of all these guys hanging out here.8 And we called you, and that was so many9 years ago, and you've just been growing10 and growing and growing. But it's11 employers like you that really want to12 give people a second chance. I mean, we13 have all kinds of issues here in14 Philadelphia, poverty, and employment15 helps. I mean, agencies such as the16 Prison Society and a lot of the other17 groups here in the City that are working18 with reentry, there's no way we can19 address any of these issues if people20 cannot become employed. So it's really21 key, and I really feel passionate about22 this issue, too. I mean, we've got to be23 able to help people, and that's why we're24 here.25 89 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 And I've heard that your2 success rate at the Prison Society is3 pretty good with your reentry program.4 In fact, I think I just referred a couple5 of people over there about two or three6 weeks ago. So one young man is very7 pleased. No. He went to a different8 one. He's doing carpentry training.9 But I think we all have to work10 together. I know William has been11 meeting with groups and I know the Prison12 Society has been a part of those groups13 to talk about this legislation, talk14 about ways we can help.15 But I really thank you for16 coming in today. And I also want to just17 make note that Councilwoman Jannie18 Blackwell has also joined this hearing.19 Thank you. Thank you for coming.20 (Applause.)21
Our next22 witnesses will be Michael Ta'Bon and23 Terry Starks.24 (Witnesses approached witness25 90 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 table.)2
Pull the11 mike up, make sure that you identify12 yourself for the record and speak into13 the mike and proceed. Thank you.14
Yes, ma'am. My15 name is Michael Ta'Bon, and I just want16 to say good morning to everybody. Thank17 y'all for coming. I want to thank you18 personally. I don't think a lot of19 people realize how serious what you're20 attempting to do is, and I really21 recognize.22 I just found out this morning23 that today was the day. I switched my24 whole schedule around to come down here,25 91 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 because I recognize how serious what2 you're doing is.3 Introduce yourself.4
My name is Terry5 Starks, and I recognize exactly. I'm6 with Mike Ta'Bon, and we rumbling the7 fight, but we're here today to let you8 know we got -- well, we really in full9 support of everything that y'all doing10 for us, for the City.11
Thank12 you. And we really appreciate it, too.13 Thank you for coming.14
Basically today,15 simply what I'd like to speak about is16 it's nice to see that somebody in City17 Hall as a public servant is lining up the18 legislation with God's will. I think19 it's important to know that what we're20 talking about here today is the word21 "forgiveness." It's really that simple22 when you break it all the way down. It's23 like are we willing to forgive these24 people? And I just think it's a simple25 92 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 situation where morally some employers2 have to ask they self, have they ever3 been in need of forgiveness? You know,4 the Bible, what it say? And forgive us5 our trespasses, as we forgive those who6 trespass against us.7 I just -- I want to get -- I'm8 going to keep this short, but I want to9 just deal with it from this perspective:10 This bill, this ban-the-box bill, is11 bigger than anybody really believes, and12 the brother back here touched on it.13 When you give ex-convicts jobs -- I mean,14 does anybody want the violence to stop in15 the City? Because when you got an16 ex-convict in a halfway house -- I've17 been in many halfway houses, from Komen18 Call, Kenta (ph). Everybody comes out of19 state wanting to do the right thing, for20 the most part. There are a few who plan21 their way back to prison while they still22 there, but for the most part, brothers23 have a positive outlook on life and want24 an opportunity.25 93 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 Now, the drug dealer always has2 a job available. Always. And what we've3 been preaching up there on 19th and4 Hunting Park in your district is simply5 that our good has to become as relentless6 as their evil or we're going to lose.7 You understand where I'm coming from? We8 have to begin -- the bottom line is, if9 you give somebody a job, you don't know10 what they've done behind closed doors.11 They might deserve to be a convict. You12 understand where I'm coming from? And13 when they do something wrong in their14 job, you fire them.15 You give an ex-convict a job,16 if he doesn't do good at the job, you17 fire him and get somebody else. We don't18 have to use the fact that somebody is an19 ex-convict as a reason to punish him even20 further. It's like I keep hearing people21 say, Well, let's wait ten years before we22 give them a fair opportunity to ban the23 box. To say that is to say that the24 money that we invested into the25 94 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 Department of Corrections doesn't work.2 It's like you're saying -- to say that we3 got to wait ten years after they've been4 released is to say that the Department of5 Corrections didn't correct anything,6 because if you believe that it was7 corrected, you'll give them a job as soon8 as they came home. You got departments9 to correct them. You understand where10 I'm coming from?11 I think that we as taxpayers12 need to believe in what we putting our13 tax dollars behind, the Department of14 Corrections. Because what's happening15 is, when you go up there and you take the16 training programs and you take the rehab17 programs and you've cleaned the guy up18 and his skin look a little better and he19 feeling good about hisself and he know20 it's about time to go home, and then they21 get home and get that door slammed shut22 in his face, it's basically telling him,23 you still the same person that you was24 before you did this time. You have not25 95 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 been corrected. And then it's like now2 you get the mentality of, I might as well3 go back to what I was doing before.4 Now, when you give an5 ex-convict a job -- and I hope somebody6 in here got a business that's listening7 to me -- a lot of times you don't feel8 sorry for the ex-convict. Well, maybe9 your heart can bleed for the children of10 the ex-convicts, because when you --11 (Applause.)12
When you give13 an -- thank you. When you give an14 ex-convict a job, he could take care of15 his family. Now them little hungry kids16 that you see at the gas station trying to17 pump gas for a dollar, now they don't18 have to pump gas, because some of them19 kids is really hungry and some of us in20 here right now drive past them and won't21 let them pump their -- and they're22 creating a job, something that a lot of23 people in power can't seem to do. But24 when you see that little kid pumping gas,25 96 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 he just created a job for hisself. When2 you see him bagging bags in the3 supermarket, cutting grass, you let him4 shovel your snow in the wintertime when5 it's cold, that is called creating a job.6 Let's take a page out of New7 Jersey book. How many gas stations do we8 have in the City of Philadelphia? What9 if we hire somebody, an ex-convict or a10 young person, in the summertime or11 whatever that pump gas legally? They12 there anyway. They do it right in the13 next state. You can't pump gas in New14 Jersey, and the gas is cheaper. So maybe15 we need to take some of that gas money16 and use it to make jobs. If it's a17 thousand gas stations in Philly -- and I18 don't know how many it is, but let's just19 say it's a thousand -- and you got two20 shifts working, that's 2,000 jobs21 overnight.22 I mean, I don't think that we23 have to make it as complicated as it is.24 I think we just need to get it simple.25 97 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 We need to deal with forgiveness and we2 need to deal with the realities of if you3 want your communities a little bit safer,4 then you need to give ex-convicts jobs5 from that perspective, because when he at6 work, he puts down the gun. When he at7 work, he puts down the drugs.8 You go up on 19th -- if you9 don't believe that the theory works, I10 implore you and -- Ms. Donna Reed Miller,11 in your district? Ma'am?12
I'm sorry. I15 just -- because I know you're familiar16 with this place. In your district on17 19th and Hunting Park Avenue, you got a18 guy named Lionell Dunbar, the car wash19 out there. They out there 24 hours a20 day, washing cars in the wintertime and21 everything. That car wash has been there22 for eight years. Everybody that works at23 his car wash is an ex-convict. They've24 been working there for eight years25 98 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 straight. They kids come out there now.2 They women is happy with them.3 I got a brother that told me4 that because he can't get a job, he don't5 even feel like a man in his household.6 So when somebody can't provide for they7 family, it mentally and spiritually8 demoralizes the individual even worse9 than the convict.10 Everybody know that crime and11 poverty is synonymous. You gave -- take12 the crack heads right there on 19th and13 Hunting Park Avenue is working now. They14 not crack heads anymore. It's just --15 let's be what we are, the City of16 Brotherly Love. Love, that's what's17 missing. And love comes with --18 forgiveness comes from love. We got to19 start loving each other. And I'm going20 to leave before I say too much.21 God bless y'all.22 (Applause.)23
Can we24 take just a five-minute break, just for25 99 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 like five minutes. Thanks. We'll be2 right back.3 (Short recess.)4
We're5 getting ready to start. Thank you.6 Our next set of witnesses are7 Wally Smith and Reuben Jones.8 (Witnesses approached witness9 table.)10
Pleasure to be15 here. How are you this morning,16 Ms. Miller?17
I'm doing18 fine. How are you? Don't forget to19 identify yourself, too.20
22 We've already heard a lot of23 testimony, so I won't kind of regurgitate24 a lot of stuff we already heard. 3 I myself, I'm also an4 ex-offender, and one of the experiences I5 had back in, I guess, 2005, I found6 myself unemployed and I was looking for a7 job. 10 He invited me up for an interview. I11 went, and it was all the way up in12 Lansdale, PA. I didn't have a car at the13 time. I rented the car, went up here to14 interview for this position. I feel like15 the gentleman was very impressed. We had16 a lengthy discussion. 22 Towards the end, he told me, I23 just need you to fill out this24 application as a formality. We need to25 101 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 keep it on file. He left me alone for2 about ten minutes, 15 minutes, came back,3 looked over the application, and as his4 eyes scanned the paper, I could see his5 whole body language change. I could see6 his whole demeanor change, his whole7 attitude change. And he went from8 embracing me and basically offering me a9 position to telling me, you know, We'll10 give you a call. 12 The one thing I didn't mention13 with the job was, it was at a facility14 that cleaned porta potties. So, you15 know, I know we heard some testimony of16 folks saying that if a person can't get a17 job, they might turn back to crime. 11 I mean, the folks who are12 looking for jobs are looking for a job,13 and the folks who want to sell drugs on14 the corner are selling drugs on the15 corner. 22 This country was built on the23 premise of no taxation without24 representation. Am I correct? So right25 103 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 now ex-offenders are being marginalized2 in a society that they're asked to be3 contributors, asked to pay taxes, but on4 the same token, they're treated like5 second-class citizens. 11 If I were an employee, if I were a12 businessperson and I will offer13 employment to anyone and I ask them, are14 you gay, how much do you weigh, what's15 your religion, I will be sued. I will be16 ran out of business. I would be17 protested. But I'm allowed to ask have18 you ever committed a crime. And it's not19 to judge the person of the ability to do20 the job. It's not to determine how good21 of an employee they could be. It's22 simply used to exclude people. 4 Just a couple noteworthy5 changes that I've noticed in this6 society. Recently the food industry has7 gone to itemizing calories on the menu so8 that you know what you're getting, and9 maybe there was some opposition or10 pushback from the food industry and maybe11 it costs some money to reprint your12 menus, but that was a change that society13 determined was needed. Am I correct? 20 Employed ex-offenders adds tax21 revenue, and God knows the City would22 need it. We just experienced a recent23 budget proposal that's talking about24 cutting funding from everything from25 105 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 public education to police and fire2 departments. Am I correct? However,3 we've had an increase in Corrections, in4 the Department of Correction. 13 I believe that this bill is an14 investment in humanity. Again, we heard15 earlier that it levels the playing field16 and affords full citizenship. And I also17 believe that we're not just talking about18 a legal problem. We're talking about a19 social problem as well. 5 And the last thing I want to6 say, that if this bill doesn't pass, I7 think that for me it says that the8 punishment is a permanent lifetime9 punishment. My particular crime happened10 in 1986. 1986. So we're almost 25 years11 later, and although I think that I made a12 lot of personal changes during that time,13 I also feel that there's certain doors14 that I can't walk in because I have a15 criminal record. There's certain jobs16 I'm not going to be able to get because I17 have a criminal record. )2
6 I'm here -- Wally Smith on behalf of the7 Philadelphia and the state NAACP, who8 supports this bill. We support it9 basically because of public safety. 14 We want the business and the15 people who are being employers to know16 that by no way do this bill exclude17 background checks. We want to make sure18 that you get the background check through19 the state police, through the FBI. 3 But most of the time you throw it out the4 door, you get frustrated, people don't --5 and we done tracked this. 9 We don't promote prison and we10 don't think any ex-offender who don't get11 a job is a criminal. 13 A lot of people out there don't14 have employment, but they still trying to15 stay out of trouble. I mean, guns, drugs16 is not an option. 18 You got a lot of rich people19 committing crime, so it don't have20 anything to do. But this bill21 particularly in Philadelphia, because we22 have a large population of formerly23 incarcerated people, gives them a chance24 if they say they want to do the right25 109 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 thing. See, this is a chance before they2 get to prison. 7 So it is very important. It8 gives ex-offenders a chance to say if you9 want to stay out of jail, go look for a10 job and it won't be a box there. Get11 yourself prepared and qualified to stay12 on the job site. And under public safety13 is that it's very important -- the NAACP,14 we had to bring people out and educate15 the community about what they meant about16 banning the box. 19 This doesn't exclude that. That will20 take place. What this will do is allow a21 young man or a young woman to say, Hey, I22 don't have to worry about that until the23 second round. Do I have the education,24 do I have the skills to qualify? 2 Because this is a victory to the next3 level of -- if you got a felony, you4 can't even drive a bus for the School5 District of Philadelphia. Why if you6 never did anything to no children that7 whole -- you should be able -- if you8 never robbed somebody, why can't you work9 cleaning a bank? You understand what I'm10 saying? So this puts it in the content11 of where your crime gets you a job. If12 you was messing with children, sure you13 can't work in no school, in the14 cafeteria, custodian staff, driving a15 bus. No. I wouldn't support that. But16 what it does is, it allows people who got17 an education -- most people who went to18 school was ready. 20 So it is very important. I21 honor what you're doing in this22 Committee, because what it does is, when23 I talk about public safety, a young man24 can't tell me, I'm staying on the corner25 111 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 hustling because I can't get a job2 because I can't get past the box. You3 know what I mean? So when we say no,4 that's taken away now. 6 So this is a good way for us to7 make our city more economical, feasible8 and safe. So from the NAACP perspective9 and from our President, Jerry Mondesire,10 we 100 percent support it, but we have to11 get the public educated about exactly12 what this bill is going to do and don't13 get businesspeople and the private14 sector -- and the City was bold by being15 first at it. 18 I'm fortunate. 20 You know what I mean? City Hall, I was21 convicted, went to prison for 15 years,22 been out of prison 15 years, but right23 now if I get a pink slip, I'm done. You24 know what I mean? I got an asset to25 112 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 Councilpeople. 3 Matter of fact, I got a chance to tell4 three police captains what I expect from5 them in public safety, but if I get done,6 that's it because of this box. You know7 what I mean? Because it ain't going to8 be based on he ain't committed a crime9 since 1980. You understand what I'm10 saying? Twenty-year-old man got out of11 jail at 35, 50 years old now, but it12 still counts. 13 So we need a box -- we need14 this to pass. We need people to15 understand that it give you a chance,16 because I get anxiety.
Wow, if I lose my17 job, I got to go ask and I got to go18 through that whole process. A lot of19 people don't know I'm a former -- been in20 prison for 15 years, was a former bank21 robber. They don't know it. You know22 what I mean? But that was my job, and23 like you said, when I was doing bank24 robbing, I don't have a job. That was my25 113 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 job, taking money. Well, when I got a2 job, that's my job. Criminals don't look3 for jobs. You know what I mean? 5 So I'm trying to tell you, I6 did enough hard work and I understand7 that crime is never on the table and it's8 never the option. 9 Fifteen years of my life that I could10 never get back. But what I have done in11 these next 15 years is did some positive12 stuff, raised my family, being an13 outstanding citizen, keeping children14 safe, keeping our community safe. )18
Thank19 you.20 We have a couple questions or21 comments, one from Councilman Greenlee22 and Councilman Jones.23
Thank24 you, Madam Chair.25 114 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 Very quickly. Mr. Jones, I2 just want to say you're a good example of3 why we should have this bill, because I4 think if you got in for an interview,5 you're a pretty persuasive guy, so I6 think you could persuade people to hire7 you.8 So, again, I think you're a9 good example of why we need this bill.10 Thank you.11
Well, you know12 what? Can I respond to that? Thank you,13 and I appreciate that, but I think what14 the one thing we want to stress, this15 bill will create an opportunity for16 ex-offenders, formerly incarcerated17 people, to raise the bar. If you take18 away the barrier -- and I don't want to19 use the word "excuse." If you take away20 the barrier for employment with that box,21 that means now I got to go to school, I22 got to get some training, I got to learn23 how to do -- I have to bring something to24 the table. That experience I had with25 115 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 the cleaning the porta potties sent me to2 graduate school to get a Master Degree,3 because I didn't want to be in a position4 where somebody could judge me for that to5 clean a toilet. Do you understand? So I6 know from personal experience from the7 people that I surround myself with,8 removing that barrier will create a9 better society, because now folks are10 forced to raise the bar of their own11 expectation and opportunity.12
Frontline Dads15 mentor youth, we do reentry support for16 formerly incarcerated individuals17 returning to the community, and we do a18 fatherhood program for single fathers and19 disconnected fathers.20
Thank you,24 Madam Chairman.25 116 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 I just want to say, first of2 all, Wally, I've known you a couple of3 decades now and I know you to be a4 positive influence on the community, and5 if a box gets in your way of success, we6 need to remove it. So, I mean, that's7 where I'm at.8 But I remember from the NAACP9 vantage point, not the local but the10 national convention they had in11 California a couple of years ago, I12 shared a plane ride with one of the top13 brass of the NAACP, and we got to talking14 and he said to me, Why don't more young15 people sign up for the NAACP? And so at16 first I didn't want to answer him because17 I was a little embarrassed and didn't18 want to embarrass him by the answer. Not19 the local but the national. And I20 finally told him, I said, Because after a21 while, you have to change your issues to22 be relevant. And in the United States of23 America, for African Americans, criminal24 justice is a civil rights issue. It is25 117 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 right up there with voting rights and2 equal opportunity for economics and where3 you live.4 This issue affects more African5 American men in particular, and women6 now, than most. And so, therefore, the7 issue of -- and the example was, I think8 her name was Rice. She was related to9 Condoleezza Rice, I think her cousin or10 second cousin or something like that, was11 a defender out in California, and12 California wanted to do a proposition on13 the ballot which would automatically14 certify people who committed felonies15 when they were 16 as opposed to 18, and16 it was going to be left up to the17 discretion of the prosecutor. She was18 able to go out, organize on that issue to19 defeat that ballot position because it20 was relevant to the day-to-day lives of21 many of the inner city men in big cities.22 So as we start to look at what23 is relevant today, we should look to the24 past with pride and build on that, but we25 118 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 have to look to today and remove what2 barriers to success and to a good quality3 of life that all of us deserve, and if4 the box is it, it needs to be gone.5 So I want to thank you for your6 testimony.7
To respond to what8 you said, they must have heard you at the9 national level, because two people under10 40 is now heading the NAACP, which over11 100 years old, Chairman Roslyn Brock and12 our President, Ben Jealous, who was an13 activist before he became President. So14 he understands what you said. The new15 issue of civil rights is about education,16 about incarceration of massive people of17 color and et cetera. And on our local18 level, I really think that our leadership19 is starting to get it, because it had to20 start -- and it takes courageous leaders21 like Chairman here and the rest of the22 Committee to talk about these issues23 about being inclusive for anyone. So I'd24 just like to thank y'all again.25 119 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111
One good2 point about it within this Chamber, right3 within this Chamber, when we did the4 budget hearings, a lot of the departments5 showed up and in particular this day,6 Madam Chair, it was the Water Department.7 Now, I didn't fall off a turnip truck8 from Pleasantville. I grew up in West9 Philly. So a lot of the guys that were10 working for the Water Department, I knew,11 but I knew them from back in the day.12 And I'm looking at them, I'm saying, wait13 a minute, ain't that so-and-so from14 such-and-such street, and ain't that --15 and as I started identifying them, I knew16 they had taken a trip upstate, and to see17 these men and women responsibly going18 about their business and changing their19 lives just by virtue of having an honest20 job was transformational. And what21 you're saying about wanting to work and22 when you want to change, you do and not23 having a barrier to it was proof positive24 just by that one department, because for25 120 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 sure, had they not been -- well, I don't2 know that, but it seems to me that3 without that job, without that4 opportunity to support their families and5 themselves, they'd have took a different6 path.7 Thank you, Madam Chairman.8
You're9 welcome.10 It's so important. I was11 having a discussion with someone that was12 incarcerated in federal prison maybe13 about a year or so ago. He called me at14 home, and I said, you know -- so we were15 just talking, and I said, What's going on16 with -- what are the people saying that17 are returning, that's been released, did18 a violation and now they're back? What's19 happening with that?20 He says, Well, you know, one of21 the worst things a man wants to find22 himself -- one of the worst situations is23 one of poverty and they can't provide for24 their families. So that's one reason25 121 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 why, in his opinion, people were2 recommitting and getting -- with new3 charges and going back to prison.4 So it's important. People need5 to find -- people need jobs. We all need6 jobs. You know, we all need jobs.7 So I want to thank you, Wally8 and the NAACP, for your support of this9 bill.10 I want to thank you, Reuben and11 Frontline Dads, and thank you for coming12 in and testifying today. Thank you.13
We're17 going to have Reverend Robert Shine,18 Reverend David Kline and Reverend19 Michelle Simmons. Please come up to the20 witness table.21 (Witnesses approached witness22 table.)23
And next24 we'll have Malik Aziz, Steve Blackburn,25 122 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 Antoinette Jackson and Wayne Jacobs.2 You're going to be next.3 Make sure you pull the mike4 close to you, even though -- all three of5 you are pastors, so I'm sure you're used6 to talking a little bit loud so we can7 hear you. Identify yourself for the8 record and proceed with your testimony.9 Thank you.10
3 "The mood and temper of the4 public in regard to the treatment of5 crime and criminals is one of the most6 unfailing tests of the civilization of7 any country. A calm and dispassionate8 recognition of the rights of the accused9 against the state, and of the convicted10 criminals against the state, are constant11 heart-searching by a charge with duty of12 punishment, a desire and eagerness to13 rehabilitate in the world of industry all14 those who have paid their dues in the15 hard coinage of punishment, tireless16 efforts towards the discovery of curative17 and regenerating process, and an18 unfaltering faith that there is a19 treasure, if you can only find it, in the20 heart of every man and woman incarcerated21 or released. 9 What is required in these days and time10 when we hear so often of overcrowded11 conditions within the prison system is12 not further ostracization and13 stigmatization. 15 These men and women do not need16 isolation from the public square and17 employment. 18 Without one, they will be reconsigned by19 default to the community of crime once20 again, thus recidivism. Prison21 consolidates this community by cutting22 ex-offenders off from regular society and23 by habitating them to a life of a24 recidivist society. The stigma becomes a25 125 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 badge of belonging, the regimentation a2 substitute for self-control. And like3 any impressive experience, prison4 produces camaraderie among those who have5 shared it, and this camaraderie extends6 beyond the prison walls. And although7 men and women at times are8 well-intentioned and mean well when they9 come out and they don't want to go back10 into that, unless they have created a new11 social bond and a new community, if they12 don't have a new community to go back to,13 they're going to go back to the old14 community of friends, because there is15 such a need for each one of us to belong16 somewhere. 25 126 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 And the support of this legislative Bill2 110111 is a giant step forward toward3 reducing these feelings and, even more,4 opening up the opportunity for the5 returnees to regain some dignity, respect6 and a second chance. 20 As I have read the bill, I find21 that it is not only a civic solution, it22 is a moral one as well as a just one. I23 further believe that introducing this24 piece of legislation will bring the City25 127 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 of Philadelphia into the mainstream of2 modern correctional practices. This3 legislative bill I also believe is in4 harmony with the reforms being led by5 State Senator Stewart Greenleaf, who has6 authored legislation not only to help7 reduce recidivism and save money by8 creating a prison system that encourages9 non-violent offenders to participate in10 evidence-based treatment and job-training11 programs. I see no reasons then why this12 legislation should not be enacted. The13 combination of these reforms will improve14 our prisons and help protect society by15 encouraging the returnees to take the16 necessary step towards resocialization17 while inside. So that once they are18 released, they have the greater19 opportunities for success outside. If20 hard times drove them in, then hard times21 won't keep them out. Fair Criminal22 Record Screening Standards is a positive23 step in the right direction. 10
My name is14 Reverend Michelle Ann Simmons and I want15 to thank Councilwoman Donna Miller Reed16 (sic) for initiating this Bill 1101-11117 and the other Committee members,18 Mr. Curtis Jones, Jr., for being on the19 front line of this initiative.20 Truly, this box is killing us21 as formerly incarcerated people. I was22 born and raised in the City of23 Philadelphia and I'm currently the24 Founder and the Chief Executive Officer25 129 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 of Why Not Prosper, which is a2 transitional house for female3 ex-offenders. In my early childhood, I4 experienced abuse and domestic violence,5 which led to drug abuse and6 incarceration.7 In 1999, I was released from8 the California Institution for Women and9 I was granted permission to return back10 to my home state. And when I returned11 back in 2000, I was homeless, a little12 bit -- I was uneducated. I had lost13 custody of my children and I was14 recovering from drugs and alcohol, but it15 was something in me, just like the16 brother Mike said, that had a desire to17 do right and to get my kids back, and I18 commenced to researching jobs and19 employment, but the box always haunted20 me. And I remember that because of this21 rejection and this disappointment, I22 started to focus on entrepreneurship, and23 I wanted to start a program for females24 like myself where I could be an employee25 130 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 as well, and that's how Why Not Prosper2 was birthed.3 So Why Not Prosper is currently4 celebrating its ten-year anniversary, and5 now I am the forerunner for women coming6 home from prison that face these same7 barriers that I faced when I was8 released. And I'm totally -- Why Not9 Prosper is in support of this bill10 because the women come home with the11 desire to have they children back. So12 women come home with a desire to do the13 right thing, and because of the lack of14 employment, you understand, they're going15 and they're forced back into unhealthy16 situations, they're forced back into the17 domestic violence situations, and I think18 banning the box is going to give them the19 opportunity.20 I sit before you with a21 Master's Degree in counseling psychology.22 You know, I have a book here of all my23 accomplishments and everything I've done24 in the last ten years that's on its way25 131 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 to the Pardon Board, and I too have been2 denied recently for the application to3 take my license as a licensed therapist.4 So this box is still haunting me after 125 years of being clean, ten years of no6 criminal activity, and I think banning7 this box will allow me to be able to8 continue to service the other9 Philadelphians that's coming home with10 these issues. That's the first thing.11 And, secondly, it's going to12 help me personally because, for example,13 I applied for a job, I applied for the14 professional licensure. When we got to15 the box, the process stopped. They16 didn't care about all these17 accomplishments. And most of them that I18 was in an interview in front of them,19 they probably don't got a book this20 thick. You understand? Not to put21 myself out there, but I did a lot of hard22 work. You know what I'm saying? And I23 paid my time back to society. However,24 when that box get checked, it just halt25 132 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 the process.2 So this bill will enable the3 formerly incarcerated persons to at least4 get a chance to present themselves to an5 employer, and that's going to be the6 biggest thing, because we do have skills.7 Some of the women I service, they are8 licensed LPNs and registered nurse and9 dental hygienist, and they got high and10 they messed up and now they degree is11 sitting in a corner because they got to12 mark yes on that box.13 So I'm in support of the bill.14 God bless you.15 (Applause.)16
18 First of all, my name is K. 23 I want to first thank Donna24 Reed Miller. I want to thank Curtis25 133 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 Jones. I want to thank Jannie Blackwell,2 who just left. The reason I want to3 thank you is because you have put your4 reputation on the line to help5 ex-offenders. 11 In the '90s I worked with12 Offender Aid and Restoration. 18 I had a 96 percent rate of19 placing ex-offenders in jobs. 25 134 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 In the '70s, I was able to get2 through the drug scene in the South3 Philly war crime, the war that went on in4 South Philly. I ended up in the Youth5 Study Center as a young kid and was able6 to escape by going -- being put out into7 an upstate institution, which they sent8 me to school because I had a good school9 record. 13 In '75, I was able to win the14 Joe Frazier Silver Gloves Boxing15 Tournament, and in '75, I was also able16 to go to Canada and was awarded the17 Outstanding American Boxer Award in18 Canada. 24 I've seen when I escaped that25 135 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 part and was able to go, become a2 minister, what came into my heart was my3 friends that went to jail and had nobody4 to actually help them. For the last 235 years, I've been a prison rights6 advocate, constitutional rights advocate,7 going in and out of the prisons, being8 able to do job development. But the job9 development that I was doing was not only10 on my own, it just looked like I was -- I11 knew how to get in the doors and get out12 of the doors, thanks to people like Donna13 Reed Miller, being able to go to her14 office and get information of where jobs15 were. When I was out of work or got laid16 off from a position, when I had a family17 to feed, I still walked Center City in18 suit and tie and briefcase, and nobody19 knew I wasn't working. But what I did --20 finding a job or looking for a job is an21 eight-hour job. 23 He had a business center where you can24 come. If you wanted to start your own25 136 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 business, if you wanted your resumes and2 things put together, you can use the fax3 machine, you can use the computer, and I4 had my own phone. 6 And Mr. Jones would come see me. I would7 see him in there. How you doing,8 Mr. Jones? I would thank him all the9 time. 21 And when I took other guys down there22 with me, I let them know, this is what we23 can use on our resume as volunteer24 services. 6 Why? Because soon Jannie Blackwell,7 Donna Reed Miller, Curtis Jones, they8 will be even harder to get to because of9 their positions. )15
Well, I16 want to thank you guys for coming in. We17 just know that this is the type of bill18 that really will impact quality of life19 and life in the communities and public20 safety and recidivism and all those other21 things that this will positively impact.22 We just know that most people coming out,23 they really want to work. I think -- and24 their hopes are so busted when they can't25 138 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 even get past the application process.2 So that's what we're hoping. We are3 hoping that we will be able to help many,4 many, many people with this bill.5 Michelle, I've been to your6 place, you know that. I think when you7 first opened, I was there, and I think8 you're doing a good job up there on9 Chelten Avenue.10 Certainly, Reverend Shine, we11 all know the different activities and12 things that you're in, and you're always13 calling looking for work for people and14 trying to help people. And Reverend15 Kline. So, you know, we're here for you.16 So thank you. Thank you for17 coming in. And we still have about ten18 or more people to testify.19 Any questions from any of the20 Committee members?21 (No response.)22
There is every23 hope for this bill being passed, right?24
Excuse25 139 3/16/11 - PUBLIC SAFETY - BILL 1101111 me?2