COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - - - Room 401, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Thursday, June 18, 1998 8:45 p.m. - - - RESOLUTION 980481 - A Resolution appointing Richard Voith to the Board of Directors of the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority. RESOLUTION 980482 - A Resolution appointing Ms. Jettie Newkirk to the Board of Directors of the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority. - - - PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHN F. STREET, Chairman COUNCILWOMAN ANNA C. VERNA, Vice Chair COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE L. BLACKWELL COUNCILWOMAN AUGUSTA A. CLARK COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN FRANK DI CICCO COUNCILWOMAN HAPPY FERNANDEZ COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILWOMAN JOAN L. KRAJEWSKI COUNCILMAN W. THACHER LONGSTRETH COUNCILMAN RICHARD T. MARIANO COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN ANGEL L. ORTIZ COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO - - - VINCENT VARALLO ASSOCIATES, INC. Registered Professional Reporters Eleven Penn Center 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 (215) 561-2220 I N D E X RESOLUTION 980481 Richard Voith -------------------------------- RESOLUTION 980482 JETTIE NEWKIRK ------------------------------- 4 3 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482
Good morning Ladies and Gentlemen, this is a recessed hearing of the Council Committee of the Whole. We have two resolutions in front of us, Resolution No. 980482 and resolution 980481. The record should reflect that the Mr. Richard Voith and Ms. Jettie Newkirk are both in the chambers and ready to proceed with this hearing. We don't yet have a quorum, and we obviously cannot start this hearing without a quorum. I am asking that all Councilmembers please come to the Council chamber as quickly as possible. I'm beginning to feel lonely down here. Please, Councilmembers, come to the chamber. Thank you very much. - - -
This is a recessed hearing of the Council Committee of the Whole. We will now take testimony on resolution 20 980481, which is a resolution appointing Richard Voith to the Board of Directors of Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, and Resolution No. 980482. Will these two representatives please come to the witness stand? 4 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 Please identify yourselves for the record.
Thank you very much. Does any member of Council have any questions of these nominees? The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.
We're very glad to see the two Philadelphia representatives on the SEPTA Board here this morning. Obviously, everyone is very much concerned about the situation as it exists today, and I think there are many people who would like to know what the view is of the two Philadelphia representatives and what you can do to help bring about a fair settlement of the dispute because we think you're the City's representatives and there are thousands of workers for SEPTA who live in Philadelphia and there are hundreds of thousands who are suffering throughout this period. Therefore, I think it is important that the people of Philadelphia know what the Philadelphia representatives are doing. We understand that you 5 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 have a difficult problem with the representation on the Board, but we'd like to hear from you on that. And then you know that Council has taken a number of positions and we'd like to hear your views on that. You know that this City Council has supported the demand for arbitration of the dispute, that the City Council passed aa resolution to that effect. I think it was unanimously or nearly unanimously, if not unanimously. That the City Council passed again unanimously or nearly so, a statement of its position that the Frankford L and the Broad Street subway should not be operated by personnel other than the regular assigned personnel when there is no 15 work stoppage. We'd like your views on that. And we'd like, ultimately, your view, I think, on what you feel you can do to bring about the kind of fair settlement that City Council has been struggling to get. You know tomorrow we're considering a resolution in City Council to go to court, to do everything we can, and we think you both owe a duty to all of the people of Philadelphia to make your views plain and we'll go from there. Thank you, Mr. President. 6 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482
Councilman Cohen, I certainly share all of your concerns, and my goal at the end of the day here is to have a settlement that's fair to our employees that can assure that we can deliver high quality service --
Sir, I need you to speak just a little louder and a little closer to the microphone.
Okay. I'll start again. My goal in this is to have a settlement that is fair to our workers and that will allow the Authority to provide better quality service and to maintain fares at the levels that we have now, or better. That's the end desire of my goals with respect to the contract.
Could I ask that he speak very directly in the microphone? I'm having great trouble -- I just have to concentrate to be able to hear your words.
Okay. Is this better, Councilman? 7 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482
Okay. I will endeavor to do that. So my desire is to get a contract that's fair to the workers because they are the body and soul of the Authority, they deliver the service, and one that we can actually deliver high quality service and keep fares or improve our fare levels from where they are now. So, that's my goal. With respect to -- to be direct about the other issues, I think I do not support arbitration because I'm not sure that we can come out with a contract that will ultimately allow us to operate the Authority at the service levels we do now.
Could repeat that? Again, I'm having great trouble understanding what it is you're saying. I'm even having trouble understanding the words that you're using.
Okay. With respect to arbitration, binding arbitration, I'm not in favor of that. I believe that it will not necessarily assure us that we will have the ability to maintain our fare levels or our service levels given the 8 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 outcome. So, I'm not in favor of that. And I guess I also believe that it is the responsibility of the involved parties to actually come to an agreement at the bargaining table. That's basically where I stand in regard to arbitration. With respect to what I'm personally doing in terms of contract negotiations, basically I am personally outside of negotiations. I'm not involved in them at all.
I am not involved and I am outside of the negotiations. Of course, I'm in contact, but I am not directly involved in the negotiations, nor do I think that's a position that I could be really very helpful in.
Do you have any position with respect to the operation of the Frankford L and the subway by people who are not the regular people who operate those two lines?
Up until this point, I have not supported operating the lines. They are not operating, and I thought that it was potentially and unnecessarily too inflammatory to the negotiating process. However, at some point, there are a lot of 9 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 people that could be helped out in terms of getting to where they need to go if those lines were operated. In the future, perhaps we consider that, but its not my desire to use this as a bludgeon a wedge to force the issue one way or the other. The question just becomes at the end, at some point, do we need to provide service to people who have no 9 other means to get to work.
Could you tell us what you see your responsibility as the Philadelphia representative on the Board? How do you see that position of yours?
Well, clearly as a Philadelphia representative and one of only two, we are the people who -- our constituents bear the brunt of the cost of this work stoppage more than anyone else on the Board. And in that -- because of that's the case, I think that both myself and Ms. Newkirk are incredibly sensitive to the inconveniences. And that's a term that's way too light for many of our riders that are confronted by our inability to negotiate a settlement. And I see my role, as a person that tries to keep the focus on the fact that we need a fair settlement because the 10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 costs in terms of the riding public in Philadelphia and the citizens of all of Philadelphia are extremely high, and I try to keep that in the forefront of my colleagues. At the end of the day, however, we need a contract that is going to not only solve our short-term problem, but some of our longer-term problems in terms of being able to operate a system that is going to be viable and improving over time and also affordable for our riders.
Could you tell me how your view differs in any way at all from SEPTA management or from the overwhelming number of the suburban members of the Board? I'm trying to find out why you're the Philadelphia representatives, because so far, I've heard from your mouth the same words we hear from David L. Cohen. (Applause.)
There is a lot of agreement about what is in the best and long-term interests of providing public transit service to the citizens of Philadelphia within the Board. And I'll let it go at that.
Well, Mr. President, 11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 may I suggest this? With your approval, I'd like to have Ms. Newkirk also address those questions and then so that they each have full opportunity to make their statements. And then I see there are other lights flashing, there are other folks that --
Councilwoman Clark's light is on. She's really actually entitled to be next. Councilwoman, the request has been made for Ms. Newkirk to give a similar response. And Could we move to you then?
I think that's a fair way to do it, and I do not object to it.
Good morning, Council President and to members of Council, and I thank you for this opportunity. Let me state that, first of all, I feel my obligation on the SEPTA Board and --
Could you speak up a little louder in the microphone? This is the volume that you need in order to be able to be heard in the chamber.
Very good. Is that 12 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 better?
This is the volume that you need to be operating, right here.
Council President, let me say thank you for this opportunity.
A relaxing moment. Let me state that I feel that my responsibility on the Board in terms of representing the citizens of Philadelphia is to see to it that we have an efficient, well-managed, seriously operated transportation Authority. That means that both management and workers must be responsive to the needs of the community. People need transportation. I live in the intercity, and it is right now those people who are not getting basic transportation. I feel that very strongly. So I consider myself as someone who represents all of these people, as well as the Council and the City and the Mayor. 13 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 Having said that, there are also things that come as a result of a fiduciary responsibility for being a Board member. And that means that we have to balance those interests in terms of what is going to keep this system going and make it well-managed so that we can deliver transportation. I participated in the search that brought Jack Leary in here as a new general manager. I have participated in the formulation of the five-year plan, and that was one of the reasons we sought new management, so that we could stop going from crisis to crisis in operating this transit system. I'm sure Council remembers far longer than I the many times the SEPTA management came into Council and asked for more money, and more money, and more money; and you got less service as a result of that more money. What we are trying to do now is to stop that. Having said all of that, in terms of my position on the binding arbitration, I discussed that with the Council President and I'm committed, as I stated to the Council President and to Mr. Brookins, that I would take that resolution back to 14 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 the Board and that I would vote for it. I am committed to that with the conditions that have been outlined by Council. As to my position on the running of the L and the Broad Street Subway, I was in favor of doing it. My mind, however, has been dissuaded for two reasons. One, because I see that the Union sees that as an attempt to break the Union. My thoughts had nothing to do with attempting to break the Union. It was my idea that for the inner city areas that are not receiving any service right now, running the L and running the Broad Street Subway would help to resolve that problem. In view of the fact, however, that the Union sees it as a strike breaking issue, I have backed off on that position. Secondly, it occurred to me after the disturbances on regional rail that it might not be safe, not because the managers could not operate it safely, because many of those managers operated the system before they become managers, but because we could not control the public in terms of vandalism -- and that's not saying the union might do it, but we don't control the larger public at large. They may be friends of Unions or whoever who might 15 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 sabotage the system. So I have backed off on that position and have communicated that to the general manager. As to the issue of -- what else Councilman?
Well, you've explained your general role and you explained your position on two things. May I ask you, when you talk in terms of rendering service and having an efficient system, are you aware of the fact that it is the union's position that whatever their position is will not in any way hurt SEPTA financially, but will, in fact, produce some additional savings? Are you familiar with that?
I am aware that that is their position, Councilman, but I am not on the negotiating team and nor am I at the negotiating table. That's why we hire and put people at the negotiating table. I do not believe that it is the role of Board members to negotiate a contract. We have to approve the contract. So I am not a negotiator and I am not participating in the negotiations. What I am doing on various talk shows that I have had access to, is trying to make sure 16 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 that union members as well as the public understand both sides of the issues on a factual, not hyperbole, basis.
I understand Mr. Voith is not involved in negotiations directly either; is that right?
So we have a situation where Philadelphia residents are being very much inconvenienced, where workers and their families are suffering. I understand, for example, that SEPTA cut off health benefits the day the work stoppage began. Now, did you and Mr. Voith express a differing opinion and state at the SEPTA Board that the workers and their families are entitled even when their on strike, fighting for their jobs, fighting for the families, shouldn't they be entitled to health insurance? (Applause.)
Councilman Cohen, the conditions under which strikers operate are not set me, they are not set by SEPTA, they are universal. 17 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 And when workers go on strike, they know what those conditions are going to be, and I do not have the power to change those.
Ms. Newkirk, first, I respectfully disagree with your statement. There are many strike situations in which management goes out of its way to make sure that the workers, while on strike, that they and their families get the necessary medical care so that all of the health benefits are continued. But there will be more discussion, I'm sure, on that. But let me ask you, isn't it a strange thing Philadelphia workers are out on strike, they and their families are suffering, hundreds of thousands of Philadelphians are inconvenienced, yet the two Philadelphia members of the Board are excluded from the direct negotiations so that you don't have your own direct information?
Councilman, there are no 21 Board members at the negotiating table. None.
Well, don't you think there's a special responsibility since -- we can't ask the Suburban, their constituents are not being inconvenienced, they have no responsibility to 18 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 Philadelphia. But don't we have a right to expect our Philadelphia representatives on the Board to take a leadership role and finding a fair solution that takes care of the needs of two main groups, the riding public and the workers, and the third group, SEPTA? Because that's what we're all trying to do, get something that's fair for everybody. And I'm just asking about the two Philadelphia representatives.
Councilman, you're setting that scenario as if the management employees are not residents, citizens, and workers. They are. They also pay taxes. So all of the people involved here, or many of the people are citizens of Philadelphia and have a stake in all of this. None of the Board members are part of the negotiating team.
Councilman Cohen, I would like to now recognize Councilwoman Clark. Thank you.
Councilwoman Clark, I need you to do better with the microphone. Much louder. 19 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482
Thank you very much. I will state my questions for both of the candidates for reappointment. What is your position today with respect to binding arbitration as a way to shorten the labor stoppage?
My position, Councillady, is that when it comes to the Board for a vote, that I will vote for it.
Councilwoman, my position is not that. My position is that I am not in favor of binding arbitration to resolve this conflict. I think it needs to be resolved by negotiations between both parties.
Okay. Is this a retained position for each of you? Is your position new? Is your position new? Help us.
With respect to the various scenarios that may be posed for you, have you been willing to hear and discuss many scenarios including efforts to avoid, avert, and shorten the 20 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 work stoppage? Are you willing to hear a whole range of proposed solutions?
From a Board member's point of view, absolutely willing to hear and propose solutions that will accomplish the goals that we're looking for.
But do you listen for confirmation of your present view, or are you open to being persuaded by new facts?
Always open to be persuaded by new facts as long as we can deliver high quality service with the fair levels that we have going into the future. That's the goal. And, of course, safely. That's the goal of the contract. Also, fair to the workers. That's the goal of the contract from my point of view.
Yes, Councillady. We have -- I certainly have and still engage in these conversations. I have had these discussions both openly in public on radio station. Councilman Rizzo was cordial enough to let me appear on his program 21 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 so that I could listen to these comments and questions. I have talked with workers and I continue to talk to Board members and we, of course, get continual updates from the people who are on the negotiating team. And we also listen to citizens of Philadelphia who have their views about what this strike means and what should be done.
Now, as to the question of whether you sit at the negotiating table, what is SEPTA's past practice? Is it the practice for Board members to negotiate contracts?
The entire period I was -- no, it's not. Although, Councilwoman, I'm not sure about prior. I've been on the Board for six years, and I'm not absolutely certain prior to my six years what the story is.
You're not negotiators. What say do you have in determining who negotiates your position? And your position is both management and the workers; is that correct?
Is that correct to you, sir? 22 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482
Do you consider that your representation as a Board member is as a representative of both management and the workers and the riding public? Who do you represent?
I have a responsibility to the Authority for deals its public role of providing service to the riders. That's how I view my role. I view myself as a person setting policy to accomplish the public purpose goals of the Authority, which is providing public service to our riders.
Okay, let me say it another way. Do you see yourself as a representative of management?
No, I do not see myself as a representative of management at all.
Do you see yourself as a representative of people who feed the fare box?
Not exclusively, because I'm a representative of the people who are feeding the fare box and of the people who fund the Authority, which is the general public.
Of which, if I may use Ms. Newkirk's language, some of them happen to be laborers, some of them happen to be managers; isn't that correct.
Can you really detail how your representation excludes one and focuses on the other? How would you do that? (Applause.)
My comment, Councilwoman, was not that -- was to basically note that I am not exclusively representing management or exclusively representing labor, rather I'm representing the larger interest. 24 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482
Right. And I carefully did not put the term "exclusively" in there, because I said I'm going to ask you a series of questions. Now, if I have cleared up my question, now would you like an opportunity to discuss whether you see as your responsibility to make sure that the playing field is level, that management does not take an undue advantage of labor, that labor does not capriciously interfere with the providing of high quality, dependable public transportation? What's your job? Where are you on that?
I certainly am not in any -- I do not think it's appropriate for me to advocate that management seek an unfair contract from labor. I certainly agree with you on that, in a that position. Let me take a step back, however. As a Board member, management basically reports to the Board. I don't represent them. In many cases, I am an entity that's sort of evaluating what they do, and sometimes favorably and sometimes negatively. This Board replaced the previous management, not necessarily -- 25 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482
All right. And in that supervisory role when they do something that you think is exceedingly good, you let them know that, don't you?
When they displease you, you have ways of letting them know that?
Would you put on this record one instance where you have disagreed with a proposed management position?
Last summer, management proposed a capital budget in which the City of Philadelphia, from my point of view, was shortchanged about 190 million dollars over the five-year horizon of the budget. And I guess, personally, I brought that into a major fight between the City and the suburbs to try to get the terms of that capital budget changed. And I will add they were changed dramatically. There have been -- that is a very large instance in which I've COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 strongly disagreed with management, and with the help of Ms. Newkirk, we were extremely successful in getting an outcome that's much more favorable to the residents of the City of Philadelphia.
Thank you. Ms. Newkirk, do you remember the question and would you like to be heard on it?
I remember the question. One of the things that stands out in my mind is when I became a member of the Board years ago when we had the prior administration, there were some very extreme service cuts, and both Mr. Voith and I lobbied to get service restored to some areas of West Philadelphia and the City because we thought that they had gone too far in terms of the budget cuts.
And those service cuts actually would have impacted labor?
Right. But specifically, my question is, would those service cuts have impacted labor detrimentally?
What efforts have 27 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 you made to keep Council informed of the issues as you are aware of them in this work stoppage? Do you regularly report to the Chair of the Committee or to the President of City Council? How do we know what you are doing, assuming we're not listening to Frank Rizzo on TV or radio?
I have regularly reported to the Council President and have made sure that our AGM for Community Services, Ms. Frances Jones, has kept Council briefed. I have participated in discussions with Councilmembers who have called me and have been available for any questions that Councilmembers have.
Thank you. The record probably should reflect that when City Council passes this resolution in support of binding arbitrations with the caveats that have been mentioned, Ms. Newkirk was the first one to indicate her support. She was in the Council caucus room, I think Mr. Voith was out of town and unavailable at that time. And she did make a commitment to support that resolution and to vote for it, and I think she 28 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 actually did that. At this time, the Chair recognizes Councilman Mariano.
Thank you, Mr. President. My question is to both the candidates. First, Mr. Voith, I came in a little late when Councilman Cohen was speaking with you, but you've changed your mind, now you would be in favor of scabs operating the L?
My position has always been that our first order of business is to try to provide service to the customers. Up until this point and actually looking forward, I have not favored operating the L simply because it's viewed as a Union-busting activity, and that's not what I'm interested in at all. And that has been my reason for not wanting to operate the L, in which I'm not wanting to operate the L right now. At some point, we as an Authority have a duty to provide service to people who really may need it. Some of the people are desperate for service. And if the L were ever operated, the only reason to do that would be to provide the service to the Philadelphians who actually are in desperate 29 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 need of service. I would not favor using this as a tactic or a weapon in -- the means to force a contract settlement. That's not my interest.
But you think for the better of the City, this strike goes on six months that it could possibly be something where for the betterment of the people of the City, we might need the L to get people around, therefore, scabs could operate it?
Councilman, I hope that this thing does not look anything like six months.
Now, you see, I have to vote for or against you to be a candidate for this Board, so I --
Mr. Voith, I need you to speak into the microphone much louder. Thank you.
Excuse me. I have to vote for or against you to be a candidate here so I need to know what your mindset is, your philosophical thought. These are people who would be scabs, management or not. I need to know that. That's very important to me and to the people that I represent. And if you think that eventually it's 30 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 going to help the people of Philadelphia, well, let me tell you, a hundred years ago when there was coal mines ruling this state and this country, they thought that nine-year-old boys and girls should be working in a coal mine so they could get coal out for people so they could heat their house. You know, there was a time when ten-year-old girls probably right now somewhere in this world, ten-year-old girls work in factories sewing a hundred dresses for two cents an hour, or making sneakers. They think that's important to get out, too. What's important here is that the people that are represented by Local 234 --and this isn't a commercial for 234, this is a commercial for the people of the City, people I represent and the rest of these Council people represent. We need to know not what you're going to be thinking because you just don't change on something, you're either for scabs or you're against scabs, so you're either with them or against them. (Applause.)
I'm neither for scabs nor against scabs. I have not supported operating -- I 31 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 don't call anyone who works a scab. I apologize for that.
Well, let me tell you, I can do that. Anybody that operates an L that's not a member of Local 234 is a scab. Even if Mr. Leary does it himself, he's a scab. And that's what it is. It may not be a nice word, but guess what, I'm not nice guy. I didn't get here by being a nice guy. I won't be out of here by being a nice guy. And when I'm not being an electrician, it's a scab. I've said it before, I'll say again for those who didn't hear it, a scab is a scab is a scab. This isn't a joke. I need to know, are you going to change? I mean, are you wake up one morning or maybe one night have a martini and think, you know what, the people of Philadelphia, they need them Ls, so the hell with the union, we'll just put these management guys, as you call them, and that's fine, scabs as I call them. I mean, I need to know that, Richard. I mean, that's important.
I have said, and I will say exactly what my position that I have not supported operating the L mainly for the concerns of the kinds you're expressing. But would I in the future 32 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 consider operating the L, and I would say, yes, I would.
So you would consider operating the L with scabs in the future?
Now, Jettie, you wouldn't, right? Ms. Newkirk, you said you wouldn't be in favor of management operating the L?
I said I was not now in favor because I consider it a danger because we could not control the people who might sabotage the system and because the Union views it as a strike-breaking issue. I cannot, however, predict and will not sit here today and predict if this strike goes into infinity what I would consider in terms of the best interest of the City because my responsibility is not just to the Union. My responsibility is to all of the citizens of Philadelphia who have to use a public transportation system. That is why I was placed there and that's what I view as my larger responsibility. So I cannot sit here today, Councilman, giving all due consideration, and predict what my position will be in the future. My position today is that we should 33 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 not operate the L and the Broadway Subway.
Ms. Newkirk, no 4 disrespect intended, but if you're not sure about that, then you're not thinking the way I would like you to think, but you're certainly entitled to think any way you want, and I appreciate that, and I'm sure the people of the City of Philadelphia appreciate that. So we'll say maybe you would be not in favor of it; but he's in favor of it. You're in favor of binding arbitration; he's not in favor of it. You cancel each other out. We might as well have nobody on there, as far as I'm concerned. (Applause.)
Please tell me I'm wrong. You're in favor of binding arbitration?
No, I am not in favor of binding arbitration. However, my position with respect to operating the L is substantially the same as Ms. Newkirk's.
Okay. Well, let the people of Philadelphia listen. We have a way maybe to settle the strike. If I could settle the strike, if Councilman Street could settle the 34 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 strike, if Councilman Verna or Fernandez or anyone in this room could settle the strike, we would do it just because we would like to get the heck out of here and go on with summer vacation or whatever is going to happen, okay, or what's going to happen. But we can't do things because we have to think about, not just Local 234, many of these people are my neighbors and friends. I could look out, people live right around the corner from me, People that operate buses that are my friends, guys I grew up with, ladies I grew up with. And it's important. But if we could settle and end this strike and I was sitting where you were, I would do anything. You two are going to possibly, maybe, maybe not change in the future depending what happens for the good of the City. Well, where is the Board's or the management's thought now in the good of the City when binding arbitration? If you came to me and said, "Rick, we could settle this thing right now possibly," I would take the possibly, wouldn't you, Councilman Ortiz? Binding arbitration, possibly. Why aren't they doing it? If I'm on that Board, I have to know why they're afraid of binding arbitration. 35 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 Now, I talked to Steven Brookins, I also talked to Jack Leary almost every other day. All right. And guess what, they're not close. And do you know why they're not close in my humble opinion? They're not close because the people on the Board leave you two out of it, don't live in Philadelphia. They don't care about Philadelphia. They care about Delaware County, Montgomery County. They're the people that left Juniata Park, they're the people that left North Philadelphia, they're the people that left South Philadelphia, West Philadelphia. (Applause.)
And I'm tired of the people that abandon our city, coming in here and working and then telling us, "You know what, your wage tax is too high. But I need a cop right now. I need a fireman right now." Now, I'm all for interegional responsibility, but you two people are the ones that have to represent us here. I'm going to saves you all the trouble. I'm voting against both of you unless you can have the idea that maybe you could help settle this strike because that's what it's about, settling the strike. 36 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 (Applause.)
It doesn't just help the union. It doesn't just help the people. This it isn't about me. This isn't about me getting clapped. Please don't clap, it's not about that. Let's settle this strike. If I'm on that Board, whatever it takes, if it takes camping out in Jack Leary's house every day when he comes out, "Hey, Jack, here's your Inquirer. Guess what? There's still a strike. Because you know why, Jack, because something is not working." I went to John F. Kennedy School of Government to learn getting a yes. Local Union 98 set me up there. It's simple. I could save all you guys the money. You can't walk out of the situation and feel like I broke your back or you broke my back, brother. You know what it's about? It's about win/win, bending, getting a yes. In my opinion, nobody here wants to get the yes. The big story here is Harry Lombardo left to go to international and Lou Gambicini -- God rest his wife's soul, his poor wife died and Lou retired. The guys on the Board, they think Lou gave you guys everything. You know that? I'm not afraid to say 37 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 that. Now, Lou's gone. When Leary came in, they said, "Jack" -- and Jack's a nice guy. Jack's in Boston. I spoke with Jack. He's done a halfway decent job with Boston and St. Louis. I checked up on him in Boston. I worked in Boston as an electrician on a union construction site, Rose Wharf. I went up there for a weekend, checked around with Councilman Ortiz, did my homework, we looked around. It wasn't just about living wage, it was about Jack Leary. I called people that I knew in St. Louis, not just local --
Then you can't interrupt me when I'm on a roll, Mr. President.
I have to interrupt you. We have 84 bills on our calendar today.
Can I get to my point? Because the other day when we were talking to Council, it's about speeches. This isn't about speeches. This is about ending a strike --
I understand that -- 38 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482
Ending a strike that hurts not just the union, hurts the people of the City of Philadelphia. I've sat here for three years and listened to every crybaby in the world come in here. Well, it's my turn to cry and whine if they want to say I'm crying and whining. (Applause.)
Mr. President, we have to end this strike. We have to end this strike no matter what it takes. No matter what happens, we have to end the strike. Camping on Jack Leary's door -- I know you've done a lot. I see you walking up and down Broad Street. That's great. We're going to end the strike. But guess what? As long as the people on the Board, SEPTA's Board -- and it's probably not these two, they're probably lovely people. It's the people that don't live in the City. They don't care. They left us. They don't want to live in North Philadelphia. They hate John Street. They hate Rick Mariano and Michael Nutter and Happy Fernandez. They don't like us, that's why they moved away. Now, I can live with that, but I don't want them voting and telling these people that they 39 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 don't deserve a decent contract and the people of the City of Philadelphia don't get to ride the L unless scabs operate it. Thank you, Mr. President. (Applause.)
Thank you very much. The chair recognizes Councilwoman Fernandez.
Thank you, Mr. President. I think it is unfortunate that we only have two nominees before us today, because as the Councilman noted, one of the real problems we face is that Philadelphia only has 2 representatives on the SEPTA Board, out of 15. And prior to 1991 it used to be 2 out of 11. And I think for the record we should note that in 1991 the state legislature changed the law and added four more members of the SEPTA Board; one representing the majority leader of the house, one representing the minority leader of the house, one representing the majority leader of the senate and one representing the minority leader of the senate. So the Board has gotten bigger with more diffuse and in some ways more state controlled. 40 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 And so in a sense, it really is too bad we only have two Philadelphia representatives on the SEPTA Board, 2 out of 15. So I want to make clear for the record I intend to vote for their renomination. I think they have a long, strong record of being strong advocates for the riders and for the citizens of this city. We see today they have the courage to stand up for their views here before Council like they've had the courage to stand up for their views in arguments with the SEPTA Board and with the SEPTA management. So while good people can disagree over some issues, I would urge us to vote for these two people who have been very excellent, strong, courageous and tough advocates for the riders in our city. Thank you.
And what communications with the people that negotiating --
Yes. And your communications with your negotiating team. One of 41 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 the things that seems to be exacerbating and driving the people to dig in their heels even deeper than even the issues is the way it seems that the lead negotiator from SEPTA characterizes the work force of TWU, Mr. David L Cohen. His rhetoric has been excessive and at times insulting to the work force. Do you have any input in terms of as to -- if you don't have any input into the negotiation process, do you at least have any input into the way communications are done and the way that the rhetoric is put forward?
Councilman, I have repeatedly expressed my displeasure at many of the statements made by David L. Cohen. However, as you can see, this has not helped a great deal. However, all we can do or all I can do is express my displeasure and attempt to make for a calmer playground, and I have continued to do that and I will continue to do that.
I would also say that we do have an input into how negotiations are conducted, what we would like the external sort of relationships to look like. And I do not think it's productive or accurate to characterize people who 42 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 work for SEPTA in negative ways. I mean, at the end of the day, the strike is going to be over and we're going to have to operate in Authority and we're extremely dependent on the high quality workers that we have.
Have you expressed that to David L. Cohen as Ms. Newkirk has said?
I have not expressed it to David. I wasn't speaking solely about David, but I have expressed these views to Jack Leary that I think that we have -- and I think that he agrees with this completely that this is not an issue of breaking anyone. And if you frame things as sort of this butting heads mentality as sort of the mode of operation, that even a win might be a loss. So I am sympathetic with your comments. And don't get me wrong, we are not involved in the negotiations, but Ms. Newkirk and I are, and I can't tell you, in constant communications more than daily many times a day about how the progress of the negotiations are going.
But there hasn't been any progress in negotiations now for, like, three months. And Mr. David L. Cohen keeps on pointing to 43 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 a little box and says, this is the box that's there and that's it, and that does not seem to be a negotiating posture. That's what worries me in terms of not only the statements that are made about the work force, but the fact that they continuously put forward phrases such as, "This is where we're at, we're not moving from here." So that's not really a negotiating posture. This Council has been saying, "Get to the table and negotiate." But, however, if you go to the table and you say what you said three months ago, or take it or leave it here, that's not negotiation. And I wonder what is your input into that negotiating team and saying to that negotiating team, "What you're doing is not negotiating."
Councilman, the Board started working on contract items and plans back in, I guess, June, July of last year and put together certain things that they felt were necessary in order to move into the new millennium, to use everybody's term. This included the things that have been put forth in management's five-year strategic plan. The contract items, some of them, 44 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 most of them, are necessary to move forward. There is negotiating room, but I cannot determine and cannot say when you are getting one report from union leaders and we are getting another report from management negotiators as to what goes on at the negotiating table. They are both saying that the other is not negotiating. And since I am not there, I have to believe that neither of them are negotiating. But there is certainly nothing that I can do regarding that. I cannot make them sit there -- I can make them sit at the table, but I cannot make them do what the other believes is negotiating since those things seem to be the difference. I am at a loss to know what Council expects of Mr. Voith and myself in view of this. We cannot control the vote. I certainly do not agree that our suburban members, many of -- some of whom suburban representatives and state representatives do not care about the system. I think they have proven that they do care about keeping our public transportation system running. But if it goes out of business, if it goes out of business, then more than the workers will be harmed. And our 45 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 responsibility as a Board is to see to it that that does not happen. That means make the hard decisions. It means take positions that may not be publicly popular, but that's what you pay us the big bucks to do.
The one Transpass that we get to ride the system when it is working.
I do hope that you're not under the illusion that you get together and put together a management plan a year ago and that you expect that the Union is going to agree to all of that management plan.
Councilman Ortiz, forgetting about where we are now, there has been a great deal of movement from where we were in that management plan, say, in November to where we were on March 15th. A great deal. Now, we may still be at an impasse and admittedly it doesn't appear to be much 46 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 movement since then, but it's not as if that plan was assembled and there has been no change. In fact, I believe there's been quite a bit of change.
I can only tell you what we were told by your negotiator. That we put it on the table and that's where we're at, and we're not moving from that. So I don't know what negotiating takes place when the negotiator says, "That's it and we're not moving."
But Councilman, it was put on the table at the request for a final offer. When you ask for a final offer, then that means that you are then, it seems to me, willing to accept what is put on the table and that's what was done. Now, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Leary, and Mr. Bitell have said that even with what is on the table, there is still room for movement. I don't know what more can be said other than that, but I certainly know that Dick Voith and I have no control over what happens at the negotiating table. So if our appointment or reappointment is going to be based on that, then we are out of luck right now.
I have not heard Mr. Cohen say that there is room for movement. 47 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482
Mr. Cohen has used the word "wiggle room." I don't know what that means.
Thank you very much. We have Councilman Nutter who hasn't had an opportunity. Councilman Nutter.
Sorry, Mr. President. Mr. Voith, just two questions. You had responded and you have responded on a couple of occasions to the binding arbitration question. I want to ask the question in a particular context and in a context of how we in the Council have tried to deal with that issue. I think one of my colleagues pointed out to you that we have passed a resolution. I've heard your position and what your concern is about the eventuality. The resolution that's passed by the Council on what we asked, I guess, SEPTA to consider and now what I'll ask you to think about in a more narrow framework -- framework seems to be the 48 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 word of the strike. We have asked for binding arbitration in the context of no fare increase, no 4 decrease in service, no increase in the amount of city subsidy to SEPTA, and the greatest champion possibly in the body of labor issues, I asked him in the caucus prior to the vote on that resolution did he think that an arbitrator would be able to operate in that framework. And I believe Councilman Cohen said yes. What I need to ask you is --
Mr. Brookins said yes. So what I need to ask you is in that more narrow framework of the question and that process, is that something that you could consider if those three factors were the interval components of what an arbitrator would have to deal with under those circumstances?
Councilman Nutter, since those are my goals, I certainly -- outcome goals, I certainly could support that. However, I don't believe that it is a realistic possibility to expect arbitration to deliver that. I just want to take a step back -- 49 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482
I understand that. Just let me just deal with the first part of your response, which under the circumstances may have been where you wanted to put the period, because we're dealing with a situation tomorrow on a resolution, taking public testimony in our collective efforts to try to do as much as we can, and there are, I think, legitimately some unanswered questions about where that can go. You, I think, don't know and it would be very difficult, I think, for you to predict even in that framework what an arbitrator would eventually do. But if we can stay in that framework, again, as the SEPTA negotiators only want to talk about issues in a framework. So now, I want to talk about this circumstance in a certain framework. Your response was, in that framework you thought that -- because it's your goal anyway, you thought something like that could be something that you could support and you only expounded on your answer because you're anticipating Step C in the process which is a legitimate concern of yours. Is that a fair characterization of where you could be on that issue? 50 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482
I understand that, but we're in a step-by-step process.
In a step-by-step process -- I'm sure I'll be tripped up on this, but yes, since those are my goals, if you can assure me that I can get my goals, I would be delighted. I will say it again, and I know it's the inappropriate thing, but I'm not -- I guess I'm not well attuned to it.
Let me ask another question. This will be even simpler. Do you have any personal or professional interests in trying to break this Union?
Thank you very much. The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen for a couple of brief questions. 51 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482
That cannot be complied with, Mr. President. It's an unrealistic request. So you're saying that as SEPTA Board members you really have no power. You're apparently not embarrassed by the fact that SEPTA is adopting a position of saying, "We refuse to submit this to unbiased people because we're afraid that if objective, unbiased people look at this, they're going to decide that we at SEPTA are wrong;" isn't that what you say when you say, Mr. Voith, that you don't support arbitration? Isn't arbitration within the very narrow framework set forth by the Council resolution, yet you say, no, even under that framework you cannot support it? You know, explain; I don't understand that. Are you convinced -- you must be convinced that the SEPTA position is so unfair that any objective person looking at it will have to so declare.
That is not my opinion. I think the SEPTA position is basically a fair one. 52 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 Having said that, I believe that what I stated is that my goals are to get a solution that would guarantee the service levels we have or improvement, and the fare levels we have. And if we can guarantee maybe arbitration will deliver that, I would. It's my understanding of arbitration is as a good solution for solving problems when people know that they are starting out with an arbitration solution at the end of the day. Furthermore, the idea that there are quote, unquote, experts out there that know so much about an extremely large public service enterprise and can know better than the enterprise's staff, or indeed, better than the Union is unlikely in some sense to me. And furthermore, it seems to me that this is something I spent a great deal of time in and it's of my responsibility not to attempt to support positions that I believe are ones that will move the Authority into a better position to deliver our public service in the future.
At a later time I'll try to figure out what that means. All I can understand that it says, no, we're not prepared to submit the issue to people that are objective and 53 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 unbiased. That's the only thing I can conclude. Let me ask you this. You gave as a reason you want to make sure there's a sound fiscal structure. Well, tell me, isn't it a fact that the budget last year was balanced, that SEPTA ended last year's budget with a surplus, isn't that a fact? You certainly must have known their reports even if you're not part of the inner workings of SEPTA management. Isn't it a fact that SEPTA ended its last budget year with a surplus?
Yes. And isn't it also a fact that as of February of this year, that SEPTA management was reporting everywhere that they expected to end this year, that's before the strike, without a strike in the picture that they expected an even bigger surplus this year than last year?
Councilman Cohen, I believe in January we had about a five-million dollar deficit and we were predicting that we would close the gap to be balanced at the end of the year. That's correct. 54 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482
Well, let me tell you, you're not only maybe got that five million, but didn't you get more than 90 million additional from the federal government that you never got before? And isn't it a fact that SEPTA decided arbitrarily on its own not to include a penny of that 92 million dollars in the operating budget, that it was SEPTA's decision to squirrel that money away for capital improvements; isn't that a fact, Mr. Voith?
It is true that SEPTA has had quite a bit more money for its capital budget.
Isn't it a fact that money has actually come into SEPTA this year at a rate unprecedented in the whole history of SEPTA? Isn't that a fact? Separate the difference -- forget the difference between capital and operating. But isn't it a fact that SEPTA has much more money than it's ever had before? And I raise that -- I don't like to discuss that publicly in general, but it was a nice bit of news, and that SEPTA is being deceptive in saying it has to fight this to the very end in order to save the financial structure of SEPTA. SEPTA has 55 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 never been so good off as it is now, and all the facts show that. (Applause.)
And I'm not revealing secrets. This is all out in public to anybody who is willing to take a few minutes to check the records. That's the reason, Mr. Voith, that I believe that SEPTA is not telling the truth to the public. There is no financial need for SEPTA to force this Union to try to starve their membership to death. (Applause.)
Because that's what are you're trying to do, it won't work. But what may happen is you may destroy -- you may destroy the public transit system. It isn't the strike that's going to destroy it, it is the attitude of SEPTA and its actions that threatens the reliability of the transit system. (Applause.).
And that's why I say both of you have a duty. Your duty ought to be -- Ms. Newkirk is apparently a meeting with part of that duty to the public. But respectfully, Ms. 56 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 Newkirk, I say you underestimate your abilities. I think all the Philadelphia representatives on the Board ought to be working every moment on all the other Board members to say, "You've got to support a solution which will put to an end on a fair basis to the strike." The Council resolution does that. What could be wrong? What could possibly be wrong with letting a third party come in, a third party chosen by both sides to come in, and with the limitations expressed in the Council position on arbitration which safeguards for all time SEPTA's fiscal picture. What can be wrong with saying, since apparently both sides -- I take what Ms. Newkirk said in good faith. She gets a report from management that the Union is not negotiating. She gets a report from the Union saying that management is not negotiating. How do you settle something when two sides can't agree? That's the whole theory that we have in dispute resolution, you bring in a third party. And if you're worried, you frame their authority in such a way to preserve the position of SEPTA. That's what this resolution does. Our demands for 57 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 arbitration fully protects SEPTA and protects the workers. When you have something going on that looks like it's endless, there's no solution in sight, you've got to have a process that does present a final solution. That's what arbitration presents, and I want you to know -- you know, it's a strange thing that all the polls show that among the riding public that's being so inconvenienced, they overwhelmingly support the workers because they know at every stage this union has sought to find some approach to bringing the strike to an end on a fair basis. And that every step of the way SEPTA's had only one answer -- excuse me, they've had two answers. They said first you got to negotiate within the terms we set forth. That's not negotiation. Negotiation means both parties come to the table with no 19 preconditions, but SEPTA insists on preconditions. And secondly, when they see that that gets them nowhere, they still refuse to set in motion a process that offers a simple solution. And I think that the real danger to the transit system comes, as I said before, from this intractable, totally unreasonable, senseless 58 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 position of SEPTA. (Applause.)
Thank you very much. The chair recognizes Councilman Longstreth.
Mr. President, I'd like to simply suggest in view of Councilman Cohen's running filibusters, which have been going on now for quite a long period of time, that we apply a five-minute limit to his testimony as we have done for those other people who are following their own agenda when they're testifying. They're really not staying close to the point at all, which is to evaluate these two people whom I think have made a good deal of sense in their presentation for continuation on the SEPTA Board.
Thank you very much, Councilman. Anyone have any other questions?
Excuse me, Council President Street, when does the public have an 59 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 opportunity to testify in this proceeding?
Thank you very much. The witnesses are excused.
The witnesses are excused. The witnesses are excused. Now, leave.
If you have anything to say, I will allow you now to sit at this witness table and say it. You may sit at the witness table and say what you have to say. (Applause.)
My name is Patricia MacNamara. I'm CEPA's educational director and I'm here to ask when the public gets an opportunity to testify in these proceedings?
This is your opportunity right now. AUDIENCE MEMBER: Okay. It's open to the general public then?
Please 60 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 identify yourself for the record and proceed with any statement that you have.
My name is Patricia MacNamara and I'm the educational director of CEPA, Consumer's Education and Protective Association. And we have a question. We would like to know what the position is of the Board members that are representing us, why we don't have input to demand that they support binding arbitration to end the strike? (Applause.)
There's something wrong when the people that are most hurt by the system don't have any input into the people who are supposed to be representing their interests.
Thank you very much. That question has been covered over and over and over again by Councilman Cohen, Councilwoman Clark, and a number of other people. This record is full of testimony on it. If you were here, you would have heard it.
The question was, when do people have the opportunity to testify on whether or not the these folks should be reconfirmed? 61 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482
Well, the Chair wishes to direct this question to the members of the committee. We either have to take action on these resolutions now, take action on them after Council session, or we have to take action on them in the fall if there is to be further public testimony. We cannot have further public testimony at this point in time. And the chair wishes to have some guidance from the members of the committee on it. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Clark.
Mr. President, I move that we dispose of this resolution today.
I move that we dispose of this resolution today. (Duly seconded.)
Now, there is a motion. Question on the motion.
Mr. President, does the proposer of the motion mean today in the 24-hour period today, or today now?
Chair 62 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 recognizes Councilwoman Clark.
Now, in order to consider these resolutions now, there has been a request by at least one member of Council for additional public hearing. My understanding that at the sense of the motion is that we end the public hearing and go on to a public meeting and consider a resolution. The Chair recognizes Councilman Ortiz.
Mr. President, I want this to be done right now because I have to leave for a very important City-related business at 12 o'clock today, and I want to have this resolution 16 and vote on these two individuals before I leave on that trip.
I believe that we have no power to act at the following a public hearing at which the public has not been heard. I think we have -- we don't have the power legally to shut off testimony of the public when the public has 63 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 not been heard. Say, for one witness, I think there has to be a representative grouping of testimony and I think both can be met. I think we can have representatives who wish to be heard that are in the public. I see large numbers of union members. I think a union representative ought to be permitted to speak on their behalf, and if there's any other separate interests, I think they ought to be heard. And then I think we can act and act promptly today on the motions.
Anyone else wish to be heard? Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Mr. President. The question that was asked earlier regarding the public testimony, I think I'm trying to understand the nature of the question. This hearing was originally scheduled for yesterday. It was advertised?
Yes. This was a duly advertised hearing on this resolution of the Council Committee of the Whole. This is the kind of resolution that we don't even have to have a public hearing on if we don't want. The resolution 64 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 can be introduced. The rules can be suspended. We can approve these nominations without any public hearing at all. We are well within our rights to do it. We do not ordinarily like to have public consideration of a resolution without having significant opportunity for the public to testify. And frankly speaking, I think the representatives of Septa answered the questions. I represent they answered the questions in a fair and honest way. If Councilman Cohen insists that we have -- and if he is substantially supported, then we will recess these hearings to the call of the Chair and we will make arrangements to have an opportunity for people to come, other people to testify. We cannot do it now. We cannot do it now. It is now almost 10:30. We have 80 bills that are on the second and final reading passage calendar. We have two presentations. We have a clergyperson. It is unfair to those people. This hearing was scheduled for 8:30 this morning. I was here at 8:30. No 22 Council member was here at 8:30 and we didn't get started until late. And it is unfair to all of the people that will be inconvenienced by our now deciding to have a lot of testimony from the general 65 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 public.
May I ask one question, sir? Would you be good enough to ask if there is a representative out of the Local 234 who wishes to be heard? Give them three minutes, four minutes.
Councilman, it is unfair because there are representatives from CEPA who are here who want to testify , and if we start having public hearing testimony, then we are going to take it. I have no objections to taking it. My only concern is that we've been here, we have all these other people here. Councilmembers took the time that we were entitled to take. It is now time for us to do the other business of this Council. That's all my point is. We have all these other people coming. And if you are going to insist it is unfair to the general public, I'm going to support you in it because I think if we open up to the general public, we have to open it up to the general public. We won't be able to do it now. And I have no reservations about having the general public. I think it's unfair For CEPA people to be here and others and then we say, "Well, we're going 66 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 to take one representative of the union and tell everybody you else you can't be heard." So my recommendation to the Committee is either we end it, act on the resolutions, or else we recess and give everybody who wants to testify an opportunity to testify at another time. Now, to me, those are the only rational choices we have. There is a motion on the floor. Now, I just want to make sure that everybody understands where we are. This is where we are. The motion essentially is -- and Councilwoman Clark? Excuse me, Councilwoman Blackwell, could you ask your aid to step back? I want to be able to see Councilwoman Clark. I would like to restate your motion for you, and if you will agree to it, then let this be the motion. And the sense your motion is that we end the public hearing and consider the resolutions now. Is that the sense of your motion?
Is there a second to that? (Duly seconded.) Council
Is there any 67 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 discussion on that motion?
I will call the role. Those voting aye will be voting in favor of the motion, those voting no will be voting against the motion. The witness can step back. Thank you. Councilwoman Clark.
Councilwoman Miller. 68 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482
Councilman Rizzo. 69 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482
Councilmember Street voting aye. The ayes are ten, the nays are five. The resolution passes. This brings us to the end of our public hearing. We're now go to our public meeting. - - -
The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Verna for a motion on resolution No. 980481.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that Resolution No. 980481 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation.
All in favor, let it be known by saying aye. Can we have a role call? We'll have a role call. This is the Richard Voith resolution. Those voting aye will be voting in favor. Those voting no will be voting against. Councilwoman Clark.
Councilwoman 70 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 Blackwell.
Councilman 71 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 Ortiz.
The ayes are nine, the nays are five. The motion passes. It is so ordered. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Verna for a motion on resolution 980482. Those voting aye will be voting in favor of the motion. Those voting nay will be voting against the motion. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Verna.
Mr. Chairman, I move that Resolution No. 980482 be reported out of 72 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 Committee with a favorable recommendation. (Duly seconded.)
Councilwoman 73 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - 980481, 980482 Fernandez.
The ayes are 12, the nays are two. The motion passes. It is so ordered. Thank you very much. This brings us to 74 the end of our public hearing Council Committee on the Whole. (Adjourned at 10:30 a.m.) - - - 75 C E R T F I C A T I O N I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of June 18, 1998, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of the same. RE: COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ___________________________ Lisa C. Bradley, RPR and Notary Public