That's what the billboard industry would like to delete from Philadelphia's 40-year-old Zoning Code.
In the past two years, the three little words have enabled anti-billboard activists to win appeals declaring 19 proposed or existing billboards illegal.The losses represent a huge blow to the billboard operators, since each sign would bring in an estimated $10,000 to $15,000 a month, depending on its location, according to industry rate schedules. That's a potential annual revenue loss of more than $2 million, with further challenges to new billboards waiting in the wings.
Under the Zoning Code, any aggrieved party or any taxpayer can appeal any Zoning Board of Adjustment decision to the courts. And those opposed to the spread of billboards, like Mary Tracy and her organization, the Society Created to Reduce Urban Blight (SCRUB), say they intend to keep filing appeals."Any person or persons jointly or severally aggrieved by any decision of the Board, or any taxpayer. . .may appeal," the Zoning Code now states.
The words targeted for removal from the code by the billboard industry in an amendment now pending before City Council are "or any taxpayer."When the Zoning Board of Adjustment granted variances permitting the erection of the 19 billboards, Tracy and SCRUB took advantage of those three words and filed appeals. The Center City Residents Association joined in some of those appeals.
Initially, Tracy was unsuccessful because Common Pleas judges accepted the billboard industry's interpretation of the Zoning Code that only residents of the affected neighborhood - "persons. . .aggrieved" - had the right to appeal.But two years ago, Commonwealth Court disagreed and overruled Common Pleas Court. The words "or any taxpayer" meant just that, a unanimous three-judge panel said.
After that ruling, Tracy and SCRUB returned to Common Pleas Court. With their right to appeal upheld, they retained attorney Sam Stretton, and his arguments persuaded the courts that the proposed billboards were illegal for a variety of reasons.Subsequently, Council members Frank DiCicco and Joan Krajewski sponsored the amendment to change the Zoning Code by deleting the words "or any taxpayer." Both said the change was to prevent non-residents of areas affected by Zoning Board of Adjustment decisions from having standing to appeal.
"There's a feeling among some people that this is an attempt to disenfranchise people," DiCicco said. "Just the opposite is true. We want to empower the community. Why should someone who lives in the other end of the city be allowed to come in and interfere with something the community wants just because she doesn't like billboards?"In one case, DiCicco said, a community group "negotiated a deal with a sign company for a billboard to be erected in the neighborhood."
"In return for the community's support, the company was making a generous financial donation to the community," DiCicco said. "Although the zoning variance was granted, it was overturned because of opposition by people outside the community."That opposition came from SCRUB.
DiCicco said the amendment would not just affect appeals on billboard matters but on all actions by the Zoning Board of Adjustment. If someone wants to appeal a decision on a specific project by a developer, that person or group must reside in the neighborhood of the project, he said.Asked if a non-resident of the area would be permitted to appeal if a strip club was proposed adjacent to Independence Hall, DiCicco said no. But, he stressed, others, including elected officials, undoubtedly would appeal.
DiCicco said he wants to add language to the Zoning Code that guarantees "an established community association with a significant constituency in the affected neighborhood" the right to appeal.His proposed language does not define "affected neighborhood" or "established community association." DiCicco suggested those definitions ultimately would come from the courts.
Both DiCicco and Krajewski received $3,000 in campaign contributions from billboard interests over the past two years. DiCicco said the contributions didn't influence his decision to co-sponsor the amendment, and a Krajewski spokesman said the same thing.Council's Rules Committee has scheduled a hearing on the matter for today, and those against and in favor of the amendment have said they will turn out in force to air their views.
"There are more than 3,000 billboards in the city and at least 1,500 are illegal," said Tracy. "As citizens and taxpayers, we have - and should have - the right to appeal."The Center City Residents Association is among those who have notified the Rules Committee of a desire to testify in opposition to the amendment.
"The amendment makes it easier for commercial interests to obtain variances, since a protestant's right of appeal will be cut off," said residents association president Lenore Berson. "Thus, the amendment favors developers and other commercial entities. What happens in one part of the city can affect another part of the city. Therefore, any individual or group has a stake or interest that can be asserted under the procedures presently set forth in the [Zoning] Code."