Saying he was responding to the wishes of a coalition of community organizations, Mayor Street yesterday vetoed a controversial City Council bill that would have limited the right to appeal land-use decisions.
The measure, known as Bill 629, likely would have prevented people from going to court to challenge decisions of the city zoning board unless they lived near the properties that were the subject of dispute. As the law now stands, any taxpayer can appeal a zoning decision."This is a Mayor who worries about little people, and small businesses in neighborhoods, taxpayers," Street wrote in his veto message to Council. "This bill could deny those people their day in court and, therefore, I cannot allow this bill to become law."
Councilman Frank DiCicco, chief sponsor of Bill 629, disputed Street's characterization of the measure, saying it still would have allowed neighborhood groups to take zoning cases to court."I think the mayor took this as an opportunity strictly for political purposes to look good in the eyes of the public," DiCicco said.
DiCicco wrote Bill 629 in part to protect the billboard industry from lawsuits by an activist organization that has no particular neighborhood affiliation, the Society Created to Reduce Urban Blight (SCRUB). The organization has successfully stopped billboards in six Commonwealth Court cases.But the measure would have affected all zoning disputes, not just those involving billboards. That is why so many community groups opposed it, said Judith Eden, zoning chair of the Center City Residents Association.
"It's a great day for all the people of Philadelphia," said Eden, whose group represents about 1,500 households in the western half of Center City. "Zoning is at the heart of every civic organization, and this was an attack."Mary Tracy, head of SCRUB, said: "I think he [Street] just responded to the hundreds of people who wrote to him and asked him to do the right thing."
The veto represented a change of position for Street's administration. A representative of the Managing Director's Office testified in support of the measure at a hearing in March and said the administration believed it would not take away the rights of neighborhood residents.Activists who lobbied the mayor for the veto said they believed hundreds of people had written to the mayor in opposition to the bill.
DiCicco said he would not seek an override of the veto. The measure originally passed with only nine votes. Twelve votes are needed to overturn a veto.With his veto message, Street also forwarded a draft of a proposed compromise bill that would limit only the right to appeal in some matters strictly involving neighborhood issues. DiCicco called the draft "ambiguous" and said he did not believe it would accomplish his aims.
Yesterday's veto marked the third time this month that Street has overturned a City Council measure. Amid growing tension fueled by Council President Anna Verna's refusal to introduce Street's blight-removal plan until Council members get more details, Street two weeks ago threw out a referendum on school privatization and Council's redistricting plan.The redistricting plan would have taken prime Center City territory away from Street's protege, Councilman Darrell Clarke, and given it to Verna.
Now, with yesterday's veto, Street earned high marks from one of the most powerful community groups in the disputed Center City territory - the Center City Residents Association.Verna this week appointed a committee of Council members to draft a new redistricting plan, but it is unclear when a new bill will be introduced.
Some Council members said they did not believe yesterday's veto was politically linked to the other two. Still, they criticized the mayor for changing his position on Bill 629."It's disingenuous," Councilman James Kenney said. "In this business, you've got to be able to keep your word."
Street did not respond to a request for comment. But in his letter to Council, he wrote: "I do not lightly take up the veto pen; vetoing is a serious matter. I spent 19 years as a member of this Council, and I have tremendous respect for the work that this body does . . . ."