I've written in this space about how hard it is for civic and neighborhood groups to get city government to do consistent, rigorous and fair enforcement of the city codes: fire, zoning, building, etc.
Allow me to offer Exhibit A.
It's a case involving the gigunda wall wrap that hangs from an office building at the corner of Seventh and Callowhill Streets. It currently advertises Subaru cars and SUVs.
That sucker is 65 feet tall by 100 feet wide and is visible from Interstate 95 and the Vine Street Expressway.
It was first put up in 1999, but the owners of the building neglected to get any of the necessary permits. Hey, these things happen. In due time, they were cited by the Department of Licenses and Inspections.
The wall wrap violates a number of code provisions that regulate signs. To name two, it is much bigger than allowed by law and it sits along a highway corridor that the city decided years ago should be billboard-free.
The building owners appealed to the Zoning Board of Adjustment, which hears appeals of L&I rulings.
This was when Ed Rendell was mayor, and Ed was friendly with the billboard industry. How friendly? Let me put it this way: If you were that friendly with a member of the opposite sex in a public place, you'd be arrested for indecent conduct.
The Rendell appointees on the zoning board approved the wall wrap.
Appeal after appeal
Several groups - the Old City Civic Association, Kensington South Neighbors, and the anti-billboard SCRUB - appealed to the courts.
They won in Common Pleas Court. Judge Matthew Carafiello ruled that the wall wrap violated city code and that the building's owners failed to offer good arguments for being allowed to keep it up. That was in November 2001.
The building's owners - Callowhill Associates - appealed to Commonwealth Court, the state appeals court that hears zoning cases.
I don't blame them for appealing. Mary Tracy of SCRUB told me that wall wrap brings in $800,000 a year.
Callowhill lost in Commonwealth Court. That was in July 2002.
The owners appealed to the state Supreme Court. It refused to consider the case. That was in December 2002.
The owners appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. It refused to consider the case. That was in June.
So, you'd think it would be time to take the wall wrap down? Nope.
So far, the city has agreed to delay the day of reckoning three times.
In May, Common Pleas Court was ready to order the wrap be taken down. But the hearing was postponed until June.
In June, the City Solicitor's Office agreed to postpone the hearing until September.
In September, the solicitor agreed to postpone it until November.
The reason: Myron Berman, the partner in Callowhill Associates most familiar with the wall wrap, is a colonel in the Army Reserve.
Take the train
Luther Weaver, Callowhill's lawyer, said Berman has been on- and off-duty in his hometown of New York City but is due to retire in October.
That doesn't wash with Mary Tracy of SCRUB.
"He's not on duty in some distant place; he's in New York City," Tracy complained. "And he can't come down one day on the train?"
The city could have moved to have the illegal wrap taken down anytime after Commonwealth Court ruled in July 2002. The court refused a request by Callowhill to delay enforcement while it continued appeals.
The wheels of justice grind slow, but it doesn't take an Einstein to see what's what here.
Every month the wrap stays up, the owners get close to $70,000. So, naturally, they are inclined to seek delays.
But why should the city go along with that tactic? It's been a year since an appeals court shot down the Callowhill appeal and said, in so many words, "You have the right to take that sucker down."
And the sucker stays up. Pathetic. It makes the city look like a patsy.
"What is the job of the city?" asked Tracy. "Pass laws and enforce laws. It looks like they haven't read that part of the chapter."