It was done in secret. It took place in the middle of the night. It involved a theft. The victims were completely surprised by the attack.

Does it sound like a mugging? In a way, it was.

Only the mugger was the Pennsylvania Legislature. The victims were the citizens of Philadelphia. What was stolen were their rights.

It happened in late November, just as the House and Senate were about to adjourn for the year. And just itching to get out of town.

Out of nowhere appeared House Bill 1954, an innocuous-looking bill that started life as a measure to authorize the City of Philadelphia to increase the fines charged for code violations.

At the last minute, an amendment was added in committee that was aimed squarely at SCRUB, the anti-billboard and anti-blight group that has been very successful in the courts in challenging the legality of billboards.

However, the amendment was so broadly written that it had the effect of excluding not only SCRUB from legal standing in zoning cases, but any neighborhood, civic or community group that couldn't meet the bill's narrow definition.

I knew it wouldn't take long for some lawyers to try to use the new law as a cudgel against community groups. Lo and behold, they have.

The case involves construction of the swank new St. James apartments at Seventh and Walnut Streets.

Throw the bums out

The Society Hill Civic Association and the Preservation Alliance are challenging the developer's plan to preserve the facades of historic buildings that are part of the apartment town project.

Lawyers for the developer went into court in December, seeking to have the civic association and the alliance thrown out of court. Their motion is pending.

This is just the beginning.

Over the next few years, lawyers will challenge the standing of every group that appears before the Zoning Board of Adjustment.

Over time, this new law will have the effect of taking civic and neighborhood groups out of the business of trying to regulate zoning and development in their own communities.

And I'm not talking just about citywide groups, such as SCRUB, the Preservation Alliance, the Clean Air Alliance, etc.

As the St. James case proves, lawyers will use the new law to deny standing to civic associations in the neighborhoods where the projects are planned.

It's no surprise that passage of House Bill 1954 has had a galvanizing effect on civic groups in Philadelphia.

More than 20 have joined to challenge its legality and are planning a suit, focusing on the stealth way it was enacted.

Let's try this

I say, God bless them for their effort, but a lawsuit could take years.

There is another way.

Just get the legislature to repeal the offending section of the bill.

Most Philadelphia legislators said they were completely unaware of the amendment when it came before them - in dawn's early light, with dozens of bills being voted on. There's reason No. 1.

There were never any legislative hearings held on the issue. No debate on the merits of the idea. Besides, what business does the legislature have changing Philadelphia's City Charter, which contains the language on standing? Anyone up there ever hear of home rule?

Reasons No. 2, 3 and 4.

"It's unwise for the legislature to fool around with the City Charter. It tends to make a mockery of the home-rule concept."

That quote comes from State Rep. Mark Cohen of Philadelphia, who has drafted a bill to repeal the amendment and is circulating it among his colleagues.

Every House member from Philly - Democrat and Republican - should sign on as a cosponsor.

It would send a message to the rest of the legislature that Philadelphians want this to be a local issue.

And we don't like being mugged.