Philadelphia community activists notched another victory last week in their effort to preserve the right of all citizens to legally challenge zoning decisions.
Almost as soon as it was passed by a state House of Representatives committee, an amendment tacked onto a municipal authority bill that would have limited legal challenges of zoning decisions in Philadelphia was killed by state lawmakers.
Before it could even be voted on by the full House, the amendment last Wednesday afternoon was withdrawn by lawmakers in response to local opposition.
The legislation bore striking similarities to City Council Bill 629, which placed restrictions on citizens' rights to appeal decisions by the Philadelphia Zoning Board of Adjustment.
Both measures essentially stated that only parties that could prove aggrieved status in relation to a disputed zoning decision had the right to appeal it.
In other words, only folks who lived in proximity to a plot in question and could show that the proposed use would directly impact their lives would be allowed to file legal appeals.
At the time the City Council bill was being considered, many opponents claimed that the legislation was designed to prevent groups like Society Created to Reduce Urban Blight (SCRUB) from appealing zoning board rulings that allowed billboards to be erected throughout the city.
Some community activists alleged that those who supported Bill 629 were kowtowing to the billboard industry; they noted that several Council members had received campaign contributions from those interest groups.
Unlike the City Council bill, however, the state amendment actually contained a clause that expressly addressed billboards.
"In the case of an appeal involving outdoor advertising, only an aggrieved person shall have the right to appeal," it read.
Co-sponsored by Councilwoman Joan Krajewski (D-6th dist.) and Councilman Frank DiCicco, a Democrat from South Philadelphia, the merits of the local measure were debated during a series of public hearings last summer and fall.
Krajewski could not be reached for comment.
Had Bill 629 become law, only those who could have proven a connection to the property in question would have been permitted to lodge a challenge. The measure narrowly passed Council but Mayor John Street vetoed it in October.
The state measure would have accomplished the same feat.
A rapid chain of events lead to the withdrawal of the amendment.
According to Barbara Fellencer, communications director for the Democrats on the House Appropriations Committee, House Bill 1100 - to which the amendment was attached - was voted out of committee late last Monday.
State Rep. John Taylor (R-177th dist.), a former member of the House Appropriations Committee, which voted in support of the amendment, said that while he didn't have the opportunity to cast a vote for or against the measure, the language was too ambiguous.
"As it was written, it would've affected community groups throughout the city," he said. "And as a member of the Northwood Civic Association, a group that has frequently employed the right to appeal zoning decisions, I know firsthand how that could harm civic groups."
Following passage by the Appropriations Committee, the measure was brought to the House floor on June 25 and was scheduled for a vote, said Stephen Miskin, a spokesman for House Majority Leader John Perzel (R-172nd dist.). Miskin noted that Perzel supported the measure. By Wednesday afternoon, however, a deluge of phone calls and e-mails received by state lawmakers from Philadelphians who opposed the amendment altered its outcome. Miskin contacted the Times that afternoon to report that the amendment had been withdrawn.
Several local lawmakers confirmed that community backlash was strong and nearly unanimous.
State Rep. George Kenney (R-170th dist.) said his office received nearly 40 fax letters and e-mails stating opposition to the amendment.
"We got a bunch of faxes starting on Wednesday and they were mostly opposed to the amendment," added State Sen. Mike Stack (D-5th dist.).
One of the groups that contacted lawmakers to express its feelings about the amendment was SCRUB.
Mary Cawley Tracy, executive director of the anti-billboard group, credited folks from the Northeast with turning the tide against the amendment.
"I think the real key players here were the community groups in the Northeast," she said. "I don't think that Rep. Perzel was aware of the impact of that amendment. But Northeast community activists quickly made him, and other elected leaders, aware of the opposition."
While Tracy relishes the recent victory, she prefers to focus on other challenges.
"What really irks me is that our time could be much better spent improving neighborhoods and making our city a better place to live," she added. "The more time we have to spend fighting our lawmakers, the less time we can dedicate to improving the city."