Community groups criticize regulations, Advocates say the city can do more to remove marketing
Kwame Abasi Patterson Tribune Staff WriterCommunity activists who testified in a recent Committee on Public Property and Public Works hearing said the city can do more to regulate alcoholic advertisements placed near areas frequented by children.
This week, the committee passed a bill proposal prohibiting outdoor advertisements of alcohol products within 1,000 feet of any school, public playground, recreation or child-care center or library.
“This is a part of the comprehensive strategy by this City Council to push legislation that creates quality of life issues throughout our city,” said Councilman Darrell Clarke, who introduced the measure.
Any company found violating this mandate would be fined up to $700 on the first offense, with an increasing fine of up to $2000, if the Council approves the bill on Dec. 15.
But a number of advocacy groups are stating that the problem goes beyond distance regulation.
The Rev. Jesse W. Brown, executive director of the North Philadelphia Community & Business Initiative has been speaking out against what he considers negative advertisements for years.
“In general, getting rid of the billboards is a good deal,” he said. “But enforcement and whether or not they (the city) are up for a Supreme Court battle was not clear.”
During the hearings, representatives from Clear Channel Inc., Steen Outdoor Advertising and Free Speech LLC said the idea of prohibiting signs within a 1,000-foot radius would violate the Constitutional rights of free speech.
“They’re engaged in commercial speech and the city is placing a constitutional limit on that,” said Mark C. Rahdert, Temple University professor of law.
He noted several Supreme Court cases, where municipalities were found in the wrong by dictating what goes on signs that are already in place.
Brown said the 1,000-foot regulation would virtually eliminate all alcoholic advertisements, “which is a good thing,” but the federal government would never go for that.
“That’s why I suggest they make it 500 feet because of previous Supreme Court rulings in Baltimore,” he said.
Clarke, meanwhile, said the city’s position on the effect these advertisements have on children would pass mustard in any legal challenge.
John P. McGee, deputy commissioner for the Department of Human Services said his department believes the vulnerability of children involved within the agency, makes them more susceptible to the suggestion of alcohol advertising that “happiness and success go hand and hand with alcohol consumption.”
“We know we are all influenced by our surroundings,” McGee said.
The bill also cited several studies of how alcohol is the leading illegal substance used among young people.
It noted how alcohol is the primary cause of death among teenagers and its use among teenagers can be attributed to several sexual assault and rape cases and sexually transmitted diseases.
“There have been several cases – up to the Supreme Court – that if you can state this is done by a government to clearly define how it relates to the conditions and the welfare of the citizens, the government has allowed certain municipalities to impose such prohibitions,” Clarke said.
Tracey Gordon, advocacy specialist and spokeswoman for the African American Heritage Coalition, the group that help lead the push to remove “Get Rich or Die Tryin” movie ads, said the real issue is that alcohol billboards are strategically placed in Black, Hispanic and low-income communities.
She said the advertising companies have carte blanche in Black neighborhoods because they lack the social protection from the city, coupled with powerful alcohol companies’ lobbyist and community ignorance.
“Clarke’s bill is not good enough, but it’s a first step,” she said.
But officials from the Society Created to Reduce Urban Blight (SCRUB) said the bill is the city’s “fifth step.”
Mary Tracy, executive director of SCRUB said the city already has laws on the books regulating billboard ads.
The city passed sign control laws in 1991 that say billboards can’t be within 650 feet of schools, libraries and other areas children may frequent. In addition, billboard ads can’t be within 350 feet of a home.
“The city never enforced this law,” Tracy said. “What good is it, if no one is there to enforce it.”
In order to avoid Supreme Court action and further violations of existing laws, Tracy suggests the city just take all the signs down.
“Then alcohol companies wouldn’t have anywhere to place their advertisements,” she said.