Greg Montanaro wrote: > In recent weeks, Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell introduced an ordinance > in City Council that would not allow the City's Historic Commission to > create any new historic districts. Rather, the Commission could only > make recommendations, and all new districts would have to be created > by City Council.
Bravo. > In addition, this would make the process distinctly less democratic. > Whereas the Historical Commission holds community meetings, sends > mailings to every property owner, and provides many avenues for input, > the City Council process would be exposed to the politicking, > lobbying, and institutional pressures that we have seen kill many > pieces of valuable community legislation. The Historical Commission > has a policy of systematically polling for community support, and only > supporting nominations where there is community buy-in. The City > Council process is much more susceptible to the disproportionate > influence of those people and corporate entities that have the > resources to amplify their voices. This is, frankly, one of the least compelling arguments I';ve ever heard on this matter. As we all know by now-- and as I'd explained, in an _Inquirer_ editorial some months back-- the process by which a district is made Historic is _in no way_ democratic. As I'd written, a small-but-motivated group of people could nominate a neighborhood without any requirement to obtain the consent or approval of their neighbors. In turn, the PHC-- whose officers are not elected, but appointed-- can designate such a neighborhood without any requirement to obtain this same consent. Even of 99% of the neighborhood was opposed to the proposal, the PHC could approve it. In other words, under the original process, there was _no provision for democratic review_. Jannie Blackwell's proposed legislation takes that decision away from a board of appointees, and places it in the hands of officials who are democratically elected-- and who are subject to lobbying, negotiation, the concerns of the community, and general public review. In other words, her legislation would make the process _more_ democratic, not less. > While we are on the topic of the democratic process, it is important > to note that Councilwoman Blackwell chose to not consult any of the > community organizations in the area, or as far we can determine, any > of the city based preservation organizations, or for that matter, the > director of the City’s Historical Commission, in introducing the > ordinance. This is utterly untrue: Ms. Blackwell's office has been open to community groups on this matter for a long time now. She attended the Public Meeting last April, and her office was instrumental in obtaining the answers to the questions submitted at that meeting. For Greg Montenaro to accuse her of making a decision without any consultation is, well, ridiculous-- to put it mildly. > Upon learning about this, Kate Stover from Spruce Hill Community > Association and I immediately arranged for a meeting with the > Councilwoman to discuss the issue. > > What I have to report back to all of you is somewhat disheartening. > Councilwoman Blackwell told us that she didn’t really care whether > Spruce Hill became a historic district or not. In fact, she said she > has no opinion on the matter, and would not have an opinion on the > matter. The only insight she offered was that she said that no one > should be able to tell anyone else what to do with his or her > property. Councilwoman Blackwell said that she introduced her > ordinance because she didn’t have confidence in the Historical > Commission to ensure that the community supported the district, and > that she wanted that to be her decision in City Council. She added > that although she doesn’t currently oppose the historic district, she > would not support it until it was demonstrated that a majority of the > people in the proposed district wanted it to occur. > > Kate Stover and I understood Councilwoman Blackwell’s position, and > asked what she thought we could do to demonstrate that a majority > supported the historic district. Councilwoman Blackwell replied by > telling us that she didn’t know how, or if, it could even be demonstrated. > That left us at somewhat of an impasse. If we had to demonstrate that > a majority supported the historic district, but there was no process > to get there, and it might not be possible, then where were we left? The original process didn't require asking the neighborhood what it wanted, and I don't recall hearing Greg complain about it at the time. Now Jannie Blackwell says that she wants to know what the neighborhood thinks-- and now Greg's complaining about this new responsibility. Amazingly, Greg maintains that polling the neighborhood for its opinion makes this process _less_ democratic. > I say this, only in that I am not sure how we proceed from here. > Councilwoman Blackwell told us that she would not table or withdraw > the ordinance. She also disagreed with our assessment that the > ordinance was "changing the rules" on the community mid-game. Offhand, I'd suggest "total surrender." It'd end the matter pretty effectively. > If you mail a letter to the Councilwoman, as we have requested, please > provide us with a copy. Her address is: > > *Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell > City Hall, Room 408 > Philadelphia, PA 19107-3290* I agree. In fact, I'd suggest forwarding Greg's letter along, so she gets an idea of how his organization feels about democracy. > ---- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see <http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
