Letters to the Editor

by the Readers

More News Box Boxing

It pains me to learn that one of my favorite free-speech crusaders, general counsel Katherine Hatton of the Inquirer and Daily News, has become an apologist for city regulation of sidewalk newspaper boxes [Mailbag, Oct. 16, 2003]. Like the good lawyer she is, Hatton makes the best possible case for her client. But it's a mighty flimsy case.

Hatton emphasizes the city's right to regulate its sidewalks, as if the city were some disembodied foreign colonial power. But nobody disputes that right. The real issue is whether such legislation is demanded or needed by the Philadelphians who actually comprise the city, and whether the cure is worse than the disease.

News box legislation, I submit, appeals only to two local constituencies: politicians naturally inclined to control public discourse, and media executives naturally inclined to discourage new competition. The handful of Philadelphians clamoring for neater streets, I wager, are vastly outnumbered by the masses who yearn for better local mass media. Unfortunately, this ill-advised legislation encourages neither.

The news box ordinance of 1999 was intended to limit the spread of news boxes but produced precisely the opposite result: As soon as it was passed, existing publications scrambled to install news boxes on every available downtown street corner before the law took effect. The result is a far greater profusion of boxes than existed before the law was passed, and an unfair advantage for stodgy existing publications over potentially fresh and exciting new ones.

Hatton also chides me for erroneously asserting [Mailbag, Sept. 25, 2003] that the new ordinance bans the Philadelphia Independent from downtown sidewalks. But the ordinance does indeed ban the Independent and other upstarts from downtown sidewalk corners, the most cherished locations in the newspaper-distribution game.

Center City's own late, great sociologist, E. Digby Baltzell, often warned, Beware the unintended consequences of virtuous acts. Some civic problems, if left alone, solve themselves. Online publishing will drive out print media and their news boxes soon enough. In the meantime, Philadelphians hungry for a more stimulating media diet need new publications to give the existing ones a necessary kick in the pants. The least our city government -- and I stress that it is ours -- can do is assure a level playing field.

Dan Rottenberg

Former Welcomat editor
Philadelphia

One-Way Street

I just finished reading the interview with Mayor Street [What's Bugging Him?, Howard Altman, Oct. 23, 2003]. It gives one more bit of evidence that the news people are more of a problem than the politicians. You seem to have a one-track mind in your questions.

Mr. Bush continues to speak of the Democrats as a tax and spend party. The Republicans are a war, debt and dirty tricks party. I consider myself a middle-of-the-road individual -- neither a conservative nor a liberal -- but the lies and deceit of the current party in power in Washington, D.C., are despicable. The bugging of the mayor's office is an attempt to capture the state of Pennsylvania for the Republicans.

Wake up.

Albert Bary
Via e-mail

I haven't done anything wrong.

Perhaps what Mayor Street meant to say was, I haven't done anything illegal. Nepotism, cronyism and pay-for-play may be legal and commonplace in Philadelphia, but that's not to say they're not wrong. At a time where most voters cynically believe that government is supposed to be corrupt and that's just something that we have to live with, a federal probe reinforces what we've always known but felt powerless to act upon: The way Philadelphia operates is not right. As John Street's career is based on skillfully playing every underhanded card available, he may honestly believe what he said. If that isn't enough to scare you, consider Street's surging poll numbers in the face of being investigated for what are at least unethical activities. If African-American voters can re-elect Marion Barry after he got busted smoking crack and cheer O.J. Simpson for dodging a much-deserved bullet, they can surely back John Street regardless of the veracity of this probe.

The cesspool we tolerate is the one we deserve and this surge of support for Street embarrasses me as a Philadelphian and a human being. We can do better.

Jay Scheuerle
Bella Vista

Music to His Ears

Cynthia G. Mason's honesty and dedication [Shedding the Label, Patrick Rapa, Music Issue, Oct. 16, 2003] not only indicate that there is plenty worth listening to in the local music scene, but also that there just might be hope for the legal profession. You don't need to be an insider to know how dissatisfying the law business is to many of those who need it as well as those who practice it. An artist can create important work that might inspire the changes the profession must make. One reason we make art is a need to realize possibilities. Unlike yesterday's headlines, great art doesn't go away. Thank you for bringing her to our attention.

Bill Kent
Via e-mail

Funny Business

Your Dear George log [Bruce Stockler, Slant, Oct. 23, 2003] was childishly brilliant.

Thanks so much for a hearty morning chuckle (belly chuckle, not just a snortle).

Bernadette McHenry
Via e-mail

Avenue of the Darts

I am writing regarding the discussion that has been taking place in our neighborhood surrounding gentrification, the UCD and the Baltimore Avenue commercial corridor [Baltimore Avenue Freeze Out, Daryl Gale, Oct. 9, 2003]. As a resident of Cedar Park and a business owner on Baltimore Avenue I am concerned that the revitalization efforts of the UCD along Baltimore Avenue will play into what many are right to call the gentrification of our neighborhood.

I am particularly concerned about the dismissive stance that Eli Massar, UCD's Baltimore Avenue commercial corridor manager, and others have chosen to take regarding this issue. It is apparent to many in the neighborhood that property values are rising, as is L&I enforcement, even while the neighborhood is touted as a new Philly hot spot. Given the current climate of skyrocketing property values and rents in the neighborhood, I believe that it is essential to confront the issues of low-income housing and class diversity to avoid displacing working-class residents of Cedar Park. We are all eager to see improvements in the neighborhood, so long as they do not end up displacing low-income people. Massar and others have characterized such concerns as paranoid, but the Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition recognizes the problem:

Many working-class neighborhoods have seen dramatic rises in property values and rents since the 1990s including Northern Liberties, Bella Vista, Manayunk, Fairmount, University City and Southwest Center City -- making these once affordable neighborhoods now virtually out of reach to households with incomes below $20,000. --From A Call to Action: Philadelphia's Affordable Housing Crisis and What We Can Do About It, published by the Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition.

I applaud the work that has been done to help make the neighborhood a cleaner and safer place, while providing jobs through the Safety Ambassadors and neighborhood cleanup programs. I believe that the UCD's revitalization efforts should include:

•A commitment to provide a stable environment for the working poor that make up much of this neighborhood, including a commitment to affordable housing

•More community involvement in decisions made by the UCD. The UCD continually points to its Baltimore Avenue market study as proof that it's doing what the neighborhood wants, even though three-quarters of the surveys were filled out online, predominately by white and upper-middle-class respondents. Many residents and business owners were not surveyed and would welcome a chance to have more input.

•Fair wages and good benefits for workers hired by the UCD.

•Participation in and recognition of the community dialog surrounding the issues of gentrification and revitalization.

Paul Walker
Firehouse Bicycles