DN Editorial: Our over-privileged pols

GOOGLE a few terms - like "cheesesteak" or "Rocky" - and you'll get few references outside Philadelphia.

The same holds true if you search for "councilmanic prerogative" or "councilmanic privilege" - the practice that gives elected lawmakers supreme power over development in their fiefdoms, er, districts. Other cities around the country have city councils, but privilege appears to be a strictly Philly thing. Council prerogative is not codified in the city charter, but in use nonetheless.

One argument in favor of prerogative is that Council members know what their districts and constituents need better than anyone and so should be considered the default expert on OKing developments and other deals.

Arguments against prerogative include the fact that it puts too much power in the hands of a few, especially considering the nature of district Council elections; in the last election, every district seat was won with fewer than 20,000 votes each. For critics of councilmanic prerogative, the danger is that a Council member's cozy relationship with a developer could take precedence over the public good, or could freeze the forces of the free market.

Council is a body that provides some checks and balances, of course. But too many checks could bring things out of balance, and this is especially critical at the beginning of this new year, with the launch of the city's new Land Bank.

Last year's creation of the Land Bank was a signal accomplishment, because another Google term that brings up a disproportionate number of Philadelphia references is "vacant properties." Over the years, a deadening mix of lax tax collections, lax regulation, shrinking population and maddening bureaucracy has created a city with thousands of vacant properties.

To call this problem a cancer on the city is not overstating it: Vacant properties lead to blighted neighborhoods, lost revenues and decline of the city as a whole.

The effort to create an instrument to gather them up into a single body, streamline the thick red tape of conflicting oversight departments and more easily dispose of properties to those looking to develop was no simple feat. Mayor Street tried to address this with his neighborhood-transformation initiative, but it was Councilwoman Maria Quinones Sanchez's attempts in 2012 to draft a bill that finally led to the creation of a land bank.

The bill addressed the key problems of often-conflicting bureaucracies that gummed up any attempts for developers to buy unused land. Despite the logic and rationale of the Land Bank bill, it didn't eliminate the practice of councilmanic privilege. Before a land parcel can be disposed of, that disposal is subject to Council approval.

So, consider it a land bank where all withdrawals need a co-signer. And Council members reluctant to co-sign the release of properties in their district don't have to give a reason.

Sanchez herself has indicated that she's ready to serve as role model to the rest of Council. We urge Council to follow her lead on this. The Land Bank should work right out of the gate: Its early success would send a signal to those willing to invest in the city that such investment is welcomed, and that we no longer tolerate blight and delinquency.

No one is drawing a direct line to the city's huge inventory of vacant land in this city and the role that councilmanic privilege might have played in that inventory. But it's not unfair to wonder why not.