A response to the Op-Ed by Mr. Katz in the Philadelphia Inquirer
Dear Interstate Outdoor Advertising CEO Drew Katz,
What is a Camdenite to do? No matter which side of the billboard issue a Camden resident supports, someone loses. So how are we to decide?
For billboard supporters, the majority of whom seem to be connected to Camden nonprofits, the promise of approximately $200,000 annually would be amazing. These nonprofits are doing vital and community sustaining grassroots work in the city. The prospect of more financial security for these organizations and the lives they impact might be worth more than the desire to not see a billboard constructed. Going deeper, a few questions come up, however. Why was Interstate not willing to put the promise of donations into writing in a community benefit agreement? Is there a way to create donations that would not be at the expense of fellow Camden residents who are extremely opposed to the proposed location?
For those opposed to the billboard, some concerns are aesthetics, traffic safety, and quality of life. It is also on the grounds of two separate plans adopted by the city as law: The North Camden Neighborhood Plan and the Waterfront Development Plan. Both of these plans were developed after hundreds of residents gave input on what they wanted for their neighborhood. Given the negative economic impact of billboards, they were intentionally excluded. Going deeper again, there are a few questions- if the billboard does not happen, will the promise of donations also disappear? Why has Interstate been unwilling to pursue an alternate way of supporting the city, one that does not involve intense divisiveness?
True philanthropy does not ask for anything in return, and it does not come not at the expense of others. The Katz family has donated to Camden for years and for many good causes, without asking for anything in return.
The complicated scenario that Interstate Outdoor Media has created is one in which hardworking nonprofits do not receive funds unless other Camden residents bear the burden of the revenue source- the billboard. It’s a false dilemma- one side only gets what they want at the expense of the other, thus pitting Camden residents against each other. Which begs the question- why create this artificially conflictual and confusing situation?
Considering it is a barbed offer, it’s not unreasonable to suppose there are other motives at play. Dividing and conquering does not sound like the method of a pure at heart philanthropist. It does however sound like the technique of a savvy businessman with an angle.
So what’s the angle?
Once variances are passed it sets a precedent, and a reasonable supposition is that once Interstate gets the charity billboard built, the company could seek to build other billboards in our community. Interstate owns over 1,000 billboards in NJ alone (two already existing in Camden), and they can be difficult to get approved. By getting the variances needed for the charity billboard, it allows Interstate a foot in the door for future billboards in Camden. Considering the billboard needed seven variances to pass, and how much communities everywhere struggle to oppose billboards, the billboard would never have stood a chance of passing without the charity component.
One could still say “Even if this is just a ploy for Interstate to build future for-profit billboards, at least Camden still gets much needed money from the charity billboard”.
That would mean the best case scenario is that nonprofits receive donations from you only at the expense of their Camden neighbors, while also being used as a political tool for the end goal of increased corporate profit and personal gain. We deserve better.
Integral to Camden’s history has been leaders opting for short term solutions due to a scarcity of resources despite the negative long term social and economic effects on the city. Camden activist Frank Fulbrook fought your father, Lewis Katz, for years to prevent billboards being put up along 676 which would have brought blight to those neighborhoods. Riverfront State Prison was formerly located adjacent to the very spot your proposed billboard would go. It was built on prime waterfront real estate on the edge of a densely populated neighborhood in exchange for state funding and the jobs that came with it. In turn it robbed the city of vital property tax revenue and blocked public access to the water.
The opposition to the billboard from North Camden and Cooper Grant residents is based in real and lasting concerns because they are neighborhoods, like much of Camden, that have gotten dumped on in the past. It is not just about the view or an eyesore, it is a neighborhood’s ability to have a say in their future and the legal right (via the city adopted neighborhood plan) to oppose land uses that are not consistent with their vision for their neighborhood.
Let Interstate Outdoor Media do what it does best- the business of billboards. And let the Katz Foundation do what it does best- philanthropy that doesn’t ask anything in return and does not give to some by burdening others.
Mike Morgan lives and works in Camden and is a proud and totally not at all anxious father-to-be.
Share it!
