I was surprised to hear trash talk from a stuffy environmentalist. But other noshers at a recent sustainable development event didn't look shocked.

The 200 urban planners and assorted advocates who assembled at the Academy of Natural Sciences looked angry. Because while other cities are dreaming green, Philly's recent building boom has come with dirty politics and a dirtier environment.

Our tax abatements let million-dollar condo buyers pay a pittance for 10 years. Meanwhile, older homeowners lose homes at record rates. Our zoning board practically gives away the city's air rights. The Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation pursues a car-culture mentality that's essentially bringing suburban sprawl right into the city.

"The Green Country Town: The Future of Philadelphia Land Use Planning" was the forum's title. But it sounded like a cruel irony. As panelist Karen Black reminded us, Philadelphia hasn't revised its code since the 1960s, when the city still had industrial jobs and a stable middle class. And when we mistakenly pursued the notion that the city should be more like the 'burbs.

We may know better now, but Philadelphia's 600-page code still stands. And at this point, it's dysfunctional by design. A useless code has let city councilmen game the system, creating an unusable patchwork of exceptions. An old code has let the Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) run amok. The courts have repeatedly reprimanded the ZBA for grabbing powers it legally shouldn't have. When a three-story neighborhood suddenly expands to accommodate a 30-story high-rise, that's not an "adjustment."

But so much of city planning is done in ugly bits and pieces. And with this dirty development comes a future of crowded streets and broken neighborhoods. Developers have become our de facto urban planners, and their lawyers, our architects.

When one forum panelist, Tom Chapman, who heads the City Planning Commission, tried to tell this crowd that the city has a comprehensive plan, the audience booed. Our City Planning Commission is a political eunuch.

But don't blame Tom. Blame John. Because the mayor has the power to bring Philadelphia into the 21st century. In the ecological Super Bowl—the contest to be the nation's greenest city—Chicago and San Francisco are already fielding their teams. Meanwhile Philadelphia is still in the parking lot, passing out favors to developers.

I hope this group's rage gains traction and is finally heard in the political arena. They're now asking Zack Stalberg and the Committee of Seventy to put sustainable development on top of the agenda for the mayor's race. How about it, Zack?

Will homeowners about to lose their homes get a reprieve from the sheriff?

Sheriff John Green currently forces struggling homeowners trying to stop a foreclosure to pay too much for newspaper ads in advance [Loose Canon, "Sheriff Green's Foreclosure Machine," April 13, 2006]. I found that homeowners must pay an average of $1,000 for advertising that should cost only about $420.

After my column appeared, the Sheriff's Office called to ask about that $420. They weren't disputing it. They just wanted to know where it came from. Simple, sheriff. I called the authorized newspapers, and asked how much it would cost to place the required ads for an average-sized foreclosure. Total bill, $420.

Since Green buys more than 500 ads a month, you'd assume he could wrangle an even better price. But till now, instead of a price break, publishers have been giving Green additional, free advertising. This advertising supposedly educates homeowners about keeping their homes. But homeless activists say the ads only help the sheriff keep his job.

After the sheriff called, sources say he summoned homeless advocates to announce that he's now going to force newspapers to compete with each other on price—a savings he'd pass along to homeowners trying to rescue their houses.

I called the Sheriff's Office for confirmation. No return call; nothing in writing. Meanwhile thousands of homeowners are losing millions of dollars—and their homes.