Several advocates showed up for City Council’s Committee on Rules hearing on June 3 to raise objections to Councilmember Mark Squilla’s bill, amending regulations for historic properties within the city.

The bill seeks to revise procedures and requirements for the historic designation process, including changes to the criteria for designation and notification procedures.

While the bill’s wording is not finalized, groups like the Chestnut Hill Conservancy oppose the current form of the bill, saying it “creates a significant loophole that would allow property owners to demolish the majority of a building and its character-defining historic features without oversight by the Historical Commission.”

Ahead of the hearing, Squilla and Councilmember Cindy Bass, who chairs the rules committee, told the attendees that the hearing would be pushed back, drawing a displeased reaction from the crowd.

At the hearing, Squilla spoke to the crowd, saying that the bill is still being worked on

“This legislation was put forth as a notification bill,” he said. “People believe it would make it easier for demolition and other things to happen when they notify the property owners that their property would be designated as historic, but that was not the case. There was a lot of misinformation being spread out there. We added additional language into this, working with the law department and the historic commission to guarantee that at notification there would be no chance of demolition.”

“We met with the Historic Commission, Law Department, Preservation Alliance, and others for six months, working on that language,” he added. “We still don’t have a consensus agreement on it, but we will continue to work on that, and hopefully have a hearing in the summer to push it forward.”

Several attendees took issue with the delay, shouting at the council members.

A long list of speakers was set to testify on the bill, including David Gest, Executive Director of the Chestnut Hill Conservancy, who intended to speak in opposition to the bill, and local developer Richard Snowden, who was also listed as “opposed.”

Following the hearing, the Conservancy put out a statement saying, “While the bill’s tabling provides additional time for discussion, Bill No. 251030 has not been withdrawn. The Conservancy will continue to monitor the legislation, participate in stakeholder discussions, and advocate for policies that support thoughtful preservation, community engagement, and the protection of Philadelphia’s historic resources.”

A follow-up date has not been chosen for the hearing.