Quantcast
Channel: Steve Volk – Philadelphia Magazine
Viewing all 32 articles
Browse latest View live

Did Bill Marimow Ask for $1 Million to Leave the Inquirer?

$
0
0
Bill Marimow. Photo | AP / Joseph Kaczmarek

Bill Marimow. Photo | AP / Joseph Kaczmarek

The two sides in the dispute among owners of the Philadelphia Inquirer, Daily News and philly.com got hung up on one issue in last-ditch settlement talks: the fate of Inquirer editor Bill Marimow.

According to a person with knowledge of the negotiations, Marimow requested four years salary, equal to about $1 million, to vacate his editor’s position.

Attorney William Chadwick, who represented Marimow, rejects this account.

“The assertion that Bill Marimow asked for any money during the negotiations — much less 4 years severance — is absolutely false,” says Chadwick. “His primary concern is and always has been the journalistic independence of the Inquirer. For that reason, Mr. Marimow rejected numerous offers of severance because they did nothing to ensure the journalistic independence of the paper, which he believes cannot be maintained so long as George Norcross controls the paper. Mr. Marimow believes Norcross’s motivation for removing him as editor stems from Norcross’s desire to control the content of the paper, which Marimow has resisted.”

A spokesman for insurance executive and political power broker George Norcross III, Dan Fee, responds: “There has never been any credible evidence that George Norcross has either directly or indirectly attempted to influence the newsroom, or the journalistic and editorial operations of the company. None has appeared in print, none was introduced in the hearings and they never even bothered to call him to testify under oath when they had the chance. They’ve made a lot of allegations, and provided no facts. And if they had any, they would be public by now. Other than that, we can not have any comment on discussions between the parties.”

Marimow, a two-time Pulitzer prize winning journalist, in his second stint as editor of the Inquirer, was fired in October by publisher Robert Hall. The dismissal set in motion a wave of suits and counter-suits that continues to this day. The court proceedings, which went on over a couple of weeks at City Hall, made public a schism that had been present since the early days of the new ownership group’s existence.

The primary combatants are George Norcross III, an insurance executive and the Democratic party boss of South Jersey, and Lewis Katz, a parking lot magnate with deep political connections of his own. The pair sit on a two-man management committee that, according to the terms of their operating agreement, must agree on major business decisions. Katz, the longtime companion of Inquirer city editor Nancy Phillips, backed Marimow and contended, in court, that he had not been allowed to exercise his blocking rights as a co-manager. His lawyers also argued that Hall, the publisher, had been acting on Norcross’s behalf both in requesting that Marimow fire specific sub-editors and ultimately in firing Marimow himself.

Chadwick adds that shortly after Marimow had been fired, Katz was approached, through a back channel, with a pair of offers. The first was for three years’ salary, which Marimow rejected after hearing about it from Katz because it did nothing to ensure the journalistic independence of the paper.  The second offer was so large Katz told Marimow it would “make him a rich man,” and that he didn’t want to specify the figure for fear it would “ruin his day.”

According to Chadwick, Marimow declined this second offer without ever hearing what it was worth.

“If Bill Marimow was offered something by Mr. Katz,” Fee responds, “they should be asked where the money was coming from. Clearly they thought it was worth giving him money to go away or else they wouldn’t have even raised the issue with him. Otherwise, this allegation should be considered just another in their series of illusionary claims.”

Follow @SteveVolk on Twitter.

• Get Phillymag.com’s Daily Newsletters

The post Did Bill Marimow Ask for $1 Million to Leave the Inquirer? appeared first on Philadelphia Magazine.


Inquirer Ownership Battle: “Darling … Eliminate the Daily News”

$
0
0
Lewis Katz (center) walks to court in November. Photo | AP / Matt Rourke.

Lewis Katz (center) walks to court in November. Photo | AP / Matt Rourke.

According to an email leaked to Philadelphia magazine, Nancy Phillips, as her long-time companion Lewis Katz was contemplating purchasing a controlling interest in the city’s biggest media company, made sweeping recommendations about strategies for turning around the Inquirer, Daily News and Philly.com, including specific executive firings and the possible elimination of the Daily News.

“Darling,” the March 17, 2012 email, from Phillips to Katz, begins.

“Company needs a new publisher,” she writes.

“Paper needs a new editor.

“Philly.com needs a new leader.

Daily News has to be seriously evaluated with a view toward possible elimination or curtailment as in a move to the website with pared down staff and a paper product one day a week if at all.”

At the time, Phillips worked in the newsroom of the Inquirer as a reporter. And in roughly two weeks, George Norcross III would close a deal with Katz, her boyfriend, to acquire her workplace. In this sense, Phillips’s letter seems part business advice, a “honey do” list, and the fantasy of any working stiff made manifest.

In 10 paragraphs, Phillips advised Katz to fire or demote and replace her boss, editor Stan Wischnowski (for him, she advises, there is a “role… in this company” as he is “good, honorable and hard-working.”); publisher Greg Osberg; Philly.com chief Wendy Warren; and the COO, the CFO, and the head of the advertising department. She also alerted Katz to Mark Block, “the lovely PR guy,” because she’d just noticed he held a VP title and probably made too much dough. “Feels like a waste of money to me,” she wrote.

After Philadelphia contacted Phillips for an interview, Lewis Katz’s spokesman sent a statement that began: “First and foremost, this email has been altered and is not in its original form.”

I contacted Katz’s spokesman, Jay Devine, to inquire about any specific alterations between the original email and the one received by Philadelphia. He declined to cite any specific example of discrepancies between the two. I had, originally, cut and pasted the “Phillips” email into a separate email for Devine. But after receiving this statement, I hand-delivered a hard copy of the email. The next day, Devine sent over a revised statement, which no longer included any assertion that the email had been altered.

“This email is a private, confidential communication between two people using their personal email accounts. It was written at a time when the potential owners were weighing whether to invest in the company and contains a candid, dispassionate assessment of certain aspects of the company’s operations. It was never intended to be disseminated to others or made public, as that would have been hurtful to several people. It is deplorable that others have now made it public.”

The dispute between warring ownership factions—with Katz the main player on one side, and democratic power broker and insurance executive George Norcross III, his chief opponent, on the other—has included days of court testimony and a small pile of leaked emails.

This new leak provides a window into the odd shape of the new media company’s ownership structure, which included a reporter suddenly elevated into a position of first lady to the co-owner.

Phillips is a highly respected reporter, logging 20 years of blue-collar effort. She obtained a confession in the infamous murder of rabbi Fred Neulander’s wife. She is also winning plaudits in her new role as city editor, working late hours and peppering her charges with emails congratulating them on their good work. In short, she’s a good boss. And while, through Katz, a billionaire, she has access to the resources to be anywhere she chooses, she chooses to be in a big-city newsroom.

Looking back at this now nearly two-year-old email, some of what she called for came to pass: Most notably, Wischnowski is still in the company, but was replaced as editor by Bill Marimow, who mentored Phillips early in her career. But the most charged portion of this email, from the perspective of the average citizen, involves her suggestion that the Daily News might need to be closed entirely or shifted online with a one day per week print product. The Daily News has long been targeted for elimination, dating back to the ’90s, but remains open. So clearly, Phillips’s suggestion never gained terminal momentum. But it’s worth wondering if the revelation of Phillips’s take, even if it is a couple of years old, will cause support for Katz in the current ownership struggle to wane. If Norcross comes to be seen as the guy who would keep the Daily News open, and Katz as the guy who would close it, might that cause some groundswell of support to emerge for the oft-criticized Norcross?

I asked Devine, by email, if Katz had any intention of closing the Daily News, to which he replied: “There is nothing new at the Daily News and it will continue to operate.”

The new owners have been at odds almost since the moment the company formed. But the dispute went public over the firing of Inquirer editor Bill Marimow. A judge subsequently ordered Marimow reinstated but the papers remain in an untenable position: guided by an operating agreement in which Katz and Norcross, as co-managers, must agree on every major business decision yet no longer seem able to get along.

At the moment, the two sides are busy filing legal paperwork. Most recently, Katz petitioned the court to order that the entire business be made subject to a public auction. On Friday, Judge Patricia McInerney, ordered attorneys from both sides to appear in court at 10 a.m. today, to explain why she should not dissolve their ownership and approve a public auction. McInerney had earlier ruled in Katz’s favor to reinstate Marimow.

This latest order means Norcross’s attorneys must have spent a long weekend preparing arguments as to why a public auction should not be allowed. They have argued earlier, on behalf of Norcross, that the media company should be subject to a closed auction, restricted to bidding from the existing pool of co-owners.

The dispute has turned personal and while both sides have vowed to bid to retain the papers, Katz’s call for a public auction seems an attempt, on his part, to make it less likely his rival, Norcross, can win them.

Norcross’s attorneys have also argued that a third-party bidder might not be committed to maintaining the operations of all three properties, the Inquirer, Daily News and philly.com.

They might try to use the Phillips email to suggest Katz himself is not committed to all three properties.

Longtime Daily News columnist Stu Bykofsky says the email doesn’t concern him: “I am surprised at Nancy’s analysis,” he says. “I respect her… but I think it’s wrong-headed. I think it reflects the always existing, shall we say, ‘tension’ between the two newsrooms. It’s no secret that the Daily News has a deficit of respect from the Inquirer and it’s a burden that we’ve managed to live with and hopefully will continue to live with.”

Bykofsky also relates a conversation he had with Katz, directly, about a year after the current ownership group had taken over. Katz was standing in the Daily News newsroom with Inquirer editor Bill Marimow, when the new co-owner told both men he had begun reading the Daily News regularly. “I like it better than the Inquirer,” he said, and added that the cost of publishing the Daily News is actually very low.

The upshot, of course, is that Katz, like Bykofsky, might have read Phillips’s March 2012 assessment and found it, simply, wrong.

Follow @SteveVolk on Twitter.

The post Inquirer Ownership Battle: “Darling … Eliminate the Daily News appeared first on Philadelphia Magazine.

Newspaper Guild Jumps Into Inquirer / Daily News Ownership Fray

$
0
0

The-inquirer-building-with-sunset-reflecting

The Philadelphia Newspaper Guild, which represents more than 500 employees at the company, filed a petition to intervene today in their parent company’s ongoing ownership dispute.

A status hearing took place this morning at which attorney Lisa Lori appeared, representing the Guild. “The Guild has seen nothing but pay cuts [in recent years]” she said afterward. “Unpaid furloughs. … They want an equity stake.”

Lori would not comment on who the Guild might have contacted to act as a third-party buyer, but did confirm that there have been discussions.

The current ownership struggle figures to go on for many months. Late on Friday, a hearing was hurriedly scheduled for today on co-owner Lewis Katz‘s petition to dissolve the company that owns the Inquirer, Daily News and philly.com, and subject the media properties to a public auction. Katz’s opponent in the ownership struggle, George Norcross III, has requested that an auction be restricted solely to current owners.

Lori, representing the Guild, said that the union would like to take part in any auction that occurs.

Judge Patricia McInerney quickly declared from the bench that today’s proceedings should revolve strictly around scheduling, with written briefs filed by both sides by the end of the month.

Follow @SteveVolk on Twitter.

  • Get Phillymag.com’s Daily Newsletters
  • Like Philly Mag on Facebook
  • Follow @phillymag on Twitter
  • The post Newspaper Guild Jumps Into Inquirer / Daily News Ownership Fray appeared first on Philadelphia Magazine.

    Dad Files: How to Stay Happy in Marriage—Even When You Have Kids

    $
    0
    0
    Shutterstock

    Shutterstock

    On an average day, I wake up a little after 6 a.m., make myself a cup of coffee and prepare breakfast—oatmeal with bananas, or maybe eggs (followed by bananas)—for my 18-month-old boys. I sing to them, usually beginning my set list with “Seven Nation Army,” thumping out the beat on the trays of their highchairs.

    By 8 a.m., I probably have sung four or five songs, danced for several minutes, and tickled both boys till they are red in the face. The tickling, these days, occurs in the circus tent we erected in our living room. And no, I am not kidding. There is a circus tent in our living room.

    Given that my mornings revolve around silly games, open displays of affection and music, I was a little surprised to see a controversy erupt last week over a new set of studies, one of which concludes that childless couples are happier than parents.

    Really? I asked, unable to wipe the smile from my face.

    Of course, digging into the studies reveals a much more complicated picture than the click bait headline. (For instance, if factors like economics are excluded, parents and childless couples report the same levels of life satisfaction.) But because other outlets, including CNN, did a nice job of capturing all the permutations I’m going to cut right to the chase: The report that reflects poorly on parenthood is about satisfaction as a couple. It explores the question: Is the marriage more or less contented, with child?

    The fact is that 18 months into having twins I would tell you that I am both busier and happier than ever. But I do miss my wife. Before the boys were born, Lisa and I planned our entire schedules around each other, with the shared goal of spending time together. Life isn’t like that anymore, and the study claiming parents are less happy captures the reason for this: Moms report that the most important people in their lives are their children; dads in the same study say the most important person in the world to them is their partner. Thought of this way, wives rebrand themselves, becoming moms, first and foremost; husbands stay husbands.

    In fact, the single-most satisfied individuals in all the data are moms. So the idea that married couples are less happy is a bit of a red herring. If the data is to be believed, moms experience a joy that eclipses all others, including the more carefree life of the childless. And I can attest, this manifests itself in various unsatisfying ways: Lisa might spend several hours cooing and singing to the boys while only occasionally turning to me, in an emotionless (is she angry?) monotone way, to say something no more romantic than: Did you forget to use the diaper cream? Eli has a rash. And I admit, the disparity in treatment has cast me into a couple of profound funks. In fact, right after the holidays, when I stayed up late, working, and suffered from a sleep deficit and a lack of Lisa, I was downright depressed, with that little voice in my head intoning dark thoughts: I can’t do this. I don’t want to live like this. Oh Woe and Pain! Or words to that effect.

    But here’s the thing: I got to bed early on night three, grabbed a little extra sleep, and woke up to find—as I mentioned—that circus tent in my living room. And two sweet little boys. I didn’t know anything about such studies at the time. But I approached Lisa and told her, “I miss you.”

    We talked. I didn’t blame her. I even told her I might be oversensitive. But I felt like I needed some of the tenderness and enthusiasm she was directing at the boys, that these infinitely practical, business-like conversations were dragging me down.

    I don’t really remember her specific comments, only that she seemed to take it in without throwing anything back. And in that moment, that was all I really needed.

    Parenthood is showing me how true the clichés really are because, looking back, I bet it isn’t easy for Lisa, or any mom, to hear their husband say they need them to find some extra reserve of love and affection when in fact they are already dolloping so much emotion on their offspring. It might even be natural for a mom, either hearing this kind of talk from her husband or worse, seeing him sulk silently through the day, to start feeling less satisfied in the relationship herself. She’s already got actual children. A needy husband, in this context, is both impractical and unattractive. But we quickly rebounded.

    After a really frantic week or two of job deadlines, we spent a couple of nights, after the boys went to sleep, in a tangle of limbs on the couch, watching television for an hour and enjoying being close. We talked through our schedules and found some time for us. The worth of some simple couch time like this is also reflected in these studies. A close look at the data shows that big, romantic date nights and the like aren’t the key to keeping parents satisfied in their marriage. Instead, little things count: Watch a show together, fix each other a drink, take even a few seconds to hug each other, say “I love you” in a manner that reflects the weight of those words.

    The truth is, after I got some sleep and spent a little time with Lisa, the state of our relationship looked a lot clearer. We go through occasional stretches of feeling overwhelmed. But we do share such small moments—a lot.

    Do I make these efforts more often than her? Probably. Or at least I think I do. But that’s all right.

    These recent studies suggest men and women are simply wired this way. And I am already planning for the romance to come. As our boys get older and begin to seek their own independence, as they have sleepovers at a friends’ house in their childhood years or simply strut off to their bedrooms to read or listen to music their parents hate during adolescence, my wife will turn and find that I haven’t gone anywhere; that her husband is right by her side.

    Until then, we’re living in another time: of songs and circus tents; of stinky boy feet and little boy attempts at giving their mom and dad their lives’ first kisses.

    So.

    Really.

    Dads.

    You can’t be happy with this?

    …………..

    Steve Volk is Philadelphia magazine’s writer-at-large. A new dad to twin boys, he blogs about the ups and downs of modern-day fatherhood on Be Well Philly.

    Like what you’re reading? Stay in touch with Be Well Philly—here’s how:

    The post Dad Files: How to Stay Happy in Marriage—Even When You Have Kids appeared first on Philadelphia Magazine.

    The Fight for the Future of Philadelphia’s Newspapers

    $
    0
    0
    CRASH OF THE TITANS Clockwise from upper left, Lexie Norcross, Bob Hall, Bill Marimow, Nancy Phillips, Lewis Katz and George Norcross.  Illustration by Britt Spencer

    CRASH OF THE TITANS
    Clockwise from upper left, Lexie Norcross, Bob Hall, Bill Marimow, Nancy Phillips,
    Lewis Katz and George Norcross.
    Illustration by Britt Spencer

    The meeting is lore, now: a story about a table for two that likely caused all South Jersey to wobble, ever so slightly, on its axis. The setting: Lamberti’s, aflutter with white tablecloths, occupied by the swellegant, an Italian seafood restaurant that serves as something of a home field for one of the men at the table, George Norcross III.

    His name means different things to different people. Norcross earned millions in the insurance business, as executive chairman of Conner Strong & Buckelew. He earned a scary reputation as the grinding stone of the Democratic Party in South Jersey, choosing who ran for what political office till he accumulated so much wealth and power that he became downright kingly.

    Critics plaster Norcross with uncomplimentary terms, like “the Jersey Devil.” Admirers cite his more recent run of philanthropy, thanking him for building a better South Jersey. Friends and enemies often see his avalanche of thick white hair at Lamberti’s, in Cherry Hill, but the 57-year-old Norcross added this March 2012 stop to his calendar upon request, and reluctantly. He would maybe order a bowl of linguine or something.

    Across from him sat Lewis Katz. His name also means different things to different people: An entrepreneur of many trades, Katz has worked, successfully, as an attorney, a political power broker to governors Jim Florio and Ed Rendell, a shareholder in the New York Yankees and New Jersey Nets and Devils. But he made his biggest bundles of loot in comparatively schlubby businesses like parking lots and billboards. Tall and trim, with thinning hair he combs over a wide bald spot, Katz was the one who called and asked for this meeting.

    Critics plaster Katz with invective, too, citing his vanity, his operatic ego, his success at leveraging political connections into cash. Admirers cite his philanthropy, including a recent $25 million gift to Temple University, and say that at 72, he is doing it right at the end, ladling wealth on good causes.

    In what is likely the most accurate rendering of this encounter, Katz spoke first: “George,” he said, “I am not sure you’re comfortable with this deal. And I want you to be comfortable, George.”

    Katz and Norcross were deep into their run at buying this city’s largest media organization: the Philadelphia Inquirer, Daily News and Philly.com. Norcross took in Katz’s opening salvo, the reason he had been called here to eat linguine for which he was not particularly hungry, and responded, “I’m comfortable. I’m moving ahead with this deal. But I think you’re uncomfortable. … ”

    Was Katz trying to avoid the embarrassment of queering the deal by getting Norcross to bail first?

    “George,” Katz told Norcross, “I just want to be sure you keep the passion I’ve seen in you throughout this deal. I don’t want to be that heavily involved, and I just want to be sure you’ll make it work.”

    “I’ll make it work,” replied Norcross.

    Less than two years later, the business pairing of Lewis Katz and George Norcross looms as a master class in how things fall apart. Neither man recognized that this moment at Lamberti’s forecast worrisome levels of indecision and mistrust. And so this is a story about how one brief dinner foreshadowed a dessert of legal briefs and lawyers’ fees.

    The two men bought into a business deal for very different reasons: Katz for romance, nostalgia, love; Norcross for money, power, challenge. The different perspectives meant each man had a different view of the path ahead. And the result is Philadelphia’s highest-profile feud in years, featuring two men who can’t abide losing in a battle for a prize that relinquishes a little more luster with every lawsuit.

    “None of this makes sense anymore,” says a local businessman who has known both men for decades. “Because it isn’t about business. It isn’t about money. It’s all ego now. It’s face.”

    “DARLING,’ THE EMAIL BEGINS.The sender, Nancy Phillips; the recipient, Lewis Katz; the date, March 17, 2012, as Phillips goes on to elucidate a comprehensive strategy to turn around the Inquirer.

    “Company needs a new publisher,” she writes.

    “Paper needs a new editor.

    “Philly.com needs a new leader.

    Daily News has to be seriously evaluated with a view toward possible elimination or curtailment as in a move to the website with pared down staff and a paper product one day a week if at all.”

    At the time, Phillips worked in the newsroom of the Inquirer as a reporter. And in roughly two weeks, George Norcross III would close a deal with her boyfriend, Lewis Katz, to acquire the desk, the chair, the whole shebang that was her workplace. In this sense, Phillips’s letter was business advice, a “honey do” list, and the fantasy of any working stiff made manifest.

    In 10 paragraphs, Phillips advised Katz to fire or demote and replace six people: her boss, editor Stan Wischnowski; publisher Greg Osberg; Philly.com chief Wendy Warren; and the COO, the CFO, and the head of the advertising department. She also alerted Katz to Mark Block, “the lovely PR guy,” because she’d just noticed he held a VP title and probably made too much dough. “Maybe he plays a larger role that I don’t understand,” she wrote.

    The post The Fight for the Future of Philadelphia’s Newspapers appeared first on Philadelphia Magazine.

    Dad Files: Why Every Philly Parent Should Check Out Nest

    $
    0
    0
    Parents and kids play at Nest / Photo via Facebook

    Parents and kids play at Nest / Photo via Facebook

    Our boys ran in circles at first, so overwhelmed by their options they couldn’t settle in and play with any single toy till they inventoried them all. The place was almost empty, with just a couple of other children inside, so we could hear Jack and Eli babbling and cooing as they toddled, fast as they could go, from one side of the room to the other.

    My wife and I have not been shy about getting our boys, 18-month-old fraternal twins, out into the world. We’ve fed them in highchairs on the beach and in Rittenhouse Square and on the sidewalk in front of Shake Shack. We take them to the neighborhood playgrounds, around the Graduate Hospital area, and, weather permitting, to the merry go round at Franklin Square. We’ve taken them to the Please Touch Museum so many times that they smile contentedly and wait to be strapped into their car seats as soon as we tell them we’re going. But this last weekend we took our first and second trips to Nest, an indoor play space at 13th and Locust.

    Nest is a big multi-level facility located in a building that used to house a strip club. Nearly a decade ago, when I was childless and single, I wrote about that club and the controversy it caused. Now I was back in the building as a husband and dad. I once engaged in some of the most contentious interviews of my career in the same spot where I now asked the receptionist for a high chair.

    We stayed for a couple of hours, and a lot happened.

    A cute little blonde-haired boy named Walter scaled obstacles like a spider monkey. I wondered if my boys—two months older than Walter—should do better at climbing. A mom wrapped her little boy up in her arms and rolled, back and forth, across 20 feet of carpet as he giggled and she kissed his cheeks and the two of them held to each other in paroxysms of joy. From the moment I’d walked in the room and saw all that open space I wanted to do the same thing. But now I’d just look like a copycat.

    As the place filled, the going got tougher. But the sense of camaraderie only increased. Parents sipped coffee and looked after their little ones and slipped into conversations with spouses and strangers. A woman whose son played for a while alongside mine apologized for her son’s cough, and I found that I didn’t really care so much about the risk my kids might pick up the third common cold of their lives. It doesn’t make much sense to worry about the inevitable. And besides, my sons grew up a lot last weekend. Jack started climbing up on the raised platforms in one corner of the room, not like a monkey but steadily and, within minutes, confidently. Eli played catch with total strangers, walking right up to other kid’s parents and throwing them whatever ball happened to be nearby. Both of my boys shared and bargained with other kids, pushed and got pushed. A few parents remarked on how hard it must be to raise twins but any difficulties seemed a ba-jillion miles away.

    Jack and Eli were so happy that their dad could barely see straight.

    When we arrived, the streets outside were mostly empty—the city still sleeping off Saturday. But when we left, there was a big line of people waiting to eat brunch at the café next door. And I stared at them, thinking: I used to be one of you. I could wake up on a Sunday whenever I woke up, take Lisa by the hand and walk somewhere to while away the morning, waiting to accomplish nothing more urgent than breakfast. Now, we scarf down protein bars and oatmeal at home while the boys grab toward our belts and ask to be held.

    Life is far more complicated now, and sure enough, a few days after we first trekked into Nest our boys came down with colds. But we’ll head back as soon as we think they’re healthy. We’ll talk with other parents, drink our morning coffee out of paper cups, and watch our kids play. I plan to get there early, grab my nearest boy up in my arms, and roll with him, right across the floor.

    Like what you’re reading? Stay in touch with Be Well Philly—here’s how:

    The post Dad Files: Why Every Philly Parent Should Check Out Nest appeared first on Philadelphia Magazine.

    Penn Dean Reveals Third Student Suicide Since End of Last Semester

    $
    0
    0

    In the wake of the high-profile suicides of Penn students Madison Holleran and Elvis Hatcher, Philadelphia magazine has learned that a third university student had committed suicide since the end of last semester. Dean Richard James Gelles of the university’s School of Social Policy and Practice said he made no announcement through the university because he believes in the “privacy concerns of the family … and the possibility of contagion.”

    While Gelles would not reveal the name of the student, he says he is revealing the suicide out of concern for student welfare.

    The unnamed social policy graduate student, who committed suicide off campus over semester break, can now be added to the list of Penn students who recently committed suicide, including Holleran, a freshman who took her life on Jan. 17, and Hatcher, a sophomore who killed himself just weeks later.


    “I think though that we need to be mindful of our students and their mental health,” said Gelles. “Mental health is a serious issue on every campus and Penn has a unique set of challenges. These are kids who are used to being the absolute best, and they get here and they’re surrounded, in a very competitive environment, by other kids who are accomplishing at least as much, if not more, and we need to respond to that.”

    Dr. T.J. Ghose, a professor in the School of Social Policy and Practice, says he agrees with the Dean’s decision not to name the student. But says that, “as the university community responds to these suicides, the fact that there was a third student, who was one of our own, is important to acknowledge, so that can be part of the conversation.”

    Suicide researchers say the data shows that suicide tends to occur in clusters, and that publicity surrounding suicides can spark further attempts by people already suffering from suicidal thoughts, particularly among the young, leading to Gelles’ fear of “contagion.”

    Penn administrators responded to the deaths of Holleran and Hatcher by convening a mental health task force. That effort has fallen under criticism for failing to include students as participants.

    Penn is also facing severe criticism for understaffing at CAPS, the student mental health services provider. According to a story published Wednesday in the student newspaper, the Daily Pennsylvanian, students sometimes have to wait for a month or five weeks to see a counselor.

    Several students, who wished to remain anonymous because of the stigma surrounding mental health care, have made the same claims about long waits at CAPS to me.

    Gelles says the issue is one of awareness — of mental health issues, throughout society, and for Penn, the particular challenge faced by its student population.

    “These schools are so difficult to get into,” he says. “An A- isn’t good enough. Second violin isn’t good enough. Going to China isn’t good enough. You have to live with a native family and learn to speak Mandarin. You can’t make a mistake. And so you get here, and you’ve never made a mistake, and being the best all your life earns you a spot in the middle here. It’s tough for an 18-year-old brain to take, and I think we have to create room for experimentation, for people to not feel that they have to be perfect. That ought to be across your whole life.”

    As of press time, Penn had not responded to a request for comment.

    For confidential support if you are having thoughts of suicide, call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1-800-273-TALK (8255). Learn about the warning signs of suicide at the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention.

    Follow @SteveVolk on Twitter.

    The post Penn Dean Reveals Third Student Suicide Since End of Last Semester appeared first on Philadelphia Magazine.

    Without a Trace

    $
    0
    0
    without-trace-imbo-petrone-940

    Richard and Danielle six months before they vanished.

    To most anyone watching, they were just another couple, out on a Saturday night at Abilene’s on South Street, drinking a few beers and watching a band.

    Never much for dressing up, Richard Petrone wore a gray hoodie, jeans and sneakers. But the night no doubt meant something special to him, because she was there.

    A few weeks earlier, Danielle Imbo had ended their on-again, off-again relationship. She’d begun dating Richard during a long separation from her husband — a separation she was intending to punctuate with a divorce. She wanted time to focus on the transition from married woman to single mother. Richard said he understood; he’d raised a daughter on his own. But inside, he hurt. Danielle, five-foot-five, trim and pretty, looked like the real thing. She fronted a rock band around New Jersey and boasted a singer’s outgoing personality, and after the trouble she’d had with her estranged husband, she’d responded to Richard’s gentler approach.

    They hadn’t spoken since she broke things off, blowing right through Valentine’s Day without even a text message. But tonight, on February 19, 2005, he had been alone, eating in a South Philly bar and working his cell phone, searching for someone to meet up with for a drink. He reached his sister, Christine, and found her enjoying a ladies’ night out with their mother, Marge, and two longtime friends, Felice Ottobre and her daughter.

    Danielle.

    Richard and Danielle’s relationship always bore this extra wrinkle: Danielle was his sister’s best friend, dating back to high school. Their moms enjoyed a friendship of their own.

    “Want to come have a drink?” Richard asked.

    Christine said no. But she put the invitation to Danielle. And two hours later, the reunited couple looked happy together. They sat close, smiling and laughing. They kissed. They compared notes on what their ensuing Sundays entailed: Danielle had a hair appointment at 11 a.m.; her ex-husband was scheduled to return their son after that. Richard, a NASCAR fan, planned to watch the Daytona 500. At around 11:45 p.m., they got up to leave.

    Richard said he’d drive Danielle home to Mount Laurel before returning to his place in South Philly. And so, on a night when the temperature was about 27 degrees and the crowd at 4th and South was probably a little thinner than usual, Danielle and Richard walked out of Abilene’s toward Richard’s truck.

    And vanished.

    NOTHING HAS EVER BEEN FOUND — not a bolt, not a screw, not a purse or a hair, no clue at all — to explain what happened that night more than nine years ago. In the early hours and days after Richard Petrone and Danielle Imbo disappeared, their families banded together, frantically phoning each other the next morning when Danielle didn’t turn up for her hair appointment and both her cell phone and Richard’s kicked straight to voicemail.

    Danielle’s brother, John Ottobre, had a key to Danielle’s house. He went in and found the place dark, still and undisturbed. But panic didn’t really set in until 3 p.m., when Danielle’s son, little Joe, was due to be dropped back home by his father.

    “She wouldn’t have missed that,” John says now. “No way.”

    Police often wait as long as 48 hours to consider adults missing. That night, John and Richard Petrone Sr. set out on a nightlong drive, John behind the wheel, rolling slowly along darkened city streets, tracing and retracing every major highway route and side road leading from Philly to Mount Laurel. Richard Sr., in the passenger seat, peered out into the dark, searching for his son’s truck. The pair crossed and recrossed the Walt Whitman, Ben Franklin and Betsy Ross bridges. At dawn, they returned home, exhausted.

    Friends also swarmed into the picture. Volunteers fanned out a hundred miles in every direction. They carried pictures of Petrone’s black Dodge Dakota truck, knew its license plate — YFH-2319 — and the image of its NASCAR decal by heart. John paid $1,200 to get a Camden police officer to take him up in a helicopter to search. But in the end, they all found nothing — no truck off the road, no hulking shadow flickering beneath the water. A police officer tried to prepare John: “No one,” he said, “is ever going to find anything.”

    “What do you mean?” John replied.

    “It’s too clean,” the cop said.

    The post Without a Trace appeared first on Philadelphia Magazine.


    The Tragedy of Madison Holleran and Suicides at Penn

    $
    0
    0
    MO-madison-holleran-collage-940x540

    Family, friends and scenes from Madison Holleran’s Instagram feed.

    Doors were beginning to open for Madison Holleran. She racked up straight As, ran track, and pushed her Northern Highlands Regional High School soccer team to two New Jersey state championships. As she entered her junior year in 2011, Lehigh University soccer coach Eric Lambinus became a regular at her matches. Lambinus hoped to recruit Holleran as his center-midfielder, the most physically taxing and important position in his system. “What impressed me about Maddy,” he says, “is that she was exceptionally skilled in the fundamentals. She was very good, and she made the players around her better.”

    At home, Holleran mothered her siblings. On the field, she led without seeming to try: first downfield to hug a teammate who scored, chattering to keep everyone’s energy up. Lambinus admired Holleran’s easy charisma, watching as even his Lehigh squad — college students — gravitated toward the younger girl when she arrived from Allendale, New Jersey, on visits. He also noticed something else: “You could just see, in social situations, her being very aware of the other girls’ reactions,” he says. “She seemed to need approval. But you figure that’s something to work on.”

    Lambinus thought he had a good shot at recruiting Holleran. But during her senior year, competition emerged. Holleran was also a standout middle-distance runner, and Harvard’s track program flew her to Boston, took her to dinner and gave her a tour of the campus.

    “What would you think about my playing soccer, too?” she asked.

    These were words no track coach longs to hear. Harvard never made an offer. But the University of Pennsylvania called.

    Lambinus says Holleran seemed particularly troubled by selecting a school. Though she offered Lambinus a verbal commitment — “I think she was very comfortable with Lehigh,” he says — she still appeared “unsteady” about the choice.

    Lehigh offered the small, bucolic environment she enjoyed in high school, and soccer, the sport she loved most. But what kid knows herself so well that she can announce, at 18, to parents, relatives and friends, that she’s choosing personal happiness, the safer option, over a shot at big-time Ivy League success?

    “Could you stop with the drama?” Holleran would say every time her little sister acted like the sky was falling. She was always the mature one, the young girl with an adult’s capacity to plan. So whatever pressure she felt along the way, when Holleran pulled out of Lambinus’s program and chose Penn, the moment looked like a triumph. Holleran went Ivy, accepting a reward commensurate with her young life’s achievement.

    What shocked everyone is what happened next. On January 17, 2014, just as her second semester got under way, Madison Holleran trekked about a mile and a half from Penn’s campus to Center City and killed herself. Her death was one of five among the Penn student body in six months’ time, including four confirmed suicides. The tragedies cast a sudden pall over Penn’s image as a dream destination for every high-achieving kid and his or her parents. Criticism centered on Penn’s notoriously competitive student culture and understaffed mental health services. But the question raised by the Penn suicides is broader and more fundamental than any campus policy, reaching into every home where parents send their sons and daughters off to college with big dreams and bright futures:

    Why would these kids — top of their class, the elite, bound for success — choose to kill themselves?

    The search for answers, and potential remedies, suggests a radical shift — a new way of looking at suicide, our children and ourselves; a more honest way of handling a problem we usually treat with silence.

    WE SPEAK SO LITTLE OF SUICIDE that the issue might seem esoteric. But according to survey data by suicide experts, about 10 percent of the country’s college students think about killing themselves (what health professionals call “suicidal ideation”) at some point in their college careers. Almost one percent make an attempt. If these numbers sound small, do the math: Penn has about 24,000 students, meaning that roughly 2,400 of them will suffer so profoundly from a sense of pain or depression that they’ll consider killing themselves; within that group, 240 students will make an attempt.

    The biggest dangers are neurobiological: The human brain isn’t fully developed until we are about 25 years old, particularly in regions associated with impulsivity and emotional regulation. In this context, even a healthy kid is likely to struggle with transitioning from the childhood home to whatever comes next. Now consider that mental illness often first manifests itself between ages 16 and 25.

    The risk is clear. But what happened at Penn recently still surprises:

    Last August, the death of 24-year-old Wendy Shung, a popular graduate student and resident adviser whose kids called themselves “Wendy’s Wolf Pack,” was declared a suicide.

    Pulkit “Josh” Singh, a 20-year-old engineering and Wharton business-school junior, was found dead on January 12th in an apartment he rented off campus. Speculation over his cause of death continued until a city health department official deemed it an accidental drug overdose in April.

    Holleran took her own life five days later. Over Thanksgiving break, she told her parents she had contemplated suicide. Her father told the New York Post that she’d been happy in high school but that after going to Penn she had “worries and stress.”

    • Sophomore Elvis Hatcher, 18, hung himself in his fraternity house on February 3rd, and later died in the hospital. He first confessed suicidal thoughts to his parents at age 15, and had been in treatment ever since.

    • Almost two months after Hatcher’s suicide, the public learned of a fourth — Alice Wiley, a graduate student in social policy who died over winter break, just before the New Year.

    Mental health experts say suicide never results from one fight, one conversation, one lost job. More likely, a person struggles against some preceding, often untreated mental illness, like depression. Then a series of stressors adds weight until the inexplicable happens. In this formula, no one burden — be it college, Ivy League or otherwise; family and relationship problems; drug and alcohol use — is to blame any more than others. “I think one of the things we struggle against in the world of suicide prevention,” says Christine Moutier, chief medical officer with the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, “is that we’re always trying to explain it. We’re always asking, ‘Why? How could someone do this?’ But there’s not one explanation.”

    Moutier and other experts maintain, however, that despite suicide’s myriad causes, prevention is possible. Between 1990 and 2010, suicide rates dropped slightly among adolescents, according to statistics from the Centers for Disease Control. And in a sense, academic success is protective — kids who don’t attend college are twice as likely to die by suicide as those who do. Still, the four suicides at Penn in just six months are cause for reflection on the pressure today’s highest achievers are under: to ace the toughest available courses; excel at sports; join extracurricular clubs; and then find time on the weekends to volunteer.

    These overscheduled kids strive for perfection, spending their adolescence collecting medals, first-place finishes and congratulatory handshakes. But when they arrive at Locust Walk, they are suddenly surrounded by thousands of peers who were also the smartest and best. They experience failure, perhaps for the first time in their lives. They feel like they are letting down their families. And just as they are beginning to gather power in the world, they might be at their most vulnerable.

    MADISON HOLLERAN’S FIRST SEMESTER at Penn was tough, despite her 3.5 GPA. She had a big, close social circle in high school, a support system built from childhood. That chapter of Holleran’s life can still be seen online — playing sports, singing with friends, dancing with her old teammates on a hotel bed.

    Those bonds aren’t forged overnight at a new school. But Holleran was probably a lot more popular in college than she believed. The new friends she made remember her stopping, repeatedly, anywhere she walked, to say hello to people she knew. Later, media coverage would fixate on her looks — her thin frame, delicate features and joy-bomb smile. Her track teammates simply thought she was relaxed and confident.

    “She was just one of those people who had an effortless glow about her,” says Lauren Murphy, a fellow runner. “She did everything with elegance and grace.”

    Holleran did confide in a couple of new friends. She told Ashley Montgomery, another freshman on the track team, that Penn wasn’t what she’d hoped. Running track wore on her. She missed her pals back home. She talked, a lot, about what she wanted from life — a home in California, maybe, and plenty of outdoor time. “It sounds funny to say, but she was very serious about being happy,” says Montgomery. “She’d try to figure out what happiness is, like a formula, and she’d get really analytical.”

    Holleran and Montgomery ran together, frequently, through the city. Holleran often paused to take pictures of pretty views. On a fall evening, after track, Holleran hauled Montgomery to the top of Franklin Field. The sunset cascaded before them, swirls of orange and pink decorating the sky. At the time, Montgomery considered the constant picture-taking an eccentricity. Later, Montgomery came to believe that for Holleran, happiness was “more a thought than a feeling” — something she caught sight of, outside herself, and tried to capture before it disappeared.

    LIZZY HATCHER REGISTERED the sound, buzzing through her sleep.

    The phone.

    She could feel her husband, Kevin, rouse beside her. And as the world around her came into focus — still dark, phone ringing — she could feel fear, like a flatworm, twitch and curl in her stomach.

    She remembers only the key words the doctor told her husband: “Son. Elvis. Attempted suicide. Critical.” From there, her every act — sitting up in bed, putting her feet to the floor, standing — felt unreal. The university arranged travel from Florida, but snow in Philadelphia forced an agonizing series of delays at the airport. “It was just an awful, awful day,” she says. “Such a helpless feeling.”

    By the time the Hatchers landed, it was after 9 p.m. Someone from Penn — Hatcher doesn’t remember who — picked them up and drove them straight to the hospital. Elvis was already on life support. “The next morning,” says Hatcher, “he passed away.”

    Hatcher posts on Facebook regularly, intermixing fond remembrances of Elvis with exhortations on treating depression. She speaks proudly of her son — a multi- instrumentalist and dancer with a furious wave of curly hair who loved wearing bow ties. He’d made friends at Penn and joined a fraternity. But over the course of multiple phone conversations, her voice weakens. “Life is just … so different now,” she says. “We just try to get through the day.”

    Two days after Hatcher’s death, Penn acted swiftly, announcing the hiring of three new mental health counselors at Counseling and Psychological Services, or CAPS, and, weeks later, the formation of a Task Force on Student Psychological Health and Welfare. Penn president Amy Gutmann wrote about the changes in a university-wide email, simultaneously touting the expansion of services and denying any connection between the counseling center and the suicides.

    “While all evidence indicates that the recent student deaths are unrelated to each other,” she wrote, “and certainly unrelated to the work done at CAPS, we know that the needs of the community are placing greater than ever demand on our valuable student support teams.”

    In the same memo, Gutmann noted that in the past eight years, CAPS had grown its senior staff by 10. The message struck some as cold politicking when a tender hand was needed; in one line, Gutmann used the acronym “FTE” to denote the hiring of “Full Time Employees.”

    “I think the whole response just reflected a kind of corporate mind-set,” says Toorjo Ghose, a member of Penn’s faculty senate and an assistant professor in the School of Social Policy & Practice. “She wrote as if she was responding to shareholders — not to young people who might be grieving and in pain.”

    In terms of mental health, Penn students face a unique challenge. The school culture is notoriously competitive, a battle among valedictorian-level intellects where a Work harder, play harder mentality runs from the Wharton Business School to the humanities and sciences. Last year, 34th Street Magazine published a survey that found 71 percent of Penn students got blackout drunk at least once in college. For close to 25 percent, blacking out was the goal. Some kids also talk about a phenomenon called “Penn Face,” in which students express how stressful their lives are without ever showing any strain.

    This culture may not be responsible for Hatcher’s death, or Holleran’s. But should it change in some way so that the next Hatcher or Holleran might be helped?

    University spokesman Ron Ozio didn’t make any Penn administrators or professors available for interviews. Late in February, however, Penn’s silence was broken: The dean of the School of Social Policy & Practice, Richard Gelles, told me one of his students — later identified as Alice Wiley — had died by suicide over break, prior to Holleran and Hatcher.

    Penn can’t exactly be accused of hiding Wiley’s death; the school says it wasn’t aware of it until January. No law requires universities to track or disclose suicides among their student bodies. Experts also present strong data demonstrating that publicizing a suicide can encourage further suicides — a phenomenon known as the “contagion” effect. And out of respect for privacy or liability concerns, universities usually defer to the deceased student’s parents, rendering a campus suicide a secret.

    History suggests, however, that a cluster of suicides brings change. Drexel University responded to a pair of suicides last year by forming a task force, which is still making recommendations. Penn’s fellow Ivy League school Cornell suffered a cluster of suicides from 2009 to 2011 and moved swiftly to upgrade its mental health services. And momentum is developing for changes at Penn and beyond.

    An online petition promoting “The Madison Holleran Law,” to be presented in the New Jersey state legislature, is gathering thousands of signatures, seeking to force universities to publicly report suicides. CAPS also faces pressure to further increase its staff size. A scoop by Penn’s student newspaper, the Daily Pennsylvanian, turned up documents that revealed students often endure three-to-four-week waits for an initial visit — an eternity for someone struggling with the sudden onset of a mental illness. Those documents lent support to similar reports Penn students gave me. CAPS’s 38 full-time staff members are a mix of psychiatrists, social workers and interns. Cornell, in the wake of its own spate of suicides, has roughly 3,000 fewer students than Penn but an equal number of staffers. Even the most progressive aspect of Penn’s response — the mental health task force — seemed inadequate, given that no student representatives were invited to participate.

    There are few if any clear lines between the recent deaths and failures in Penn’s mental health services. Little is known about the suicides of Alice Wiley and Wendy Shung. Hatcher fought depression for years, and preferred to see his longtime doctor in Miami Beach via Skype. “Penn had nothing to do with his suicide,” says Lizzy Hatcher. “I think he just got tired of the fight. He enjoyed his classes and friends. He loved Philadelphia.”

    Madison Holleran did seek help from CAPS after telling her family over Thanksgiving break that she was stressed and having suicidal thoughts. But Holleran didn’t stay long at CAPS. She attended one or two sessions, with an intern; seeing a senior staff member would have required her to wait several weeks. She ultimately saw a counselor closer to her home in New Jersey.

    Holleran’s father doesn’t blame the university for his daughter’s death. But in response to their losses, Penn’s students took to the school paper’s opinion pages, social media and message boards. Wharton sophomore Erica Ligenza wrote of being afraid to confess that she has anxiety issues in such a high-achieving environment. Hilary Barlowe complained that CAPS dismissed her suicidal feelings as a “normal adjustment” to college. Barlowe had been on psychiatric leave.

    Sophomore Alexandra Sternlicht wrote an article in the DP, “Left to Grieve Alone, Together,” decrying how Penn, unlike Yale, Brown, Dartmouth and Harvard, does not automatically send student-wide emails after anyone dies. Further, students must notify professors themselves when a friend in the student body passes away.

    “Not only is Penn’s neglectful response to death an exception amongst peer institutions,” wrote Sternlicht. “[I]t is also unhealthy. And even Penn knows it. According to Penn’s Behavioral Corporate Services, when the subject of death is ‘avoided, ignored or denied,’ the grieving process is compromised. … Penn is compromising students’ mental health.”

    Ghose, probably the most outspoken of Penn’s faculty members on the recent suicides, agrees that more action — and honest reflection — is needed. “It would be irresponsible to blame the university for these deaths,” says Ghose. “But it is also true that this is an occasion for the university to look at itself, and our culture, and improve our mental health services. Because this is an elite university. But our mental health on campus is not elite. … And I think the administration should just acknowledge that.”

    One student on a Penn-based mental health website dubbed “Pennsive” wrote that after she survived a second suicide attempt in two years, she received a hospital visit from a Penn administrator.

    “Are we going to make this an annual pattern?” the administrator asked.

    “No,” the student said.

    The administrator left then, handing her a business card.

    MADISON HOLLERAN AND INGRID HUNG met on campus, maybe three weeks into the fall semester. The two shared at least one meal together per day, and every so often, Holleran declared a “movie night,” meaning snacks — she had a peanut butter obsession — and romantic comedies.

    Dressed in a crew jacket and jeans, her black hair covering her shoulders, Hung sits in a Starbucks near the Penn campus. She recalls their last movie date, watching The Parent Trap the night before Holleran died, and their friendship. “Maddy and I bonded around feeling homesick,” Hung says of their usual conversations. “And we talked a lot about just getting through it. ‘Freshman year!’ We would say to each other, ‘We are going to make it at Penn. We will make friends. We will join a sorority. And we will be happy.’”

    Hung says Holleran admitted that she missed her family, friends and soccer. She also feared that turning down Lehigh’s soccer scholarship was a mistake. Hung doesn’t cite the pressure of Penn, specifically, for Holleran’s troubles. She says that leaving home and attending any college would have been tough for Madison. Hung also saw her struggle with the burden particular to their generation — to have a great time, always, and post pictures of her revels on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook.

    “I’m not sure how I’m even going to talk to my friends back home,” Holleran told Hung. “I look at my friends on Facebook, and they all seem so happy. They are all having these great college experiences, and I’m not.”

    Today, Hung commiserates.

    “On social media, everyone presents a false picture of their life,” she says. “No one ever posts a picture of themselves looking sad. Everyone is at the coolest party. And I think all of us wonder, sometimes, ‘Why isn’t my life like that? Why don’t I feel like smiling like them?’”

    The version of herself that Holleran projected to the world online offered no clues to the turmoil she held inside. Her Instagram stream is rife with pretty pictures. And any stress she expressed on Twitter reads like typical schoolgirl patter.

    “FREEEEEDiOM!!!!!!!!!!!! Spendin my last day in Philly with my gf before headin home,” she wrote on December 20th.

    “VS fashion show is on and I’m in the damn library,” she wrote on December 10th. “Something here is not right.”

    There is also a cell-phone video of a November Penn track meet that captures Holleran running a race. She rounds a corner and pulls a muscle, maybe 10 yards from the finish line. She seizes up, then jerks along, fighting, till she can finally throw herself across the finish line.

    “That’s my Maddy,” says a family friend. “Tough as ever.”

    “I AM VERY LUCKY to be alive,” says Jack Park. He is tall, slim and well-dressed, with dark eyes, a gentle demeanor and a soft speaking voice. A junior at Penn, Park announced in February, through social media, that he had attempted suicide in his dorm room — twice. Park has attained a kind of celebrity in recent months, a fact about which he seems humble, even bemused. “I am very pleased that you are interested in my story,” he says.

    Alerting the world to his battle with mental illness was brave enough. But Park also publicly listed his phone number and email address. “My operating hours are 24/7, 365,” he wrote in a Tumblr post, taking what reads like a slap at CAPS, which only added evening hours after the recent suicides. “To make time for these calls, I dropped courses to take only the four minimum credits legally required for international kids to attend Penn. Please, please, do not attempt to kill yourself and call this number if you want to hear me out. Life is so much more beautiful than death. I taught myself this the hard way. … ”

    Park took a semester off from school, returned to Penn, and completed his sophomore year before the Holleran and Hatcher suicides convinced him to go public.

    “I take medication now,” he says, without a trace of shyness, “for depression and bipolar disorder, and I feel good.”

    Traditionally, people who survive suicide attempts keep the topic secret. But these days, Park isn’t alone. Drexel business student Drew Bergman gives lectures about his own suicide attempts. Online, the website Live Through This has gathered more than three dozen testimonials from suicide survivors — teachers, health-care professionals, moms and dads. In April, the New York Times chronicled this new openness among suicide prevention experts in talking about suicide attempts.

    In part, these initiatives spring from a growing understanding that mental health should be addressed in the same terms as our physical health. No young adult would hesitate to tell her parents that her knee hurts. But admitting that thoughts of suicide keep popping up, or that feelings of anxiousness and depression are all-consuming, still carries a stigma. The reason is easy to see: A bum knee is just something we have. We believe our thoughts reveal who we are.

    Mental health, however, relates to physical workings in our brain. Researchers at Columbia who study suicide have published data showing that abnormalities in brain chemistry and structure are present in the suicidal — including deficiencies in pleasure-dealing serotonin. “These things are treatable,” says Columbia researcher J. John Mann, “with therapy and medication, and that’s what people need to understand.”

    Capitalizing on this knowledge requires a bold cultural shift in which parents teach their kids to talk about their mental health as freely as they would a headache. “It’s a new and very hopeful time,” says Christine Moutier, from the AFSP. “All of these people who used to stay in the dark are coming out now, despite the stigma, and putting a face on this issue.”

    For now, however, mental illness and suicide remain stigmatized, in part because of advice coming from the very same experts. The “contagion effect” is real: Publicity surrounding suicides can increase the suicide rate, and suicides often occur in geographical clusters, like one from 2000 to 2003 in which six Cherry Hill teenagers took their own lives.

    Mental health experts endorse strict guidelines for publicizing suicide: Don’t mention the location or method; avoid depicting the mourning of family members; and resist stories that might make anyone who died by suicide appear attractive or celebrated.

    “We struggle with this,” says Alison Malmon, “throughout the community of people working on the issue of suicide prevention.” Malmon was a student at Penn 10 years ago when her brother, a senior at Columbia, killed himself. She founded a nonprofit, Active Minds, to combat mental illness and prevent suicide on college campuses.

    “There is already such a huge stigma around suicide and mental illness in general,” she says. “And some of us fear that if we’re too strict about what we should or shouldn’t say, we’re actually adding to that stigma and keeping the subject in the dark.”

    People who attempt suicide are usually convinced that all of their distorted thinking is true. They have often spent a long time formulating a plan and display incredible calm, despite the pain they’re in, because they believe they’ve found the only way out. Many are saved, even then, by reaching what could be called a “bend” moment — some unexpected turn of events that makes them rethink the plan they spent so long crafting.

    Sometimes a restriction on the means they intend to use is enough: Cornell put barriers around bridges on campus to discourage jumpers, and some hospitals install break-away shower rods to prevent hangings. Penn spokesman Ron Ozio responded to an email asking if the university employs any of these methods by saying, “University buildings are built to existing state and local codes.” But what, exactly, will divert someone from a suicide plan is difficult to calculate.

    “Often,” says Moutier, “you’ll hear some story, after the fact, and think, ‘This was the moment’ that might have saved them. But sometimes the person suffering has adopted a kind of tunnel vision. What looks like a rational way out to the rest of us doesn’t look that way to them at all.”

    Holleran may have believed that quitting Penn would comprise such a heavy blow that everyone would be better off if she died. In this sense, people like Park and Bergman can be a tremendous resource, not only because they can speak about what they thought and felt while suicidal, but because they’re the figures often missing from stories like this — those who provide, in this dark space, a sense of hope. The fact is, most who suffer from depression or suicidal thoughts survive. Go back to the math: Out of the projected 2,400 Penn kids who will consider suicide, nearly 90 percent will choose to go on.

    The answer to reducing suicide — or part of it — might be to simply tell more stories, particularly of people who’ve survived their suicidal thoughts, so that tales like those of Holleran and Hatcher are placed in context. And so we can understand the real depth of the tragedy here: These lives are over when they might yet have been transformed.

    OVER THE HOLIDAYS, at Thanksgiving, Madison Holleran told her parents how she was suffering. She felt unhappy at Penn. The academics were demanding. Worse, her track coach required two-a-day practices, even with classes in session. She was overtaxed. She’d thought of suicide.

    The Hollerans, in response, took all the expected steps. They got her help — a counselor who told her to call if she ever formulated a suicide plan. When she didn’t feel comfortable at CAPS, they looked for a private psychologist. On the drive from North Jersey to Penn after the semester break, Holleran said, “Dad, I don’t want to go back.”

    “I understand,” her father, Jim, replied. “You should look at transferring.”

    But she declined. She wanted to make Penn work.

    Holleran and her friend, Ingrid Hung, arrived on campus the Saturday before spring classes began. They attended a Penn women’s basketball game. That evening, Holleran told Hung she’d been thinking of transferring.

    “Oh, no,” Hung replied. “I knew you were sad, but I had no idea you were this sad. …”

    Holleran, seeing her friend’s reaction, stopped the transfer talk right there. “No,” Holleran said, “it’s fine.”

    Over the next couple of days, she peppered Hung with text messages: “We’re going to have so much fun,” Holleran wrote. “We’re going to love it here.”

    “I don’t think she fully wanted me to know how bad it was for her,” Hung says now.

    On Friday, January 17th, Holleran went into Center City. She stopped at various stores and bought gifts for her family. Her dad called around noon. He wanted to visit her. But she told him not to worry. She had sorority rush events, and the Penn track team was scheduled to run at Lehigh that weekend.

    She sent pleasant text messages throughout the day. At 5 p.m., she texted a friend who’d been trying to reach her. “I just got back from a run,” she wrote. “Whatcha doing?”

    Around 6 p.m., she walked to Rittenhouse Square. The park was still decorated for Christmas. Holleran took a cell phone picture: Big balls of light glow in the trees, capturing an idyll Holleran was unable to preserve or nurture in her own heart.

    At 6:27 p.m., she walked south along 15th Street across Locust and felt a hand grasp her arm. She turned and saw Eric Lambinus, the Lehigh soccer coach.

    Of course, this was it — the moment when the arc of Holleran’s story might have bent toward life. Symbolically, Lambinus was an ideal candidate to play this role. Decades ago, his sister, a nursing student, died by suicide at roughly the same age as Holleran. “She was unhappy,” he says. “And she was convinced that if she quit school she’d be letting everyone down, and she couldn’t go on.”

    That evening, though, he was just glad to see Madison. He wanted her to know he bore no hard feelings over her choosing Penn.

    “Madison,” he said, “how are you?”

    “Things aren’t going great for me here,” she said. “I’m not so happy, running track.”

    Lambinus had to be careful. NCAA regulations prohibit tampering. But he tried to let her know the door was open. “There is a process you have to follow,” he told her. “But talk to your parents. Talk to your coach. … You should be happy.”

    Lambinus was in town for an NCAA athletics convention and scheduled to meet friends at Fadó for dinner. He needed to get back to them. But before he left Madison, he gave voice to something that bothered him.

    “What are you doing by yourself on a Friday night?” he asked.

    In all his time recruiting her, he didn’t think he’d ever seen Madison Holleran alone.

    “I was just doing some shopping,” she said. “But I’m meeting some friends for dinner.”

    They parted. About 15 minutes later, Holleran reached 15th and Spruce. She climbed the stairs to the fifth floor of a parking garage. She didn’t have to do it. But at the moment, she couldn’t see how to do anything else.

    For confidential support if you are having thoughts of suicide, call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1-800-273-TALK (8255). Learn about the warning signs of suicide at the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention.

    Originally published as “The Penn Suicides” in the June 2014 issue of Philadelphia magazine.

    The post The Tragedy of Madison Holleran and Suicides at Penn appeared first on Philadelphia Magazine.

    Tom Wolf: Perfect Stranger

    $
    0
    0

    The candidate in his home in Mt. Wolf. Photograph by Colin Lenton

    The candidate in his home in Mt. Wolf. Photograph by Colin Lenton

    In 1957, Tom Wolf and his father attended a baseball game at Connie Mack Stadium.

    Wolf’s team, the Phillies, faced the St. Louis Cardinals, including Stan Musial, the player who broke Babe Ruth’s extra-base-hits record. The stadium announcer’s voice crackled through the loudspeakers, informing the crowd that anyone from Donora, Pennsylvania, Musial’s hometown, could get the slugger’s autograph when the game ended.

    After the last out, Bill Wolf led his son to the visiting locker room.

    “What do you think?” his father asked. “You want to go in?”

    Fifty-seven years later, Tom Wolf would be the presumptive next governor of Pennsylvania. But that night, he was just an eight-year-old baseball-crazed kid standing mere feet from one of his heroes.

    “No,” Tom replied. “We’re not from Donora.”

    “They won’t know that,” his father said.

    “No,” Tom repeated. “It wouldn’t be right.”

    I hear this story from Wolf’s parents, Bill and Cornelia, at their rambling old country house in the borough of Mount Wolf, about eight miles north of York. The couple is in their 90s, dignified-old-money in every way, but the tale feels as though it hails from an even earlier time, reminiscent of apocrypha and legends like the one about George Washington and the cherry tree. There are other family fables about Honest Tom, and the Wolfs eagerly share them, delighted that their son’s virtue outdoes even their own.

    The stories also echo Tom Wolf’s campaign narrative. A virtual unknown when the year began, Wolf blitzed the state with ads that declared him “not your ordinary candidate” and defined him in broadly likeable terms: South Central Pennsylvania kid. Highly educated, with a stint in the Peace Corps. Married to the same gal for 38 years. Two daughters. Started off driving a forklift in the family business, then took over, making it America’s largest supplier of kitchen cabinets.

    He shared 20 to 30 percent of the profits with his employees, the ads tell us — and yes, that does sound virtuous. In 2006, he and his partners sold their majority stake in the company, and Wolf resigned and accepted a position as secretary of revenue under Governor Ed Rendell. He donated his government salary to charity and refused a state car, driving a dorky Jeep instead. He explored a run for governor in 2009, but he got a call from his old management team telling him the business he’d led for 20 years faced foreclosure. So Wolf tabled his political dream for a time and manned his old post, saving the family business and hundreds of jobs.

    “I’m Tom Wolf,” he says, “and I’ll be a different kind of governor.”

    The mere sight of him established the brand. Wolf dressed casually in a button-down shirt, with an open collar and sometimes an ugly yellow jacket. He even wore a beard. Veteran Pittsburgh Post-Gazette political reporter James O’Toole scanned official gubernatorial portraits till he found the last state governor with a beard: Samuel W. Pennypacker, in 1907.

    The ads aired early and often, playing adroitly on the electorate’s distrust of ordinary politicians. It was a remarkably effective assault by a largely self-funded campaign that left Wolf’s better-known primary opponents in the dust before they ever truly got going.

    “The race for governor used to be like a heavyweight fight,” says veteran Democratic campaign adman Neil Oxman. “This race was like an undercard. The press corps is decimated. And he had it won by March, with his ads. So of course it feels like he was never really tested.”

    Wolf may not be tested this fall, either. Corbett is considered the most-likely-to-lose sitting governor in the nation, and Wolf leads him by wide margins in most polls, though that edge is eroding a bit. The result is that Pennsylvania may be led by a governor we’ve only just met, the electoral equivalent of setting up house after the first dinner date.

    In truth, Wolf is much more than the folksy two-dimensional character his ads make him out to be. He is amiable, yes, but he’s also the ambitious and calculating scion of a proud and powerful family, a man who learned from an early age that he has an obligation to work for the good of the people. For most members of the Wolf clan, that’s meant fund-raising dinners and charitable works in and around York. For Tom Wolf, that hasn’t been enough. This kitchen-cabinet supplier convincingly acts the part of the nearly-extinct citizen politician, but his yearning for the most powerful job in Pennsylvania runs much deeper than mere devotion to duty.

    AS HIS CAMPAIGN likes to point out, Tom Wolf lives in the same house his parents brought him home to from the hospital. The front door is framed by four white pillars and looks out on a wide yard with tightly trimmed hedges, a shaded street and a solitary train track. A couple of cargo carriers rattle past each day, on the same rail line that carried Lincoln’s funeral car. Mount Wolf — a verdant green enclave near the Susquehanna River — is named after an ancestor four generations removed. Today, the community of 1,393 is a moneyed suburb of struggling York. A century and a half ago, when the town was founded, it was a George H. Wolf who established the post office, and his brother Adam who ran the supply store — the same business that Tom Wolf would acquire, generations later, and lever into his political launching pad.

    Wolf meets me, hand extended, in a deep backyard under a vine-covered trellis. Affable enough to make the ritual meeting-of-reporter feel friendly, even warm, Wolf points to a pair of old trees with winding trunks that grew tall before he was born. “My grandfather and great-grandfather planted these,” he says.

    A few of Wolf’s friends had advised me to meet him here, at his ancestral home. “You just walk into that front room,” one of those friends told me, “and it’s like walking into his head. Elegant. Understated. Classical music is playing. And the whole place is filled with books.”

    No classical music is playing when I arrive. But there are two comfortable couches, each set off by tall reading lamps and three long walls adorned with at least 10,000 books. “I’ve actually read these,” Wolf tells me of the entire library, and judging by the cracked spines, I believe him. “I am pretty much always reading something.” A novel might go down in an evening. Something dense, like Thomas Piketty’s 696-page economics tome Capital in the Twenty-First Century, goes more slowly. “That took about a week,” says Wolf, smiling.

    Dressed in gray slacks, a light blue b­utton-down shirt and a matching patterned tie, Wolf walks me through a shelving system grouped by subject: economics, political science, world and American history. “Look here,” he says, pointing to a particular set. I follow his finger to see that books on religion and baseball share the same column. “See?” he says. “That tells you a lot about me.”

    We tend to think of self-funded candidates as cranks playing an egoistic game, like Donald Trump, or, in a best-case scenario, businessmen who perceive a vacuum of leadership, like Michael Bloomberg. Wolf belongs to a different category. He’s rich, yes, but he’s no tycoon. His $10 million contribution to his own campaign included $4.5 million acquired through a personal loan. And where Trump is a modern media creation and Bloomberg is a cutting-edge billionaire, Wolf seems to come gliding out of the past. There’s a nostalgic, old-timey quality about the man.

    The week before our conclave in Mount Wolf, at an event in Center City, Wolf was meeting with a group of new immigrants. “I’m like you,” he said. “I’m applying for a job. I need you to vote, and you, all of you, will be my boss.” This was standard pabulum for any campaigning politician. But Wolf made every word sound heartfelt and earnest, like Jimmy Stewart in one of those movies where he uses all his aw-shucks integrity to save a small town.

    Wolf delights in rejecting cynicism, denying, for instance, that politicians are any more resistant to compromise than anyone else. “Human beings are the same,” he says, back on Mount Wolf. “The distribution of rationality is the same in Harrisburg as it is in any other human city.”

    Wolf offers this assessment with an assured, professorial air, as though inviting me to enjoy the view from atop his massive knowledge base. Beside him is his wife, Frances, who speaks in deep NPR-pitched tones and wears a flowing, brightly colored blouse. Together, sitting on one of their long reading couches and staring out benignly from behind stylish glasses, they seem like the kind of people who might overexert themselves while do-gooding.

    Mindful of the family’s roots on their namesake mountain, Wolf’s great-grandparents insisted their children stay in town once they had grown. Two Wolf brothers, George and Tom, dutifully built houses on adjoining lots. A generation later, Wolf’s father, his sister and a pair of cousins moved into consecutive houses on the town’s opposite end. What the Wolfs now call, without a trace of irony, “the four families” had a total of 14 children.

    The clan oozes noblesse oblige. Wolfs have served on boards and funded charities for more than a century. The William T. Wolf Center for Philanthropy, named after Tom’s father, sits about nine miles away, in downtown York. Bill Wolf actually started the profit-sharing plan featured in his son’s political ads. And each summer, Bill’s father, Earle, hosted dinners for the staff. Cars lined up carrying employees from Wolf Supply. Tom Wolf served as valet.

    In Wolf’s living room, I make an observation: “When you grow up with kids whose parents are employed by your family, you must get a sense of how important the business really is.”

    Wolf draws his head back, like he just heard a bum note, and gently corrects me. Those old dinner parties didn’t show him how important his family’s business was to its employees. Those dinners showed him how important those employees were to the family business, to their own families, to the community. “You see the value of what they do,” he says. “It’s not just ‘a job.’ They’re doing really important things.”

    WOLF’S SENSE OF MORALITY — his acute awareness of his privileged background and the responsibilities that accompany it — seems to have developed early. As a child, he was permitted to be childish. He rode his bike, built forts in the woods, and dreamed of being a professional baseball player. But at age 12, after telling him he was going to baseball camp, his parents pulled a bait-and-switch and packed him off to a rigorous Quaker-affiliated summer camp instead. By day, Wolf learned to swim. By night, he sat under the Pennsylvania stars, discussing big ideas with distinguished camp visitors like civil rights pioneer Ralph Bunche and historical novelist James Michener. “That camp,” he says, “is where I learned that I actually had a brain.”

    Wolf went on to an accomplished academic career, gathering a bachelor’s degree from Dartmouth, a master’s from the University of London and, in 1981, a doctorate in political science from MIT. Along the way he traveled an important byroad, temporarily leaving Dartmouth after his first year for a stint in the Peace Corps. His assignment: Orissa, India, where the young prince of Central Pennsylvania worked in poor villages, promoting the sowing of a higher-yielding rice. “It taught me self-reliance,” he says. “I couldn’t do anything. So I had to learn.”

    He learned the local language. He learned how to work with his hands, fixing farm equipment. His Peace Corps adviser, Richard Williams, remembers that Wolf lived like the natives, wearing sandals made from recycled tires, kneeling on the floor to eat. He stuck around four months beyond his two-year commitment, to see the higher-yielding crops harvested, then returned to the States more confident than ever and ready to resume his academic career.

    Wolf chose MIT for his doctoral studies and began working under Jeffrey Pressman, a talented young political scientist. A little over a year later, Pressman, just 33 years old, killed himself. “It was a shattering experience,” says Wolf. He says this with an air of finality, as if he doesn’t want to delve too deeply into the tragedy. Frances adds only, “It became a more serious time.” Pressman’s death, the Wolfs seem to feel, shouldn’t be turned into some biographical benchmark for the candidate.

    Wolf pondered the academic life. According to his closest friends from MIT, he could have stayed on there or taken a position at Harvard. He and Frances spent a spring afternoon strolling around Boston’s Copley Square, mulling the possibilities. They looked at the people and the buildings, the Romanesque Trinity Church. He tried to imagine a future there. But some other place still had a hold on his heart.

    “I went as far as you could get from Mount Wolf and still be on the face of the Earth when I was in that village in India,” he says, “and I stayed away for a number of years. And it was this place that drew me back.”

    WOLF’S RETURN TO small-town life was about more than loyalty and the tug of home. He had reasoned, for instance, that a stellar professorial career might land him a seat on the board of the Boston public library — eventually. Back at Mount Wolf, he could run the local library board within a few years. In this sense, moving back was a way of putting into practice all he had learned — a way of becoming a leader, in business and the wider community, at speed.

    Wolf joined the family business, working the forklift for a while before ascending into management. In 1986, about seven years after Wolf returned, his father retired, and the company looked to the son. “There was no passing of the keys,” says his mother, Cornelia. “Tom bought it. That’s the way it always was as the company passed through the family. The new generation paid the older one.”

    Wolf and his partners, cousin Bill Zimmerman and a cousin by marriage, George Hodges, took out a loan to get the deal done. All three had president titles in the new Wolf Organization. But in keeping with a tradition of low-key leadership, they planted their desks in the same open room, dubbed the Office of the Presidents: OOPS.

    The Wolf Organization was essentially a sophisticated warehousing operation, capable of storing vast numbers of kitchen cabinets and building supplies till sale. Over 20 years, the company’s annual revenue grew to $385 million, and the number of employees tripled, to more than 600.

    Meanwhile, Wolf made himself a force in local politics. He rallied the local business community around a cleanup of Codorus Creek. In 2006, Mike Johnson, the newly installed chair of the county Democratic Party, confessed a lack of good candidates. Wolf asked, “What process do you have in place to generate good ones?,” then helped create a pipeline for fresh political talent.

    As chair of Better York, a civic organization, Wolf brought in nationally respected cities expert David Rusk to study the troubled city. Rusk concluded York faced the same sorts of problems as Philadelphia — a poor public school system, a weak tax base, generational poverty — and prescribed a turnaround plan that York continues to pursue.

    Cleaning the local waterway, building a political party, advancing school reform — these are lofty pursuits for a guy selling kitchen cabinets. They also suggest that one of the most common knocks on Wolf’s ­candidacy — that he’s a political naïf in over his head — might be unfounded. In fact, it seems likely Wolf has long entertained the end game we’re seeing right now. “Looking back,” says Johnson, “I would expect that Tom was probably taking mental notes on all of this. Figuring out what works and thinking about how he might implement these same ideas as governor.”

    Still, compared to most other gubernatorial candidates, Wolf’s political résumé is a bit thin. In the primary, that might actually have worked to his advantage. Wolf didn’t have a lengthy record to attack, and his few brushes with scandal didn’t scare voters.

    In 2010, Wolf co-founded a defense fund for Steve Stetler, a former state representative who was ultimately convicted of misusing taxpayer money for campaign purposes. But within the Wolf narrative — he and Stetler were lifelong friends, youth soccer ­teammates — the whole affair turns into a sepia-toned tale of unflinching loyalty.

    His service as the campaign chair for former York mayor Charlie Robertson looks darker. In 2001, Robertson’s reelection run was interrupted by an indictment in the decades-old murder of Lillie Belle Allen. Prosecutors alleged that Robertson, a police officer during the 1969 York Riots, yelled “White power!” and passed out ammunition to white gang members. One of those men, Rick Knouse, told a grand jury decades later that Robertson gave him rifle shells and told him to “kill as many niggers as you can.” Knouse told the grand jury he used the ammunition to fire on a car in which Allen was riding.

    Robertson admitted to yelling “White power” but denied the rest. A jury acquitted him of murder charges, but Knouse was convicted of conspiracy in Allen’s homicide. The day after Robertson was arrested, Wolf publicly supported the mayor. “I was his campaign chairman during the primary,” he told the York Dispatch, “and if he wants me to do it in the general, I am willing to.”

    Thirteen years later, Wolf primary opponent Rob McCord sharply questioned Wolf’s shielding of Robertson. But voters didn’t seem to care. And they were probably right not to. According to Eugene DePasquale, now auditor general, then York County Democratic Party chairman, while Wolf publicly backed Robertson, he privately worked to coax the 67-year-old out of the race. “Charlie was a particular personality,” DePasquale says. “Tom was concerned, we were all concerned, that if Charlie felt he was being forced out, he would stay in the race just to spite people.”

    Prominent African-Americans in York have defended Wolf’s role in the Robertson matter so rigorously that he has gotten away with barely addressing the controversy. Wolf’s gambit worked, after all: Robertson did drop out. And political players in York think Wolf endured an uncomfortable public position to speed the exit of a divisive candidate.

    TO THIS POINT, Wolf’s biography resembles that of many of his ancestors: an advantaged son who attended the best schools, took over the family business and served his community. But in more recent years, as Wolf attempted to transition from businessman to politician, his story grew more complicated.

    By 2006, Wolf was ready to quit the family business. When I ask why, he lamely chalks it up to corporate succession planning. “I know I’m not going to live forever,” he tells me. His actions, however, suggest his true motivation was political ambition.

    Wolf and his partners brought in Weston Presidio Fund V — an investment firm from Boston that conducts leveraged buyouts, deals that involve large loans. The transactions are legal and common, but they have a tendency to saddle the bought-out companies with big piles of new debt, often leading to cost-cutting and bankruptcies. Democrats successfully defined Mitt Romney as a self-dealing richie partly by pointing toward his involvement in just these sorts of transactions.

    The investment firm put up $32 million, and a team of in-house managers, Wolf’s protégés, contributed another $5 million. But that wasn’t reward enough for Wolf and his two partners. So Weston and the new management team took out a $50 million loan from M&T Bank on behalf of the company. That freed up enough cash to pay Wolf and his partners about $20 million apiece. They also each got to hold onto an 11 percent share of the company.

    Ron Anderson, a professor at Temple’s Fox School of Business, looked over the public information on these transactions. “It’s not common to see a family business sell to a leveraged buyout company,” he says, “precisely because LBOs leave the business at greater risk.”

    He calls the deal “highly levered,” saying the transaction left Wolf’s old company with “a ton of new debt.” But he also sees how Wolf managed to sleep at night. “It doesn’t look to me like Wolf and his partners were out to screw anybody over,” he says. “He wasn’t reckless. You have to remember, in 2006 … everyone was cashing in home equity loans. This business surely looked healthy.”

    AFTER THE DEAL, the pace of Wolf’s life seems to quicken, and holes start to emerge in his official narrative. Wolf likes to say that Governor Ed Rendell approached him about becoming revenue secretary. But when I asked Rendell about this, the former governor told me that Wolf came to him first. “He said he was thinking of running for governor in 2010,” Rendell said, “and he needed the experience.” Rendell also told me that Wolf had wanted the job of state treasurer, not revenue secretary.

    Later, Rendell backtracked, writing in an email that Wolf “did not indicate he wanted to run for governor.” Rendell also changed his story on Wolf’s interest in the treasurer job, which is peculiar, since the Wolf campaign acknowledged that the candidate was first interested in the revenue position.

    When I asked Wolf about the discrepancies between his campaign narrative and Rendell’s earlier recollection of events, he waved them away, saying, “Uhh, I don’t remember.”

    The answer seems like a dodge, as if Wolf would prefer to pretend he was called to duty rather than acknowledge that he methodically built a CV for a future gubernatorial campaign. But there’s a trail suggesting Wolf is a lot more calculating than he lets on. He donated more than $250,000 to Rendell’s campaigns between 2002 and 2006. Rendell has acknowledged in the past that a big donation buys you a meeting (Wolf and his wife have donated more than $1.6 million to various state and county candidates since 1998), so it could be argued that Wolf didn’t just purchase this last primary election; he also sank some cash into his application for a position in Rendell’s cabinet.

    One of Wolf’s closest friends debunks the notion that Wolf, all pluck and innocence, Forrest Gumped his way into politics. “I wasn’t shocked when Tom decided to run for office,” says Drew Altman, a health policy expert who served in the Carter administration, and a Wolf friend of 40 years. “We had spoken many times over the years about different offices he might run for. Should he run for Congress? That sort of thing … ”

    Wolf served well, if briefly, as revenue secretary before resigning in 2008. He began appearing at statewide political events, like the annual Pennsylvania Society ball, in advance of an increasingly obvious 2010 gubernatorial run. He hired a pollster and finance people. Newspapers across the state covered his nascent campaign. Then, on January 20, 2009, as Wolf and his wife were in D.C. preparing to attend Barack Obama’s historic inauguration, the phone rang.

    Members of his old management team, the group that had stayed behind to run the company, were calling to tell him the bank would probably foreclose. And soon.

    The 2008 recession and the bursting of the housing bubble devastated the kitchen-cabinet business. The company’s new debt load made the crisis worse. Frances says she spent a couple of hours listening to one side of the conversation as her husband worked two phones, ringing up everyone involved.

    They didn’t know, initially, if the business might already be beyond saving. Maybe Wolf would give up on his political run and the business both. “Then there was the possibility,” says Zimmerman, “that maybe Tom would return to the company, and who knows? Down the line he could look again at a run.”

    Wolf returned, plowing $11 million of his own money into the operation and raising an additional $3 million-plus from each of his old partners. He used the cash to pay down and restructure the company’s debt and reinvented its mission, nudging his company from middleman toward sourcing and design. On his first day back, he told his employees: “We are now a 170-year-old start-up company.”

    Wolf could hardly have mounted a credible run in 2010 against the backdrop of the smoking ruin of the Wolf Organization, a company bankrupted by a loan taken out largely to pay him. But Wolf and his wife point in a more personal direction: “I think he had to face the people who work there,” says Frances, “who … ”

    “Who came to dinner,” says Wolf.

    A few days after the call, after Wolf had decided he had to return, he sat down with Frances and his campaign managers in Philadelphia and made it official. His run was over before it started. When the words were out, Wolf cried.

    “We really cried,” says Frances, “all together.”

    “I figured the dream of running for governor,” he says, “was pretty much dead.”

    AT ONE POINT during our interview, when Tom Wolf was discussing the details of his rebuilt business, he leaned forward, passionately, from his seat. “Yes,” he said, raising his voice. “I’m an amazing guy!”

    Those in the room burst into laughter before catching themselves, like climbers sliding down a mountaintop. Wolf’s wife started making clucking noises, as if her husband shouldn’t have said that. One of the campaign guys shouted, “That’s off the record!” And Wolf himself made sure I knew: He had been joking.

    We all soldiered on to another subject, but a certain awkwardness pervaded the exchange — a sense that a real meeting between candidate and voters is impossible. In the case of Tom Wolf, this seems like an opportunity lost. There is a politician in him, but his ad campaign’s conceit that he’s no ordinary politician seems true. There is little frame of reference for him in our politics: a self-funded candidate who came out of nowhere; a perfect stranger who appears to have shaped himself slowly, over decades, to the task.

    Before I left, I asked Wolf about his parents’ Honest Tom stories. He acknowledged them almost sheepishly — “Yeah, they keep talking about that.” But as a credulous eight-year-old, Wolf says, he figured the great Stan Musial might actually have known he was crashing the clubhouse. Even in debunking this Honest Tom story, Wolf creates a new one.

    Wolf and his wife offered me a brief tour of a few rooms on their first floor. The highlight was a look at some of the painted family portraits, which are a Wolf tradition. Wolf’s parents commissioned one of him at age 12, staring into a studious middle distance, an open book in his hand. In another portrait, painted by his wife, the adult Wolf appears worn, serious, with a melancholy expression in his eyes.

    “He looks sad,” I observed.

    I thought everyone might rush to disabuse me of this notion. The candidate can’t look sad. But the campaign people were in the other room. Frances merely said, “Yes,” and Wolf, a glint in his eye, played the moment beautifully, doddering his head a bit, as if tossed by the sadness he keeps inside. The instant conveyed a sense of play and seemed to acknowledge that behind the perfect campaign narrative, there is a real man.

    After our interview, as he walked me toward my car under darkening skies, Wolf wished me luck at avoiding the rain.

    “Good luck to you,” I replied.

    He accepted my offer of a handshake but laughed in a way that struck me as odd at the time, as if he thought I’d said something silly. And then it occurred to me: The circumstances that created Tom Wolf and brought him to the threshold of the governorship are like the trees his grandfathers planted out back: deeply rooted, and not a product of chance.

    Originally published as “Perfect Stranger” in the September 2014 issue of Philadelphia magazine.

    The post Tom Wolf: Perfect Stranger appeared first on Philadelphia Magazine.

    John and Bonnie Raines: The Whistleblowers Whose 1971 FBI Raid Anticipated Edward Snowden

    $
    0
    0
    John and Bonnie Raines, photographed by Wesley Mann

    John and Bonnie Raines, photographed by Wesley Mann

    John Raines sat in the family station wagon, parked in a dark lot on the Swarthmore campus, waiting to see if his wife would return to him, or if police lights would appear, flashing doom. In years past, he and Bonnie had sat together on this same front seat, three kids lining the back bench, and driven to his parents’ vacation house near Lake Michigan. Even now, back in Germantown, those three children slept soundly. Would they wake to find empty spaces where their parents used to be? Raines passed a couple of hours like this, his mind a crazy haze of worry, till finally a car drew near and he realized that it was Bonnie.

    The night of March 8, 1971, had passed so slowly. Now he needed to speed up. Raines flung open his door, popped the trunk, and helped transfer four heavy suitcases from this arriving car to his own — all part of their meticulous getaway plan. Once Bonnie was beside him in the passenger seat, he drove, glancing anxiously in the rearview mirror.

    The Raineses brought all this on themselves, after plotting to rob an FBI office in Media, Pennsylvania, motivated by their intention to stop the Vietnam War. The burglars, a total of eight Philadelphia peace activists, had planned this action for months on the third floor of the Raineses’ home. Now, the deed done, they came together in four separate cars at a small Quaker farmhouse just a few miles from the scene of the crime. They opened a bag of sandwiches and bottles of beer. Then they donned gloves and divided up what they’d stolen — a trove of 1,000 files from the FBI’s own offices.

    No one remembers who shouted first. But someone started reading aloud from a memo urging FBI agents to increase interviews of anti-war activists and student protest groups. “It will enhance the paranoia endemic in these circles,” the document stated, “and will further serve to get the point across there is an FBI agent behind every mailbox.”

    J. Edgar Hoover, they’d find, had ordered surveillance of anyone who’d expressed views critical of the Vietnam War or espoused civil rights, of hippies, intellectuals and black people. Much of the country still regarded Hoover as a heroic figure. But the truth, which the burglars now held in their hands, was that he’d run the bureau as a political suppression unit.

    As dawn neared, Bonnie drove her husband to a pay phone outside a gas station near Chestnut Hill. John called a reporter at Reuters and anonymously announced the burglary, reading from a statement he’d led in crafting. A break-in had been mounted, he intoned, by a group calling itself “The Citizens’ Commission to Investigate the FBI.”

    Raines got back in the car, settling into the passenger seat as Bonnie drove home. He breathed deeply. And somewhere along Lincoln Drive, all the anxiety he’d felt disappeared, quickly replaced by a sense of relief, of joy. John Raines filled the station wagon with his great, resonant laugh. He cackled. He hooted. He tore the announcement he’d read to the reporter into pieces, rolled down his window, and sent the bits of paper spiraling out into the air — a secret, celebratory confetti whirling in the wind of Fairmount Park.

    The Temple University professor and his wife planned, like the other burglars, to get the documents they’d stolen to the press and disappear — to take their role in this story to their graves. But sometimes even the gravest of secrets lasts long enough to take on new life — to be revealed, and wielded, in the waging of an old war.

    THE ISSUES WE’RE talking about as a country now,” says Ray Batvinis, a former FBI agent and now a historian at the Institute of World Politics, “are directly tied to debates we’ve had in the past.”

    The Media burglars never expected to be quite this current. But in June 2013, Edward Snowden, a 29-year-old contractor in the American intelligence industry, gathered as many documents detailing U.S. surveillance programs as he could and, like the Media burglars, gave them to journalists he trusted. The Snowden files revealed that virtually every American is under surveillance — phone calls, emails and Web histories all sucked into a vast data pool at the National Security Agency. The result is that we’re talking — just as we did in 1971 — about the American government spying on U.S. citizens.

    After 40 years of being hidden in history, John and Bonnie Raines emerged last January and admitted their roles in the break-in. Since then, the couple has maintained a steady schedule of public appearances to talk about a book, published last winter, and an accompanying documentary, released to theaters next month, about the Media heist. And they are lending their support, at every opportunity, to Snowden. Speaking up for a man dubbed a traitor and charged by the American government with espionage isn’t exactly how most senior citizens spend their retirements. So I met with the Raineses at their home, a cheery beige townhouse not far from Rittenhouse Square, to understand how telling their story created a fresh tale.

    They appeared at their front door smiling, dressed in layers against a fall chill. They ushered me into a living room flooded with sunlight, served a platter of dried apricots, and sat down for a long conversation. They retain a youthful air. Bonnie, 73, has a pixie haircut and deep dimples, giving her a girlish smile. She speaks more slowly, more carefully, than her husband.

    John, 81, is long, over six feet tall, with a full head of white hair. The son of a preacher, he is all vigor, his voice a resonant, authoritative baritone. Together, he and Bonnie still throw sparks. At one point, reminiscing about the importance of music in the civil rights movement, they sing a verse of “Oh Freedom” (“And before I’d be a slave/I’ll be buried in my grave”), and the harmony they strike is so immediate, so close and playful, it seems to capture the intimacy won through 50-plus years of marriage.

    They each underwent an awakening, a conversion experience, before they ever met. Bonnie was raised in what she describes as a “conservative” America, yet her parents encouraged her to think for herself, to read and learn. As she grew to understand the different rules that applied to women, minorities and white men, she reached for protest signs.

    John’s metamorphosis was more sudden. His father served as the minister of Minneapolis’s elite Hennepin Avenue United Methodist Church, which housed his family in a seven-bedroom mansion. He attended private schools. Future vice president Hubert Humphrey, mayor of Minneapolis from 1945 to ’48, was among those who sat at the Raineses’ dinner table. “I thought the country was a good place,” John says, “and my brothers and I would grow up to run it.”

    By the late ’50s, John had followed in his father’s footsteps, becoming an associate pastor in a Methodist church on Long Island. In 1961, he was contacted by a civil rights group seeking volunteers to join the Freedom Riders. John knew only what might fit on a brochure: In violation of Supreme Court rulings, segregated public buses, waiting areas and restaurants continued to operate. As a Freedom Rider, he’d travel alongside black citizens, in racially mixed groups, to force Southern officials to honor the law.

    He spent weeks traveling through states including Missouri, Arkansas and Louisiana, where he looked into the eyes of people who wanted to kill him. Cops, government officials, encouraged and perpetrated crimes — assaults, bogus arrests — against black people who wanted only to board a bus. His naïveté popped like a child’s balloon.

    “When I saw how power could be manipulated and abused in this way,” he says, “I was forever changed.”

    After he was arrested for his work with the Freedom Riders and emerged from a brief stint in a Southern jail, John Raines ventured to a restaurant near his parents’ Lake Michigan vacation house. His waitress, a young college student named Bonnie, had recently given up cheerleading at Michigan State University to join a student group dedicated to improving race relations. They married a year later.

    As John finished a doctorate in Christian social ethics from Union Theological Seminary, in New York, he took a post in Temple’s religion department in 1966. Bonnie worked in a day-care center. They started a family, participating in various protests against the Vietnam War with their young children. And in late 1970, when Haverford physics professor and outspoken activist Bill Davidon got a wild idea in his mind, he approached them first: “What do you think about breaking into an FBI office?”

    AT THE TIME DAVIDON raised his question, Philadelphia’s community of war protesters was perhaps the largest and most active in the nation. “The abundance of universities meant lots of draft-age kids,” recalls John Raines, “and the city’s Catholic and Quaker populations provided a base of peace activism. These were like two mighty streams that came together.”

    In this milieu, Hoover’s buttoned-up G-men — short-haired and beardless — were as conspicuous as plums on pear trees. Yet their presence cast a chill over the peace movement, and Davidon suspected the FBI’s files might contain evidence that the chill was the point — that Hoover had run afoul of the Constitution by actively stifling dissent.

    John and Bonnie Raines had three children under age 10 to consider, but they’d also long felt that being parents didn’t relieve them of their larger societal responsibilities. So Raines approached one of his brothers. Without sharing any specifics, he elicited a promise that the brother would take care of the kids if he and Bonnie wound up in jail. “There seemed so much to gain if we were able to succeed,” says John, “that we felt it was worth the risk.”

    John and Bonnie with their children, circa 1969.

    John and Bonnie with their children, circa 1969.

    The group Davidon recruited held nighttime meetings at the Raineses’ Germantown home. Bonnie cooked spaghetti and meatballs. The children played with the aspiring burglars till bedtime. John was pivotal in developing a strategy to sift through, organize and disseminate the information they’d gather if successful. He also took the lead in crafting the group’s anonymously delivered public statements. Bonnie Raines posed as a Swarthmore student on a class assignment to case the inside of the FBI’s field office in Media, which they chose for its low security. She disguised herself, donning big glasses and piling her hair up under a hat. She also kept her gloves on during her winter visit, to avoid leaving fingerprints.

    The whole story — how they studied the office, broke in, made off with the files, and all that happened afterward — is detailed now in 1971, the documentary receiving a nationwide release next month, and The Burglary, a book by journalist Betty Medsger, who was the first reporter to write about the contents of the files, when she was with the Washington Post.

    For the Raineses, the burglary came with a cost. Hoover assigned 200 agents to solve the case, directing most of those resources to Philadelphia. The couple spent several years after Media living with a constant hum of fear — forever anxious the front door would suddenly splinter at the foot of a federal agent.

    A sense of ease came slowly, as events unfolded. In 1972, Hoover died of a heart attack. In 1973, a routing slip found among the Media files, bearing the abbreviation COINTELPRO, proved to be one of the most important discoveries in American history.

    Subsequent investigative reporting, lawsuits and Senate hearings revealed the extent of Hoover’s Counterintelligence Program, an initiative that subverted the law and common decency. Hoover’s FBI kept files on the sexual indiscretions and porn habits of virtually anyone it encountered. The bureau sent an anonymous letter to Martin Luther King Jr. warning him that his extramarital affairs would be publicized if he didn’t kill himself. Agents infiltrated political protest groups, particularly black nationalists, inciting them to violence. And they even participated in the murder of Fred Hampton, a chairman of the Black Panther Party, who was shot to death by officers from the Illinois state prosecutor’s office as he slept, sedated with barbiturates by an FBI informant.

    By 1976, the shocking revelations had forced a series of reforms, chiefly strengthening the requirement that law enforcement present evidence of wrongdoing in order to obtain warrants for searches and wiretaps. As the evidence mounted in their favor, the Raineses got on with their lives. Bonnie obtained a master’s degree in early childhood education. John thrived at Temple. The burglary became something they noted with silent satisfaction, wordless glances they understood to be about Media. Then, in 1989, a reporter called.

    Betty Medsger had been a young journalist on the religion beat for the now-defunct Philadelphia Evening Bulletin around the time Raines joined Temple’s religion department. John, Bonnie and Medsger had known each other, and John admired Medsger enough to send her the Media files anonymously. When she phoned, 18 years later, to say she was going to be visiting old friends in town, he invited her over for dinner. He had no intention of revealing his role in the burglary, but time had so relaxed him that his secret slipped.

    Introducing his youngest daughter Mary, born after the burglary, to Medsger, he said: “When your mother and I had very important information about the FBI we wanted to give the American people, we gave it to Betty.”

    Medsger’s mouth opened wide enough to swallow a whole pie. Within weeks, she was on the phone with John and Bonnie, asking them to go public. They didn’t want recognition. But at the end of the Reagan ’80s, they both felt political activism was bleeding out of American society. They thought of their story as belonging to history — a lesson in what ordinary people can accomplish even in the face of a powerful government. They said yes, securing the participation of as many of the other burglars as they could. Medsger worked on The Burglary for more than 20 years, as family and career obligations allowed, till finally she locked in a January 2014 publication date. The Raineses could mark a spot on the calendar for their big reveal.

    Then Snowden happened. His appearance, alone and exiled in Russia, immediately colored their perceptions. “There was a sense that this changed things,” says Bonnie. “You couldn’t help but see the parallels.”

    “He gave shape to our story,” says John Raines, “as something current. The same fight we had before was being fought again. I felt an immediate affinity with what he had done.”

    COMING OUT OF HIDING was not entirely unlike the burglary itself — an escapade that involved patience, fortitude and daring. Medsger was publishing every detail, including their willingness to be separated from their children.

    “It still amazes me that they did it,” says 45-year-old Nathan Raines, one of their sons. “I respect it. I’m proud of them. But I am still pretty blown away that they put our lives, our happiness, as children, at such risk.”

    “Finding out was kind of mind-blowing,” says their eldest granddaughter, 20-year-old Elizabeth. “To me, they were Granddad and Nonnie. Her role in my life was that we went to her house all the time for dinner.”

    In addition to telling their kids and grandkids the whole story, John and Bonnie needed to accept the possibility, however slim, that they might face legal consequences. It was Medsger who discovered, deep into her research, that the FBI had classified their crime as a “burglary,” not espionage. She also found that the bureau had closed the case five years after the date of the theft, when the statute of limitations expired.

    Noted Philadelphia civil rights attorney David Kairys advised the burglars that the government’s reaction to their emergence would probably be menacingly vague. “I thought the first reporter covering Betty’s book would call the government for comment,” he says, “and I figured they’d say something like, ‘We’ll have to review the matter’ and leave everyone hanging.”

    The Raineses went to New York for a series of events timed to the book’s January 7th release. They awoke that day, after 40 years in hiding, to find how drastically their circumstances had changed. The New York Times was first to publish the FBI’s response: “[A] number of events during that era, including the Media burglary, contributed to changes to how the FBI identified and addressed domestic security threats,” a spokesman for the bureau said, “leading to reform of the FBI’s intelligence policies and practices and the creation of investigative guidelines by the Department of Justice.”

    Time, it seems, has the power to transmute crime into a public service. Criticism of the Raineses has been almost nonexistent, but I did reach out to one person, former FBI agent Patrick Kelly, who worked in the Media office at the time of the burglary. He still fumes over what the thieves did. “They shouldn’t be celebrated,” he says. “Who were they to decide what needed to be revealed?”

    Kelly’s own status, as a retiree, suggests what’s transpired: With all the people they embarrassed or damaged safely out of power, John and Bonnie Raines face just one real judge — history. This same dynamic has played out before. Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the Pentagon Papers, a top-secret study of U.S. decision-making in Vietnam, was initially indicted under the Espionage Act. More than 40 years after those charges were dismissed, he’s seen as a hero.

    The same day the Times story appeared, John and Bonnie Raines participated in a teleconference with reporters from around the nation and globe. The questions demonstrated respect, even admiration. The day took on a soaring, triumphant tone that culminated that night in New York, where 1971 received a private showing. Just after the credits rolled, some of the burglars — including John, Bonnie, and compatriots Keith Forsyth and Bob Williamson — took the stage. The audience rose as one and erupted, delivering a long, loud standing ovation, as if the illicit one-car parade John Raines mounted all those years ago, when he threw his secret confetti on Lincoln Drive, had finally attracted a crowd.

    Afterward, as the Raineses shook hands with members of the audience, they were introduced to a very special guest: Ben Wizner, one of Edward Snowden’s attorneys.

    By this time, Snowden’s saga was already evolving much as the Media heist had. Revelations of NSA spying had triggered further investigative stories stemming from the documents themselves and other sources. In one memo from the Snowden stash, NSA director Keith Alexander resurrected Hoover’s ghost, suggesting that porn habits should be investigated as a means of embarrassing potential targets. The public learned that NSA employees used their work tools to spy on wives and girlfriends. The CIA hacked Senate computers involved in an investigation of the agency’s own Bush-era interrogation techniques. According to another leak from the Snowden files, a program to infiltrate computer encryption systems, unlocking virtually every citizen’s data, was code-named Bullrun, after a great battle of the American Civil War. The suggestion was chilling — a government that framed its work in terms of war against its own people.

    What had also emerged, over time, was a truer sense of Snowden himself. He grew up in the Maryland suburbs, in a family of government employees, and set about following their path. He was motivated to action, like John Raines, after achieving a new view of power — not from the bottom, but nearer to the top. At a CIA post in Switzerland, Snowden saw agents use dirty tricks to cultivate informants. In later posts, including a crucial stint as a contractor with defense consultant firm Booz Allen Hamilton, he collected proof of the range of warrantless surveillance the government carries out on its own people. He finally decided to come forward when he saw director of national security James Clapper tell Congress, falsely, that the government wasn’t spying on Americans.

    If John Raines had felt an immediate affinity with what Snowden had done before, he’d since become an avowed fan. And so this meeting with Wizner, a thoughtful man with close-cropped black hair and a long face, had a convivial air, an exchange among compatriots fighting the same battle.

    Wizner was about to travel to Russia to see Snowden. The Raineses signed a copy of The Burglary, to be passed on to Snowden as a gift, in hopes he might use their story to envision his own happy ending.

    “From one whistle-blower,” John Raines wrote, “to another.”

    BY OCTOBER 2014, when the Raineses appeared at the International Spy Museum in Washington, D.C., the old activists and Snowden seemed to have struck up a long-distance relationship, to be holding hands across the water.

    “He comes up every time we speak,” says Bonnie Raines, “and we feel an obligation to speak up for him when he does.”

    “We think he should be pardoned,” adds John, “and allowed to come home.”

    In turn, Snowden had told an interviewer for The Nation that he had been unaware of what happened at Media till The Burglary was published, and lauded the burglars’ courage.

    His father, Lon, who lives in an Allentown suburb, had reached out to John and Bonnie by phone. He expressed admiration for what they’d done. They expressed their support. Lon followed up by attending Burglary-related events in Philadelphia and New York. “Ed’s family, including myself, has been inspired by the Raineses,” says Lon Snowden, by telephone. “I don’t think my son has a chance of finding justice on American soil for several years, but the story of the Media activists gives me hope that he will find happiness in exile, and I am confident the truth will ultimately prevail. It’s simply a matter of time.” (See “Edward Snowden’s Father Speaks” for more of Lon’s perspective on his son, the Raineses, and the price activists pay for exposing national secrets.)

    His son’s attorney, Ben Wizner, calls the Raineses a boon to his client’s case. “I think the positive reception they’re getting is an indication of how people are coming to view Edward Snowden with the passage of time,” he says. “As grandparents, as relatable people who did an extraordinary thing, they make Edward Snowden more relatable.”

    At the Spy Museum, the Raineses are eminently approachable, even entertaining. Standing at the lectern, his petite wife just in front of him, John Raines assures the crowd he’ll keep his remarks brief. “Bonnie will be my timekeeper,” he says.

    In response, Bonnie throws mock elbows into her husband’s ribs. “Ohhh,” Raines groans. “You should see my side after one of these things.”

    Raines retains a preacher’s flair for theatrics, his deep voice suggesting what a mountain might sound like if it could move its rocks, wood and earth to talk. He also retains a great joy. He is first to laugh at his own jokes. And as the night wears on, he even channels Hoover. When the FBI discovered the office had been cased, he says, it fixated on the woman who had come in saying she was a Swarthmore student. “J. Edgar Hoover, it was reported, would shout to his agents, ‘Find me that woman!’”

    Raines’s volume rises, mimicking Hoover’s anger. “Two hundred agents! ‘Find. Me. That. Woman!’”

    Raines pauses just long enough to let the cannon of his voice fade. Then he points at his wife and says, gently: “There she is!”

    He laughs right along with the crowd. But as at all events involving the Raineses, the tone soon turns serious. The night’s moderator, the museum’s executive director, former CIA case officer Peter Earnest, tells the assembled: “Be careful of the 800-pound gorilla in the room … Edward Snowden. The parallels between the Snowden case and the case we’re discussing this evening are quite extraordinary.”

    John Raines offers up the most passionate defense, delivering a riff he honed specifically to place Media and Snowden in the same frame. “A nation that allows itself to be governed by fear will be a poorly governed nation,” he says. “We were a nation governed by fear in the ’50s and ’60s. The fear back then was Communism. Communism was everywhere. It was the red tide. It was going to swamp freedom. And if you were a politician labeled as soft on Communism, it was the end of your career. That’s why we had to do what we did. Today, I think the same thing is going on. … If you’re a politician, you can’t come out strongly against the NSA. You can’t come out against what we now know the FBI and CIA are doing — thank God for Mr. Snowden — because if there should be another attack, that’s the end of your career. … We are a poorly governed nation today, I believe.”

    An octogenarian’s speech, at a Monday-evening panel in D.C., may seem of minor importance, but when Raines utters the words “Thank God for Mr. Snowden,” the crowd startles, and a few can even be heard gasping. There is a sense that we aren’t sitting and listening to an old man tell a tale out of history, but are watching that man pull the future into shape — watching as a notorious American is recast in the context through which history will one day see him.

    The whole story of John and Bonnie Raines seems to speak to this: the angry, the embarrassed, play their parts, hollering “Traitor!” or “Find me that woman!” But if the powerless, the hunted, the whistle-blowers, live long enough, they emerge to find something else waiting for them: an audience. When the panel at the International Spy Museum ends, the members of the crowd don’t just clap. They clap as hard as they can.

    “I’ve seen John and Bonnie speak a few times,” says David Kairys, the longtime Philadelphia-based civil rights attorney. “And there is a quality to the applause they receive that tells you people are genuinely affected. They are the sort of people we usually never get to see outside of a book or a movie screen, who did something genuinely heroic and important, and the crowd responds to that.”

    Medsger agrees, and perceives something still deeper at work. “The Raineses are,” says Medsger, “and I mean this in the nicest way, ordinary. They are grandparents. And they look like grandparents. And I think people stand there saying to themselves, ‘Well, if they’re this ordinary, maybe I could do something so extraordinary, too.’”

    What Medsger describes, what the Raineses have lived, is total transformation. They are a couple who spent 40 years in hiding from the U.S. government, only to emerge as the sort of people we might aspire to be. In this context, the ovations the Raineses receive seem not just appreciative, or admiring, but prescient. John and Bonnie Raines appear as heralds — of an inevitable American future, when another whistle-blower, perhaps gray by then, and ordinary, will find that his enemies are gone, and that stages and crowds await him in every city and town.

    Originally published as “These Are the Faces of American Revolutionaries” in the January 2015 issue of Philadelphia magazine.

    The post John and Bonnie Raines: The Whistleblowers Whose 1971 FBI Raid Anticipated Edward Snowden appeared first on Philadelphia Magazine.

    FBI on Renewed Effort in Imbo-Petrone Case: “The Idea Here Is to Start Fresh”

    $
    0
    0

    without-trace-opener-940x540

    Federal investigators opened a new effort this week to find out what happened to Danielle Imbo and Richard Petrone, the couple who went missing 10 years ago after departing a South Street bar. As the February 19th anniversary approaches, a 10-person squad comprised of federal and local police are going back through all the evidence,

    “The idea here is to start fresh,” says FBI agent Vito Roselli, who has been pursuing the case almost from its inception. “We’re looking at every tip, every lead, and we’re going to close off some possibilities and see what we’re left with.”

    The task force includes four FBI agents, as well as detectives from Philadelphia’s cold case and homicide units and law enforcement agents from Jersey state, Mount Laurel and Burlington county. The case is among the most mysterious missing persons cases in the country, involving two single parents who both went missing along with a truck.

    The 35-year-old Richard Petrone, who lived in Philadelphia, had been involved in an on-again, off-again romance with 34-year-old Danielle Imbo. That Saturday night, the pair had watched a band over a couple of drinks at Abilene’s, a South Street bar. They departed before midnight, telling friends Imbo had plans early the next day.

    Petrone, a Philly resident, was going to drive Imbo to her home in Mount Laurel. But neither they nor the truck Petrone was driving have ever been found. In a story published last year, Philadelphia looked at the case in its entirety, including several leads and an interview with Imbo’s estranged husband, Joe, who denied any involvement in the couple’s disappearance.

    In that same story, Roselli told Philadelphia that “every detective” has a case that haunts them, an open case they carry for years and want desperately to solve. The Imbo-Petrone case is his, and so he describes himself as “very grateful” for the new resources and attention, which he hopes might finally bring closure to the parents, children and loved ones Imbo and Petrone left behind.

    Follow @SteveVolk on Twitter.

    Previously: Without a Trace

    The post FBI on Renewed Effort in Imbo-Petrone Case: “The Idea Here Is to Start Fresh” appeared first on Philadelphia Magazine.

    Richard DeCoatsworth: How a Hero Cop Fell

    $
    0
    0
    Photograph by Josh Ritchie

    Photograph by Josh Ritchie

    Richard DeCoatsworth anticipated another great day. The 21-year-old rookie cop was six months into a new job he loved, and the sun shone bright that morning in 2007, through a cloudless September sky. He left his partner off at the courthouse and drove his patrol car west on Market Street toward the wilds of his district, where street vendors and drug dealers work in the open air.

    Around 51st Street, he passed a battered blue Buick going the opposite direction. Everyone inside seemed to stiffen. DeCoatsworth had seen experienced police make arrests — for drugs, illegal guns, stolen cars — by acting on such subtle cues. He pulled a U-turn. The driver accelerated and turned out of sight. DeCoatsworth hunted for maybe a minute till he saw the car, parked on Farson Street.

    Ideally, he’d call for backup before anything happened. But when he pulled alongside the Buick, blocking it in, three school-age kids emerged and started walking away. DeCoatsworth hopped out of his car and ordered them back, while glancing at the driver. As the kids returned, he felt secure enough to turn toward the police radio mounted on his right shoulder. A sudden blast struck him like a sledgehammer to the face.

    Reeling, he scrambled sideways and over the hood of a parked car. He drew his gun and peeked back across the street. The Buick’s driver, shotgun waving wildly in his right hand, ran north. By now, the left side of DeCoatsworth’s face felt like it was on fire. Blood pumped from his wounds and down his throat, forcing him to drink. He touched his jaw, assessing the damage. He found craters in his skin, but there was enough structure that he felt whole. He realized he could run.

    DeCoatsworth remembers little about the following minute. The gunman turned every so often to look over his shoulder, appearing shocked that the cop he shot was closing on him. Each time the man looked back, DeCoatsworth slowed and fired his gun, scared that if he didn’t, he might get shot again. He and the shooter ate up three city blocks, feet pounding pavement, till the gunman rounded a corner and disappeared from sight.

    DeCoatsworth slowed, dizziness taking him. He radioed in his location, lumbered to the stoop of a nearby house, and sat down. Blood soaked the front of his uniform, chest to pant legs.

    He looked up. The sky was as blue as he’d ever seen. He felt the deep irony of dying on such a beautiful day. When backup arrived, he waved his fellow officer after the shooter. He didn’t want the man who killed him to escape.

    In the coming days, the city in which Richard DeCoatsworth was born would celebrate the rookie cop and his gritty chase. He would be hailed as a hero. But just six years later, he’d be sitting in jail, accused of rape. Over time, that hero label would do what the gunman alone couldn’t, putting a target on his back and affording him a level of deference he couldn’t withstand. The result is a story about the burden of heroism, about how the love and carelessness of a city accelerated a young man’s fall.

    AFTER DECOATSWORTH WAS SHOT, it seemed that wherever he looked, a hand reached out to shake his. Veteran police, uniforms bedecked in command brass, posed for photos and expressed admiration for the hero. Fellow cops praised the rookie in the media, calling him a “ball of fire.” Citizens recognized him in the street — likely from his wounds — asked how he was healing, and thanked him for his service.

    Like some caped crusader, DeCoatsworth had come along just when we needed him most. The city’s murder rate reached epidemic levels that year, with more than one victim per day. In a two-month span, six police officers were shot, including Charles Cassidy, who died from his wound. In this context, the DeCoatsworth story provided inspiration. His mad dash, lauded as “heroic” by the department, led to the capture of gunman Antonio Coulter. And for a while, the name “Richard DeCoatsworth” appeared in every story on city violence — an almost ritualistic gesture, like touching a rosary bead as a bulwark against the dark.

    He spent eight days in the hospital, undergoing extensive surgery to his left lip, teeth and jawbone. In the ensuing months he underwent seven more operations, requiring a long recuperation. Love from the police and the public poured in, lifting his spirits. Said one supporter, “You could be mayor someday.”

    What surprised him was the hate. Some cops turned, unsmiling, and drifted away. Others openly challenged him — “Do you think maybe you should have waited for your partner?” — as if going solo made him deserving of his wounds. He’d later describe one cop as “slithering,” taking a winding path through a crowd to reach him.

    “Must be nice to be you,” the cop said.

    A lot of police shared the same sentiment. This one nodded toward the crowd. “Wait a couple of years,” he said. “See how much they love you then.”

    The camaraderie among police officers, the thin blue line, doesn’t eliminate infighting. “There is a lot of jealousy among police,” says former police commissioner Sylvester Johnson, who was still in command when DeCoatsworth was shot. “Police keep track of who is getting the best assignments, the awards. A lot of envy comes from that.”

    DeCoatsworth was dealing with the challenges of being “a hero,” a phenomenon receiving new attention. Researchers have noticed that heroes and the wider culture have a conflicted relationship. For starters, anyone labeled a hero immediately deflects the title, usually offeringsome variation of “Anybody would do what I did.” In numerous interviews at the time, DeCoatsworth insisted any cop would have run, face shredded, after a gunman.

    “It’s a defense mechanism, an act of social preservation,” says Matt Langdon, founder of the Hero Construction Company, a nonprofit designed to “promote heroism in today’s world.” “You cannot possibly say ‘Yes, I am a hero,’ or even, ‘Yes, I committed a heroic act,’ because you’d sound arrogant.”

    Another problem is that our language conflates different kinds of heroism. Figures like Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr. deliberate over long, dangerous courses of action and accept risk. People who commit a single impulsive act, like running into a burning building or chasing the man who shot them, never reflect at all. We have no word to differentiate between these kinds of heroism, but everyday heroes sense the difference: A sudden alarming event occurred, and they reacted so spontaneously that the decision felt almost involuntary, like a reflex. As a result, impulsive heroes look out on a community of people who define them by an act they can’t own, creating a feeling of disassociation.

    DeCoatsworth faced another complication: He was a rookie cop, part of a paramilitary organization in which mortal risk is expected. In his line of work, says Langdon, the true heroes are dead, having paid that ultimate price. “Some of his colleagues would undoubtedly hold him to this standard,” he says, “and feel he wasn’t worthy of being called a hero.”

    In the fall of 2007, the celebration of DeCoatsworth stood in contrast to the mourning for Charles Cassidy. That October, Cassidy walked into a Dunkin’ Donuts, unaware a robbery was under way. A gunman shot Cassidy in the head as he entered. The 25-year veteran and father of three cast a long shadow. As DeCoatsworth walked among fellow cops, he imagined what might be going through their minds: Who is this kid? Why did he survive?

    Physically, DeCoatsworth made slow, steady progress. When his rebuilt jaw healed, he relearned how to chew. He received prescription Percocet for pain. But the face is the part of our body most closely associated with our sense of self. His had changed forever. He knew he would never prefer the new visage that stared back at him from the mirror. He took solace in the way those scars and his job fit. But whenever some jealous cop would say how nice it must be to be a hero, the rookie felt his pain mount. “Really?” he’d think. “Must be nice to be you.”

    HE REMEMBERS THE OFFICE on Delaware Avenue, tucked into a featureless building. The psychologist asked him, roughly nine months after his shooting, a question: “Do you feel fit to return to duty?”

    “Yes,” DeCoatsworth replied.

    The police department agreed, and new commissioner Charles Ramsey allowed DeCoatsworth to participate in a long-standing departmental custom: As an officer wounded in the line of duty, he got to choose his next assignment. Most cops in his position pick something quiet or close to home. DeCoatsworth selected Highway Patrol — the most active, aggressive and prestigious squad in the city. Cops usually are assigned there after a decade or more of work, if ever. DeCoatsworth was just 22, with only six months of street experience.

    “I didn’t understand the politics,” he says, “and I’m not sure I would have cared if I did. I stay up nights now, going through these kinds of things. But at the time, I was so ambitious. It just seemed like the next logical step for me.”

    On his first night on Highway Patrol, DeCoatsworth and his partner arrested a murder suspect. News stories crowed that the ball of fire was back and still burning. Six months later, in 2009, he reached the pinnacle of his success: an invitation to sit next to Michelle Obama and Jill Biden at the State of the Union address.

    He remembers the night in fragments: The First Lady was gracious. The President spoke to him afterward, posed for a picture, and made him feel like he, Richard DeCoatsworth, was his sole point of focus. Secret Service agents sidled over, anxious to meet the kid who got shot and kept fighting.

    Philly welcomed him back with the same old mix of love and hate. Most cops greeted him warmly, asking to hear the details. But other cops sought ways to challenge him or offered the same backhanded compliment: Must be nice to be you. He needed a mentor, but none appeared. Today, he thinks that could have been his fault. “There might have been people who reached out to me,” he says, “but I didn’t recognize it at the time.”

    Being labeled a hero, he admits, changed him. “I suddenly fell into this category of people with giant balls,” he says. “I felt like I had something to live up to, and I wasn’t sure if I could. Maybe the next time I wouldn’t be so brave. So I just thought, ‘I can never back down from anything, ever.’ I wasn’t the initiator of any problems, but when people confronted me, I never backed down. And that went for everyone I met — people in the street and co-workers, too.”

    When I meet DeCoatsworth in January, he’s alternately warm and wary, unfailingly polite and studiously hardened. He walks into the office of his attorney, L. George Parry, in a big double-breasted winter coat, carrying doughnuts and coffee for the staff. He looks like a bear fresh from hibernation, rounding into fighting shape. The scars from his shooting are still there, some as thick as shoelaces, in a tangle that covers his left jaw. When he settles in at the conference table, he openly sizes me up, just like a cop.

    Over the months we spend talking, he shifts between frank admissions of his own failures and stout defenses of his behavior. At 29, reeling from a decade of unrelenting drama, he’s still sorting through it all. There was nothing in his youth to suggest the celebrity or infamy he’d eventually achieve. He grew up in a divorced household, splitting time between parents in Northern Liberties and neighborhoods along the Schuylkill. His mother worked in human resources at Temple University, his father in janitorial services. He played second base in city leagues, working just hard enough to pull down C’s at Benjamin Franklin High.

    After graduating, DeCoatsworth moved in with his dad, who’d relocated to Boca Raton, Florida. He put in one semester at Lynn University to please his father before moving back to Philly and entering the police academy. “I wanted to grow up,” he says. “I wanted to show my dad I could start a career.”

    The shooting didn’t dissuade him. But when he returned to active duty, he carried dual burdens — the mantle of hero, and a pain no one could see. Though he still had a Percocet prescription, DeCoatsworth insists he was never high on the job. He tried to take the pills responsibly, waiting until pain forced his hand. Edwin Salsitz, director for office-based opioid therapy at Mount Sinai Beth Israel Medical Center in New York, can’t speak directly about DeCoatsworth. However, he says taking painkillers “as needed” increases any patient’s chance of developing an addiction.

    “When you wait until you feel the need,” he says, “you experience these dramatic swings. There’s pain, anxiety, depression. You associate those unpleasant feelings with your injury. But you’re feeling withdrawal.”

    An addiction had sneaked up on DeCoatsworth, causing him to feel beyond the need for help. His career faltered shortly after his appearance at the State of the Union, with the tenor changing publicly in October 2010, when Ivy League professor and media pundit Marc Lamont Hill alleged in a lawsuit that DeCoatsworth had subjected him to an illegal, racist traffic stop. Hill’s account reads like a case study in police-citizen tension: He describes himself as anxious and silently praying. DeCoatsworth and his partner both said Hill’s nervousness put them on alert.

    “We see this all the time,” says Kelvyn Anderson, executive director of the Police Advisory Commission. “The preconceptions each side brings to the encounter lead to this inevitable reality.”

    The city paid Hill go-away money — just 15 grand. In hindsight, DeCoatsworth — half Puerto Rican, half Irish, with a Jamaican great-grandfather — may have been sandbagged. In Hill’s writing on the subject in the Philadelphia Daily News, he never mentioned that the other officer was black.

    Hill’s complaint sparked a reevaluation of DeCoatsworth, however. The narrative shifted, and the media engaged in an age-old pastime — taking the hero we’d built up and knocking him down. Was Philly’s model cop really a bad cop?

    The press sifted through his citizen complaints. Individually, none raised alarm. But a pattern seemed to have developed: Of the 11 case files DeCoatsworth ultimately had in his Internal Affairs folder, each marking an incident that required investigation, 10 occurred in the roughly two-year period after he returned to work. Had something changed? The most startling evidence was a pair of shootings that suggested the hero was struggling.

    THE QUESTIONS ABOUT what happened still offend him. DeCoatsworth was in danger. He drew his weapon and fired with cause. What else could he have done?

    In the first shooting, in 2009, he wanted to clear a corner, something cops do in drug-trafficking areas all the time. As DeCoatsworth would later tell investigators, the crowd at Lindley and Warnock started to move, and Anthony Temple, a mentally ill man, grabbed for DeCoatsworth’s gun. He shot Temple during the struggle.

    In his attorney’s office, DeCoatsworth stands up to demonstrate this moment for me. He moves slowly, incrementally, as if frame by frame, so I can see the shooting unfold. I stand in for Temple, and we’re facing each other, wrestling, when DeCoatsworth pulls his trigger finger. He says Temple then wandered away, wounded.

    But Internal Affairs, which investigates every police shooting, came to a different conclusion about the encounter. They found that DeCoatsworth shoved Temple away hard enough to turn him around. Only then — with DeCoatsworth in control of his weapon and his assailant some distance away, with his back turned — did the young cop open fire. (Temple allegedly grabbed at another officer’s gun when backup arrived and was shot to death.)

    The written transcript of the IA investigator’s interview with DeCoatsworth contains one particularly telling exchange: “What would you say if I told you the male had an entrance wound to the right buttock?” the investigator asks.

    “I can’t say,” DeCoatsworth responds. “From what I remember, we were facing each other the whole time.”

    Five months later, DeCoatsworth shot a man in similarly contested circumstances, while on patrol with a partner in North Philadelphia. The pursuit of a suspected gunman ended when a different man, John James, allegedly accelerated towards DeCoatsworth on a motorcycle. Again, DeCoatsworth reenacts this critical moment with me. He unholsters his imaginary weapon, slow-motion dodging to the side and firing just as the cycle approaches. DeCoatsworth says no forensic evidence was presented in court to dispute his version of events. He encourages me to look for some.

    Several days later, I call attorney Jamie Funt, who shows me a PowerPoint presentation he used at James’s trial, some of which DeCoatsworth didn’t witness. The photographs reveal a small round scar, consistent with an entry wound, in the back of the motorcyclist’s leg. A bigger, more ragged scar, indicating an exit wound, marks the front. By that account, DeCoatsworth shot a second man who had ceased to be a threat to his life.

    Even after hearing about Funt’s presentation, DeCoatsworth sticks by his account. But the discrepancy between the forensic evidence and his confident retelling raises a specter — the possibility that DeCoatsworth himself was haunted.

    Sandra Bloom, a psychiatrist in Drexel’s School of Public Health, won’t comment on DeCoatsworth specifically but says having memories that conflict with the evidence is consistent with post-traumatic stress disorder. “We see that a lot,” she says. “In clinical settings, patients often remember traumatic events differently than how we might even know, from other evidence, they occurred.”

    Sufferers of PTSD are subject to hyper-vigilance and can sometimes be triggered into explosive behavior by stimuli that remind them of their original trauma. DeCoatsworth rejects any suggestion that he had PTSD and has never been diagnosed with the condition. A month after his shooting, he says, he had no flashbacks, no nightmares. But his lack of awareness might be expected. “People who are self-medicating,” says Bloom, “particularly people on opiates, often display the behavior associated with PTSD without feeling the symptoms. That’s because opiates create this conscious feeling of well-being, but the altered brain function is still there.” The Percocet may have rendered DeCoatsworth the last to know.

    He spent a few weeks on desk duty, but after hearings for each shooting, the department cleared him to return to the streets. The city ultimately paid James, the motorcyclist, a $1.5 million settlement, and DeCoatsworth was transferred from Highway Patrol to the Marine Unit, a peaceful assignment with little chance for violence. Before a month had passed at his new post, DeCoatsworth got into a fistfight with one of his co-workers. That was the end. Following one of the most widely talked-about “secret” meetings in departmental history, the former hero cop emerged a retiree, receiving disability retirement for his original injury.

    Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey later blamed himself for bringing DeCoatsworth back too soon, especially to such an active squad. “We didn’t do enough to help this kid,” he told the Daily News.

    At the time, the admission seemed admirable, but Ramsey probably went too easy on himself. The Philadelphia Police Department had an officer in its midst, one who’d inspired the city, recalling shootings in a manner inconsistent with the way the science suggests they occurred. Yet no one got him the help he needed, or dismissed him, after one shooting or even two. Department brass only acted with any finality after he got into a fight with another cop.

    “These are the threads of what I think should be anybody’s concern with respect to officer-involved shootings,” says Kelvyn Anderson, from the Police Advisory Commission. “We have to begin unraveling the fact that police officers are human beings, and how we treat and care for them in the aftermath of a shooting also speaks to how we care for the public they are supposed to be guarding.”

    Commissioner Ramsey declined requests for an interview through a spokesperson, who said in an email that the department’s experience with DeCoatsworth triggered no changes in policies on trauma counseling or the monitoring of painkiller use.

    THE CLASSIC HERO’S JOURNEY, described by thinkers like Joseph Campbell and retold in countless films, from Star Wars to The Hunger Games, starts when the protagonist, a seemingly ordinary person at the time, receives a “call to adventure.” The hero then crosses a threshold, exiting the known world for a new land and a series of trials. In this context, Richard DeCoatsworth received his call when he was hired by the Philadelphia Police Department. He ventured to the other side of the thin blue line. And by 27, he’d faced more dramatic trials — a gunshot wound to the face, an ongoing addiction, job loss — than most people endure in a lifetime. He also watched with growing shame as the media lengthened his name to “Richard DeCoatsworth, the former hero cop who once sat next to Michelle Obama. … ”

    “I felt like I’d let everyone down,” he says. “Every story about me, my name was being used to embarrass the president of the United States. Like somehow he made a mistake. I hated myself.”

    People still recognized him in the street — only now they kept their distance. When he looked in the mirror, his life and the dense web of scars that interrupted his face no longer fit. “I felt like I lost my identity,” he says. “When I was a cop, getting shot made sense. Now I felt like I got shot for nothing.”

    Some days, DeCoatsworth worked in his dad’s janitorial-supply business. Most days, he avoided other people altogether. He also reached an important realization: The Percocet he’d taken for six years — more than 2,000 days — had taken him. “I’d had a prescription,” he says. “But when things kept going so badly for me, I thought, ‘What am I doing still taking these pills?’”

    He tried quitting cold turkey, but withdrawal pain eclipsed his will. He’d chased after a gunman as blood ran in sheets from his face. Now a little bottle beat him to the floor, the pills inside offering him his only respite from shame and judgment.

    DeCoatsworth speaks sparingly about what happened next. His attorney expressed concern that the D.A. might use his words to press new charges. DeCoatsworth opted to let the vast amounts of paperwork from his case do the talking.

    He made news again in February 2012 for allegedly threatening a neighbor, though no charges were filed. A year later, in May 2013, police responded to a domestic disturbance involving his on-again, off-again girlfriend. And around this time, DeCoatsworth met Taisha Viera, a woman who advertised online as an escort.

    DeCoatsworth had grown so tired of people judging him that he sought time in the company of someone who wouldn’t judge him at all. Court records and interviews with Viera’s neighbors suggest she and DeCoatsworth quickly escalated beyond business. DeCoatsworth hung out in her house for long stretches of time, presumably while customers came and went. But on May 17th, Viera and another woman, Samantha Velazquez, accused him of rape. Within hours, police sent a SWAT team to the former cop’s Port Richmond house, arresting him and confiscating several guns. The prosecution later argued that DeCoatsworth had been ready to make his “last stand,” ignoring the obvious question: Why didn’t he?

    Here is where the story of Richard DeCoatsworth becomes a tale — a kind of civic theater piece in which nuanced facts are replaced by broader fictions. His bail is a case in point: Suspected felons, if considered flight risks or dangerous, are commonly held without bail. DeCoatsworth was held for $60 million, a figure so cartoonish it can only be explained as a political stunt requested by District Attorney Seth Williams.

    DeCoatsworth would spend 16 months in prison, awaiting trial on more than 30 criminal counts he adamantly denied, including rape and human trafficking. Prosecutors argued that he forced Velazquez and Viera to prostitute themselves at a Days Inn. From there, he allegedly drove the girls to Viera’s house, where he forced them to snort heroin and raped them at gunpoint.

    As law enforcement continued their investigation — examining cell-phone records, witness statements, text messages — DeCoatsworth sat behind bars.

    SOMETIME IN FEBRUARY 2014, in a conference room for attorneys and inmates at the Curran-Fromhold Correctional Facility, Richard DeCoatsworth met with Chuck Peruto Jr., the storied Philadelphia attorney.

    He had, after nine months in jail, made unsteady peace with his predicament. He says he got along well with cellmates and spent a lot of time reading the Bible. But he was a former cop in prison, which meant he kept his back to the wall and his head on a swivel.

    The time also wore on his family. Out of sheer anxiousness for something to happen, Mark DeCoatsworth had urged his son to fire the lawyer he’d retained, Parry, and hire Peruto. His father was helping with his legal bills, and DeCoatsworth felt obligated to take the advice. Now Peruto was here, grinning and fingering his cuff links. “Who’s the best?” he asked.

    DeCoatsworth knew Peruto well enough to understand this question had one answer: “You are,” he said dutifully. “What’s going on?”

    “I’m, eh, I’m getting you out of here,” Peruto said, pacing his words for dramatic effect. “You’re, uh, you’re getting out.”

    “How’s that?” DeCoatsworth asked.

    Peruto had negotiated a plea in which the most serious charges, including rape, would be dropped. DeCoatsworth’s potential sentence would be reduced from 20-to-40-years to time served. DeCoatsworth felt uncomfortable with the deal, but a few days later, he took it. As he was ushered back to jail to await sentencing, the prison van driver turned on the radio. His story led the news: Richard DeCoatsworth, the former hero cop, admits to being a criminal.

    In that moment, he decided to withdraw his plea. The charges against him were reinstated, and he rehired Parry to craft his defense. The media portrayed DeCoatsworth’s behavior as erratic, wondering if he was “crazy” and labeling him a “drama king.” But jail time had forced DeCoatsworth to kick the pain pills, and he knew that if he pleaded to anything in court, it would be interpreted as an admission to everything.

    Five months later, Jim Stinsman — the third prosecutor to handle the case — withdrew all the charges related to Velazquez and Viera. The statement released by the D.A.’s office cited a “massive reinvestigation” and concern over a lack of evidence. Discovery materials in the case suggest prosecutors had two problems — little evidence against DeCoatsworth, and additional information that contradicted their premise.

    Rather than forcing the women into prostitution, text records suggested that Viera sought to negotiate a fee split with DeCoatsworth, presumably to serve as her driver and muscle. She even seemed to invite his participation. “U want to make … money this weekend,” she asks at one point. “I’m talking about a thousand in.”

    Viera, who was the first of the women to speak with authorities, appeared to set up the “date” with clients at the Days Inn. Velazquez told police that DeCoatsworth threatened them on the way to the hotel. However, the other woman who was there, Jackie Perez, told police DeCoatsworth didn’t threaten them at all.

    Building a believable timeline also proved problematic. The first date the accusers gave proved unworkable when text and phone records indicated that DeCoatsworth couldn’t have been present. The prosecution scrambled for another date, then finally settled on a third one.

    There is more — a pattern of inconsistencies a defense attorney would exploit. Experts have estimated that 92 to 98 percent of rape and sexual assault accusations are true, rendering the decision to withdraw charges painful. But in this case, a wide range of evidence suggests that, in front of a jury, the flaws in his accusers’ stories would have seriously undermined their credibility.

    The case against DeCoatsworth continued to weaken. In May 2013, just two weeks after the former hero cop’s arrest, police picked up a man named Manuel Maldonado on a complaint by Viera and her mother. The women told police that Maldonado, a convicted drug dealer, appeared at their door with a gun. Viera quoted him to police: “If you testify against Richie, I’m gonna kill ya’s.” Assistant District Attorney Ashley Lynam, then in charge of the case, marched into court: “When the FBI went through Mr. Maldonado’s cell phone,” she stated, “he absolutely knows who Mr. DeCoatsworth is.”

    But no evidence surfaced to prove DeCoatsworth and Maldonado had ever met, let alone conspired to intimidate witnesses. In his police statement, Maldonado denied any involvement and described the accusation as retaliatory for an incident in which he struck Viera’s mother.

    At some point, prosecutors must have realized they had no case or were outright duped, because in a city where witness intimidation is epidemic, they offered Maldonado a sweet deal: They’d withdraw the most serious charges if he pleaded to lesser ones. Maldonado dodged a potential 40-year sentence and walked with time served. “I didn’t even know Richard DeCoatsworth,” Maldonado tells me in a phone interview. “I took the plea because I’d already spent a year in jail and I wanted out.”

    Velazquez didn’t respond to repeated requests for an interview, and Perez couldn’t be located. Viera, reached by phone, asked for money; informed she wouldn’t be paid, she never gave her account. But if the allegations against DeCoatsworth were indeed false, the motive might be found in her words. The morning after the rapes allegedly occurred, she seemed jealous when she texted DeCoatsworth: “Go have fun with that bitch.” The reference to “that bitch” could be to one of the other women.

    District Attorney Seth Williams responded to interview requests with a written statement focusing on the single charge against DeCoatsworth his office made stick — a separate instance of simple assault against the former cop’s girlfriend, resulting in a sentence of 18 months’ probation.

    “My heart goes out to the friends and family of Mr. DeCoatsworth’s victim,” the statement reads. “Her abuser is now being supervised and treated. Our expectation and our hope is that she, and our City, is safer as a result.”

    The DeCoatsworth case changed hands twice. The initial prosecutor, Joe McGlynn, no longer works for the district attorney; the second, Ashley Lynam, has since moved to another department. Jim Stinsman, the final lead attorney, had the case just long enough to review the evidence before withdrawing all charges.

    The D.A.’s office, citing long-standing policies against discussing evidence outside public court proceedings, would only speak to me about the general process of investigating sexual assault. Extrapolating from that interview to the DeCoatsworth case, the prosecutors likely gathered all of the information listed here within a few months of DeCoatsworth’s arrest. Why did they hold him for an additional year? Politics may have played a role. They’d hit the ex-cop with 30-plus charges and asked for $60 million bail. The plea DeCoatsworth was offered, like the one Maldonado took, was likely the prosecution’s best shot at avoiding embarrassment.

    Squeezing the same guy who’d run three blocks with a shattered jaw, however, was a miscalculation. The former cop had lost everything but his grit.

    THIS POINT IN THE HERO’S journey is sometimes referred to as “the abyss.” The hero is consumed by a kind of death, either literal or purely symbolic. The story appears over, ending in defeat.

    In this context, DeCoatsworth is right on time — out of prison, yet trapped by his past. The rape charges were withdrawn, but many people will always presume him guilty. He’s also on probation for that simple assault, a charge he fought in court and lost. Judging from investigative files, he really did act as a hooker’s chauffeur, at least once. Prior to his arrest, he texted other prostitutes, offering his driving services to them, too. The police retirement benefits he receives covered basics, but not the drugs he’d come to need.

    His fall was so stunning that his past has been mined for clues to suggest he was always a bad guy — that the hero role was a ruse. Even his shooting remains the subject of speculation. Did he stop the man who shot him, Antonio Coulter, because of a personal dispute? For years I had heard rumors that DeCoatsworth and Coulter were romantic rivals seeing the same girl. No one could produce any evidence.

    So I wrote Coulter, in January, and he invited me to visit him at the State Correctional Institution at Rockview, where he’s serving a 36-to-72-year sentence. A former reform-school quarterback, the 28-year-old still appeared lithe and youthful. He told me I wasn’t the first to seek his story. “A reporter from the Inquirer wrote me,” he said, “but I never wrote back. I was scared no one would believe me.” Between bites of a vending-machine hamburger, he talked. “We was selling weed,” he said.

    Coulter claimed DeCoatsworth supplied him with pot he sold. He kicked the bulk of the proceeds back to the cop but started skimming money. DeCoatsworth pursued him, seeking repayment. The gunman provided me with a list of people he said could corroborate his story, including his mother. But the witnesses I reached didn’t support his version. His mother said she had “no idea” if the pair knew each other. In a follow-up phone interview, Coulter admitted he’d lied.

    The origins of these stories seem easy enough to divine: The love-triangle rumor arose from station-house jealousy, and these days, Coulter feels on level enough footing with the fallen cop to attack him again, this time hoping for a reduced sentence.

    Observers of DeCoatsworth’s story, even the guy who shot him, see him in a brand-new way. But DeCoatsworth remains bound to his old reflection. The theme surfaces when I interview his best friend, Justin Pierce, a Philly kid who works in Los Angeles as a personal trainer. “It’s amazing to me how little he’s changed,” says Smith. “I went to visit Richard in prison and he was the same guy. Very calm. Very easygoing.”

    I ask DeCoatsworth why he put up a front for the man he called his best friend. He offers various answers to the question but eventually admits, “I still feel like I have to be that tough cop.”

    He sounds, suddenly, like a mixed-up kid — still pushing an image of himself that no one believes in anymore. Little wonder he’s stunted. Most young men spend their 20s establishing their independence. He spent his formative years lost in a fog of dramatic events.

    He has relocated, again, to Boca Raton, where he lives with his father. He has no idea what to do for a career, and the ambition that once drove him to the Philly P.D.’s most elite unit is either gone or lacks any viable outlet. Where would he like to be in, say, 10 years?

    “Probably on a boat,” he responds. “Out on the ocean. Away from people.”

    His instinct for escape is understandable, and speaks to the trouble in which he now finds himself. “I don’t want this to be the story,” he told me, “about the guy who was traumatized and fucked up on pills.”

    DeCoatsworth’s admonition could drive us in different directions: The blame for his downfall starts with that gunshot and relies on his own poor choices, but others are responsible, too — from the district attorney who kept him in jail with weak evidence, to the police department that neglected to care for him, to the society that holds its heroes up to the light all the better to expose their flaws.

    DeCoatsworth received the hero tag with a single impulsive act. But even the leaders who display courage across a lifetime, who save people and nations, are scrutinized for their most intimate and personal shortcomings. This wider view of DeCoatsworth’s story underscores the danger of hero worship — for the society that sets itself up to be disappointed, and for heroes themselves.

    But for Richard DeCoatsworth, none of that matters. Because for him, from the moment his face first went wild with pain right up to now, nothing’s really changed.

    He got shot.

    And he needs help.

    Originally published as “Good Cop, Bad Cop” in the May 2015 issue of Philadelphia magazine.

    The post Richard DeCoatsworth: How a Hero Cop Fell appeared first on Philadelphia Magazine.

    Rock Lititz Studio: Where Taylor Swift and Usher Get Ready to Play

    $
    0
    0
    James “Winky” Fairorth inside his studio’s cavernous rehearsal space. Photograph by Eric Prine

    James “Winky” Fairorth inside his studio’s cavernous rehearsal space. Photograph by Eric Prine

    The ducks in the park, the old-timey clock at the town’s heart, the rustic storefronts and occasional horse-drawn carriage suggest time has stopped here. Lititz, Pennsylvania, a small town about nine miles north of Lancaster, recalls the Main Street USA of Norman Rockwell, a place where shopkeepers maintain odd hours and post little hand-drawn signs in the windows when they’re CLOSED FOR THE WINTER.

    Yet there’s another side to Lititz, one that’s visible about a mile from its center: “The Cube,” a black box rising from an old cornfield like a monolithic spaceship, and symbolizing one of the most unique businesses in the entertainment industry.

    U2. Katy Perry. Lady Gaga. Elton John. Maroon 5. Billy Joel. Justin Timberlake. Usher.

    If they sing to the delight of millions, they’ve likely worked with one of the companies in this quaint community of 9,400, or rehearsed in that box or soon will. Lititz is home to a group of artisans who build the entire apparatus of a major concert tour — sound systems, stages, sets, lights and visual effects. Last September, that decades-old legacy culminated in the Cube — Rock Lititz Studio, a $7 million arena-like facility where the world’s most sought-after acts come to perfect their shows. (Among the most recent clients: Taylor Swift, who visited in April to rehearse for her summer tour, including two nights at the Linc this month.)

    So how did a crucial part of the music business come to be associated with a town so redolent of 1950? The answer lies in a story about a perfect partnership — about the ways in which Pennsylvania farm country and rock-and-roll were made for each other.

    I MEET ROCK LITITZ STUDIO co-owner James “Winky” Fairorth at Rouge, where the host greets him by name. He slides into a seat at the window, fresh from a personal training session nearby, looking very much like a rock star himself — fit at 50, bedecked in black jeans, bulky black boots, and stacks of necklaces and bracelets.

    Fairorth started attending Millersville University in the early ’80s, but as a Philly kid, born in Germantown, he was a little freaked out by the open country. “I used to call my mother and say, ‘What am I doing here?’” he recalls. “‘There’s nothing here. Literally nothing!’”

    Fairorth’s mother encouraged him to stay, and in time he learned of the local rock industry that flourished there. In the early ’60s, two Lititz-born brothers, Roy and Gene Clair, received a sound system from their father as a gift. They parlayed that present into a career, from parties at Franklin & Marshall College to gigs with Frankie Valli and the Four Seasons, and eventually the Rolling Stones and beyond. As time passed, a scene grew around them. Michael Tait, an Australian who’d been a production manager for YES started a lighting company in 1978; shortly afterward, production designer Tom McPhillips arrived, and later founded Atomic Design.

    Fairorth bum-rushed Michael Tait for a job without any great forethought. (“I was a college student. I was broke.”) He soon discovered that rock-and-roll is a “cottage industry” in which small bands of creatives conjure up new designs to make artists look and sound their best. The problem-solving DIY ethos of the music biz and the companies in Lititz inspired him, and he eventually became Tait’s right-hand man, partner, and now co-founder of Rock Lititz. In fact, this project represents the new Lititz Rock-tocracy. Gene Clair passed away in December 2013. (Elton John dedicated a subsequent performance of “Candle in the Wind” to him.) Michael Tait is semi-retired. Now Fairorth and Gene Clair’s son, Troy, are charting a course into new territory. (Clair Solutions is designing the sound system for the Fillmore, the new live-music venue in Fishtown.)

    For decades, companies in Lititz built big, impressive stuff. The moving platform that slowly carried Justin Timberlake out past the front rows of the crowd on his last tour? The massive bank of video screens that surrounded Jon Bon Jovi in concert? The stage on which Janet Jackson suffered her Super Bowl nipple slip? Lititz’s informal family of firms made all of that and more. And Rock Lititz offers a new service — a place to work out all of the kinks, and the largest dedicated rehearsal facility in the world.

    “ROCK LITITZ ISN’T NECESSARY,” says Fairorth. “It’s strictly a luxury. And that’s what makes it great. We did it because it’s the chance to do something really cool.”

    Until now, major music acts have had little choice but to rehearse shows by renting some arena in a small market, loading in and out of the facility — at great expense and hassle — between tractor pulls and circuses. Even then, they often can’t erect the full splendor of their multimillion-dollar stage shows in those modest facilities. “The work gets done,” says Fairorth, “but it’s very stressful.”

    Rock Lititz, with its ample space and luxury, converts that stress into a pleasant experience. Tech crews work for a month or more, honing visual and audio effects down to the microsecond before the stars fly in to rehearse the full show.

    I drove into the old cornfield to tour the 100-foot-tall, 52,000-square-foot facility in February, just after Nicki Minaj had exited. Inside the Cube is an operation in which every detail is maximized for convenience and downtime caused by technical hiccups is minimized. In a small-market arena, any malfunctioning laser or faulty pyrotechnic effect might start a chain of phone calls and FedEx shipments. At Rock Lititz, the local craftsmen who built all this gear can be on hand in 20 minutes, fixing the problem.

    Rock Lititz also includes snazzy amenities: a studio for dance rehearsals, a massive A-list dressing room, and an inviting catering hall, all outfitted in furniture created by area artisans. Most of the facility beyond the cavernous rehearsal space features big windows that showcase the lush green fields outside and admit great washes of natural light. For talent and tech crews used to working like salamanders in the windowless bowels of an arena, Rock Lititz is heaven.

    The studio draws business from across the live entertainment industry, but roughly half its clients are rock musicians. “These are the leading sound and staging companies — they knew how to get it right and they did,” says Jake Berry, a veteran production director for the Rolling Stones, Black Sabbath and U2, who recently used the Cube to finish all the technical work for their tour. “The facility is beautiful, the natural light was a welcome relief, and they got all the specifications right to make working there easy. When you’re not in New York, when you’re not in the hustle and bustle, you get a lot more work done.”

    Usher, pop music’s reigning song-and-dance man, used the mirrored studio to choreograph new moves in privacy, then emerged, took the few steps necessary to reach the stage, and tried them out. Few stories like this ever surface, because one of the key services the Lititz companies offer is privacy, through strict nondisclosure agreements. But Fairorth says he knows Usher well enough to feel comfortable sharing an insider tidbit. The experience of rehearsing at Rock Lititz was special, the singer told him. Out here in the country, there’s no media, no promotional appearances, no radio stations to visit or hands to shake. The rolling green grass outside the window, the quiet, allowed Usher the sense of space and peace it takes to be creative in the first place.

    “The show could be his whole focus,” says Fairorth. “ Now, is all of that necessary? No. But it is really cool.”

    OF COURSE, “COOL” and Lititz wouldn’t seem to fit, but they do. Voted the Coolest Small Town in America in 2013 by Budget Travel, Lititz offers a vibrant collection of charming antiques shops, high-end foodie stores, and pubs serving craft beers. Its white rural population screams conservatism, but the shirtless, tattooed and pierced can walk the quaint Main Street without garnering a single frosty glance. (The funniest joke I’ve heard about Lititz from the locals is that its name is French for “the tits.” Now really, how conservative is that?)

    Rock Lititz is the anchor for future development, including new restaurants, a luxury hotel, and a series of offices for other companies — from lasers to pyrotechnics — with a desire to be near the industry of rock. There was a small kerfuffle when the studio first opened — of the “Usher’s bass is rattling my teacups” variety — but with those sound issues resolved, the people here seem ready, even eager, for the sort of change to which small towns don’t usually cotton.

    “People are very accepting of the Rock Lititz project,” says Dan Zimmerman, manager of Warwick Township, which surrounds Lititz. “There are a lot of reasons for that, but one of them is that there is a strong entrepreneurial streak here, a history of artisans and craftsmen and companies where people make things. I think people recognize that Rock Lititz is cut from the same cloth.”

    Viewed in a wider context, Rock Lititz isn’t just the business for which the town is most famous, earning big stories in the New York Times and Wall Street Journal. It’s the town’s fullest expression. “I like to say we take ideas sketched on cocktail napkins,” says Fairorth, “and make them reality.” (For Bon Jovi, they did exactly that — took a drawing made on a cocktail napkin and, in 10 weeks, built one of the biggest spectacles in rock history, in which the video screens alone cost $3.5 million and took more than 20 computers to operate.)

    The idea of such sophisticated projects happening out here seems shocking, at least to us tourists, who think of Lancaster County as an Amish retreat from technology. But Fairorth has come to understand the true nature of the relationship between his business and the region. “It’s been a very natural process,” he says, “the way all of this has grown into what it is today — from the Clairs and Tait to Rock Lititz. And I know this sounds clichéd, but I really do believe this could only have happened, in the way it has, in Lancaster County and Lititz.”

    This nod to the country is more than just sentiment. The ideal stage set for a rock show actually operates like farming equipment. Concert tours must set up and break down quickly to maintain a nightly performance schedule. The machinists, designers, metalworkers and craftsmen who populate Lancaster County carry this concept in their blood.

    “When farming equipment breaks down, you don’t see guys stopping to go get a set of tools,” says Fairorth. “The rig on a tractor snaps into place, intuitively. Rock shows are built the same way. Nothing requires tools or fastening equipment to assemble.”

    In this sense, Fairorth, as an outsider, understands why every story about Rock Lititz focuses on just how unlikely this whole operation seems: Imagine, Taylor Swift rehearsing near a field of cows! But the kid who once looked out from Millersville and saw vast expanses of nothing has come to understand that the big black box he built in the cornfield is, fundamentally, a new crop — another kind of produce, yielded up by this place and raised from the ground.

    Originally published as “Lititz Rock City” in the June 2015 issue of Philadelphia magazine.

    The post Rock Lititz Studio: Where Taylor Swift and Usher Get Ready to Play appeared first on Philadelphia Magazine.

    The Curious Case of Nicky Isen

    $
    0
    0
    Left: Illustration by Peter Strain. Right:  The I. Brewster Gallery near 21st and Race. Photograph by Christopher Leaman

    Left: Illustration by Peter Strain. Right: The I. Brewster Gallery near 21st and Race. Photograph by Christopher Leaman

    The stakes are so high, everyone wears funeral smiles — gray grins, barely there before they’re gone. The courtroom falls silent when Nathan Isen walks in, looking a little sheepish. A small group of friends awaits, including Ralph Yaffe of Boyds and Scott Isdaner, whose family co-founded Pep Boys. They shake Isen’s hand, wish him luck, awkward because no one knows if this is hello or goodbye.

    The third-generation descendant of a prominent Main Line family, Isen has, for more than 30 years, sold artwork to Philadelphia’s doctors, lawyers, the well-to-do and the purely aspirational. And he is here today, in federal court at 6th and Market, to be sentenced on a money-laundering charge.

    “I didn’t think I was gonna make it,” says Isen. “I had chest pains on the way over here. Massive.” His voice is a loud stage whisper, dramatic yet blithely unconcerned. “Are you okay?” Yaffe asks. He sounds unconcerned, too, as if Isen is always suffering massive chest pains.

    “Heartburn,” Isen replies. “I’m sure it’s heartburn.”

    At 61 years old, Isen (friends call him “Nicky”) is of average height, with longish whitening hair. He carries extra weight that gives him a kind of mountainous shape, as if he’s been formed, haphazardly, from a pile of mashed potatoes. And he has a boyish, playful smile. A little later, he bounces lightly, shifting his weight from one foot to the other.

    “I have to pee,” he announces.

    “Go,” his friends tell him, and off he darts, his white socks flashing against his black pants and shoes. Today, as he faces a potential 20-year prison sentence, Isen seems awkward and ineffectual. But patrons of his gallery describe him as confident, a gatekeeper to the world of art, bold enough to ask attractive female customers to turn for him, slowly, like runway models, so he can see them from behind.

    Isen has ended up in court on this day in April 2015 because of his relationship with Ronald Belciano, a Main Line weed dealer who was sentenced to federal prison. Isen pleaded guilty to money laundering, and now he’s come to receive his penalty. The whole setup reads, to anyone concerned with the criminal justice system, as though Isen isn’t exactly a danger to society. And so the questions mount — about who Nicky Isen is, how he came to serve as collateral damage in a pot bust, what exactly he’s selling, and the true value of art itself.

    LIKE A LOT OF PEOPLE, I first learned about Nicky Isen almost by a kind of osmosis. He has operated the I. Brewster & Company Gallery at a few separate locations around Center City — on Sansom Street, on Walnut, and now near 21st and Race. If you’ve walked around downtown at all in the past 30-odd years, you passed Isen’s shop. So when a man came to me, a few years ago, to complain that artwork Isen authenticated was fake, I had my doubts.

    Thomas Aloia, a building contractor, called in January 2013 to tell me he’d attended an auction run by Dominic Briscoe and Isen’s son, William, who billed the event as his grandmother’s estate sale. “They said it was ‘blue-chip art,’” Aloia told me.

    Aloia bid on and won prints by some big-name artists — Miró, Dalí, Botero. Aloia spent a bit less than $10,000 that day, a meaningful entry point for someone without a fortune to spend. “William Isen actually kept berating us,” Aloia said, “insulting the audience by saying the prices we bid were too low.”

    When Aloia was finished bidding, he’d won nine pieces. He wanted to come back with blankets and twine to protect his purchases for the drive from the Main Line to East Falls, where he lives. But he says Isen’s son and the other people working the auction were pushy, insisting he pay and take the art immediately. “They wouldn’t hold it or store it,” Aloia told me. “That should have been a red flag, but I didn’t understand the process. I was new at this, so I went ahead and took the art home.”

    The art had been authenticated by Nathan Isen. Each frame bore a card listing the particulars of the work. This offered some small assurance to Aloia. The stuff was “authenticated” — someone had verified that it was real, either an original work or an official reproduction. But once Aloia had his new art home, he remembered, “something seemed off” about his purchases.

    He stayed up late that night, looking online for information about Briscoe and Nathan Isen, and quickly found that others had raised questions about both men. Thinking he’d been had, he fired off emails asking for his money back, a request he says both men brushed off. In one curious line of response, Isen wrote: “The owner’s grandson was on the premises to help out if he could,” not identifying William as his own son or “the owner” as his mother, Sondra. (Briscoe and William Isen did not return calls seeking their comment for this story.)

    Within a few months of Aloia’s call, I discovered that a lot of eyes were on Isen. A member of the local art community told me some sort of investigation was under way, and a pair of sources in federal law enforcement told me Isen was being probed for money laundering and for possible art crimes, too.

    I slowly discovered what the feds also found: There is no art crime to hang on Nathan Isen. But his troubles demonstrate that even a concept so simple as innocence can be deeply complicated — a hall of mirrors run by a man who can make us see what he wants us to, or perhaps more precisely what we want to, without committing fraud.

    FINDING THE LIKES OF ISEN in a story like this one is a shock. His parents were Main Line royalty, a union of two particularly prominent families. Nathan Isen (his grandfather) and Alan (his father) were best known for running Paramount Packaging, a manufacturing company that sold packaging products. His mother, Sondra, was a Robinson — a deep and wide clan of businesspeople who owned cemeteries, car dealerships and real estate, including the Robinson Building, a high-rise at 15th and Chestnut.

    The social significance of the pairing triggered spasms of excitement in their community. Like their parents, Alan and Sondra attended Har Zion, the moneyed Main Line temple, and the exclusive Green Valley Country Club. “Very popular, very warm and wonderful people,” remembers Gil Goldstein, a friend who has now retired to Palm Beach. “Alan was very charitable, but he didn’t talk about it, which is admirable.”

    The Isens had three children — daughter Nancy and two sons, Nicky and Peter. Peter Isen led one of the family paper companies, worked in real estate, and got involved in politics in Longport, New Jersey, where he served on the planning board. Nicky graduated from Wharton and enjoys a reputation as Wharton-smart. He pursued a love for art and opened his gallery. Like his father, he married into even bigger money, pairing off with a Berman, Leslie, a major name in city real estate circles. The couple raised four sons, now ranging in age from 24 to 32, and live in Villanova with a menagerie of big dogs and squawking birds.

    Factions of the Isen family continue to grow the empire. Most famously, Nicky’s uncle Harold divorced his wife Reva, who then married Buddy Robinson. Their daughter is billionaire fashion designer Tory Burch. Isen’s cousin, Robert Isen, now serves as chief legal officer and president of corporate development for Burch, sitting on one of the great treasure heaps in modern American commerce. By way of comparison, Nicky Isen is only moderately wealthy. And in court, his attorney portrayed him as a tad desperate — operating a family business, his gallery, that his four sons aren’t prepared to run without him.

    “This sounds,” says one real estate executive, who grew up on the Main Line and doesn’t want his name to be used for fear of the social implications, “like a ‘shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves’ story.”

    The old saying captures how the momentum of a wealthy clan diminishes in the span of a few generations. In a move that suggests a family’s decay, the Isen brothers wound up embroiled in a lawsuit. Peter sued Nicky when he slipped and fell in his brother’s kitchen at a family bar mitzvah celebration. The case, filed in 2005, ran on for seven years before they settled. The depositions capture Isen at his most eccentric.

    “I have a very, very, very poor memory unfortunately,” Nicky stated. “I lost my whole memory.”

    He never explained why. Earlier, when asked if he also fell at the party, Nicky said, “I slip all the time. I have metal shoes.”

    “Literally metal soles?” asked one of the attorneys.

    “Yes, my shoes are very slippery,” Isen replied.

    “You don’t have any particular recollection of falling at the party, right?”

    “No more than any other day.”

    The whole thing reads as an attempt to portray himself as the truly sympathetic brother. “I am the one,” Isen said. “who is always in pain.”

    “WHAT ARE YOU BUYING when you’re buying art?”

    I’m sitting at Isen’s sentencing hearing, waiting for the proceedings to begin, when one of his supporters asks me this question. I start to respond, something about how art makes us feel, when the man answers his own question. “You’re buying paper,” he says. “With color on it. Everything else is shtick.”

    I must look shocked.

    “I’m not surprised Nicky ended up in a situation like this,” he continues. “And it’s not because he’s a bad guy. He’s not. He’s a good guy, with a sweet heart. But he’s a salesman. It’s the world he’s operated in all his life. The art world.”

    Those words cut to the heart of the case: The feds sent an undercover agent into Isen’s art gallery, looking for money laundering. Isen, a salesman, might have just been looking to make a sale. The other issue Isen’s supporter raises proves more perplexing: We hold art in such high esteem, but is its value based on anything real?

    As it turns out, Isen is no stranger to shtick. And the list of ways he adds a little flair to his business and biography is long. For about three years, a sign at his gallery near 21st and Race advertised a MOVING SALE, 50-PERCENT OFF ART. His gallery at Walnut Street long ago offered a similar pitch. “There were years,” says attorney Thomas Marrone, “that I laughed every time I walked by because there was always a ‘Going Out of Business’ sign in the window.”

    Beyond his gallery, Isen’s chief credential is his co-author credit for Louis Icart: The Complete Etchings. Icart was a French artist, famous for sketches that capture Paris and New York in the 1920s and ’30s. I reached one co-author, William Holland, who contextualized Isen’s contribution: “He is the third listed author, but his involvement was minimal. He didn’t write any of the text. He helped us find a lot of the pictures.”

    Isen complains of having no memory, yet customers in his gallery marvel at how he remembers just where every print is in his cluttered shop.

    I called him repeatedly to set up an interview. He kept putting me off, declining to answer my questions. “I’m dying of leukemia and my wife is dying of emphysema,” he told me. “We just want to enjoy the months we have left.”

    In another conversation, he requested: “Could you not call here in the morning again? My wife is dying and can’t get out of bed before 1 p.m.”

    Finally, he told me that if I called him after June 8th, he’d talk. He refused to reveal the date’s significance. And by then, a pattern had emerged: His gallery will probably move one day, and go out of business, too. And that book he co-authored? Well, he apparently didn’t write a word of it. Isen and his wife looked lively in court — his wife is brassy, vigorous and forthright — but they are dying. As are we all.

    Every word associated with Isen is true, with a touch of shtick, and I couldn’t help but believe that this practice of telling truths with artful craft extends to his work.

    OTHER GALLERY OWNERS in the city respond to Nathan Isen’s name mostly with eye rolls and smirks, an occasional compliment for his “showmanship” but no tears for their colleague. Beau Freeman, the eminent sixth-generation leader of Freeman’s Auction, says, “Nicky is loud, often inappropriate, disruptive. We take special care that he pays us, and he underbids at auction. I just barely tolerate him.”

    The vitriol stems from the way Isen flouts industry conventions. Isen has worked with auctioneer Dominic Briscoe, who ran the event Aloia attended. Briscoe, according to the Bergen County Record in 2012, once held a series of auctions billed as containing art from disgraced financier Bernie Madoff and his victims. Briscoe has been cited in numerous states for deceptive practices. Isen authenticated much of the work at the Madoff auctions; one of those auctions was listed on a bill of sale as “being conducted on behalf of I. Brewster,” his gallery. In the same article, Isen said he often sends work to Briscoe because it’s the easiest way to make a sale and claimed to authenticate “a couple hundred” pieces of art per week, a high figure in a time-consuming field that requires expertise in particular artists and the craft of printmaking. Isen’s authentications were also used at a similar Madoff-related auction conducted by brothers Anwar and Azam Khan, who have been cited in multiple states for improper auctioneering.

    Authenticators usually specialize, yet Isen’s work spans a dizzying array of artists. In Aloia’s haul alone, he authenticated work by Botero, Picasso, Dalí and Miró. He also focuses on prints rather than originals — a legitimate market, but one that deals in multiple copies of any given work and thus allows more room for confusion. For a print to be of meaningful value, the artist needs to directly approve it.

    I took the pieces Aloia bought to be judged by an independent eye: Jeffrey Fuller, an art appraiser in Mount Airy and a member of the American Society of Appraisers. Fuller, a tall, thin and gentlemanly man in a spiffy bow tie, took several weeks to produce a 30-page summation. He concluded that a purported sketch by Picasso was actually an image removed from a book, Toros Y Toreros, and reprinted in a different medium, photocopied or perhaps scanned and printed. The two Degas pieces had similar issues: Étude de Tête/Atelier de L’Artiste seems to have been reproduced from a book page; Chevaux de Courses was likely “removed from a book and mounted to a new sheet of paper.” The Botero is also a reproduction of a page from a book. And the Dalí is, according to Fuller, a reproduction of a work that has itself been deemed “most likely” a forgery by an independent organization that tracks fake Dalís. Finally, Fuller writes it is “most probable” that the Miró pieces Aloia purchased — all three — were removed from a book of Miró’s works.

    Aloia paid $9,202 for the art. Fuller pegs the combined value of all nine prints at $2,390, including the frames. For five of the works, he told me, the frames were worth more than the art.

    The accusation of “fraud” is tempting, but a close look reveals Isen’s authentications are accurate. He cites the Mirós as “from the rare limited edition of 1,500” — a number too big for a run of prints with any real value. The book from which these prints hail, however, did go through a print-run of 1,500. So, Isen told Aloia what these works were — without exactly saying so.

    Isen described the Degas Étude as an “offset lithograph from an original drawing by Degas.” The language “offset lithograph” means, by definition, that it wasn’t printed from the plates associated with a high-quality reproduction. Isen tells the buyer, albeit elliptically: This is a copy from the work that actually held real value. Even the forged Dalí work isn’t a problem, at least not legally — after all, anyone, even an authenticator, might get fooled by a fake.

    Aloia admits he got “bit” by the art bug. Excited that famous art could be his to hang on the wall, he saw what he wanted to see. “I think you’ve hit the real crux of it,” says Holland, one of Isen’s co-authors on the Icart book. “When Nicky authenticates something, he could offer more information. He could perhaps offer less, and people would find the information more useful. But there is nothing dishonest in what he’s doing. Whether it’s the art world or in politics or whatever you might be selling, you want to put your product in the best light.”

    Isen’s practices are an open secret in local art circles. Gallery owners told me they’d heard complaints about Isen, as Carl David from the David David Gallery off Rittenhouse Square put it, “in the wind.” In one of Center City’s most beautiful framing shops, the proprietress told me she often gets customers who want to put images authenticated by Isen into frames more expensive than the art itself. She doesn’t warn them, and at first I regarded this cynically — after all, she’s selling frames. But David advised me: She doesn’t want to risk a lawsuit for disparaging someone else’s goods.

    As time wore on, I ran across numerous secondhand stories of people who felt wronged by Isen, yet few if any principals would talk. At first I didn’t understand this silence. Then one woman, a high-ranking executive in a Philadelphia entertainment company, told me how she and her husband spent hundreds of dollars on a print from Isen that she later called “the sort of poster you’d pay $25 for in a museum gift shop.”

    The woman suggested people didn’t want to talk for the same reason she wanted her name left out of this article: “They’re embarrassed to admit they were taken,” she says. “Whatever business you’re in, getting fooled isn’t good for your reputation. And I think with what Nicky’s doing, people blame themselves. The old saying is ‘Buyer beware,’ and I think that’s right.”

    With time, my admiration for Aloia’s openness only increased. But I also started to think of his honesty as a kind of luxury an East Falls resident could more readily afford. As another highly successful real estate executive told me, sources might stay mum to protect their own reputations — and for reasons more tribal: “Nicky’s a Main Liner,” he said. “He’s one of us, and everybody wants to keep up appearances.”

    BENEATH ALL THE SOCIAL NICETIES, it seems Isen has been known to federal law enforcement for a long time. One gallery owner claims to have been enlisted by the FBI as a consultant to look at work a wealthy man with homes on the Main Line and at the Shore had bought from Isen. The man paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for what he thought of as investments. “I’d say 30 or 40 percent of it wasn’t right,” says the gallery owner. “Some were essentially exhibition posters.” The man ultimately complained to Isen, according to the gallery owner, and got his money refunded. The feds apparently backed off.

    Robert Wittman, a retired FBI agent who specialized in art crime and still works as a consultant, won’t confirm or deny any investigation never made public. But he agreed to look at Aloia’s purchases and explained that he’d been “aware of” Isen for maybe 20 years. Wittman says Isen held “estate auctions” at big mansions listed for sale. “People figured the art was owned by the same person who owned the mansion,” says the ex-agent. “But Nicky had just relocated the inventory from his store. I’d been there, and I’d seen it.”

    Such behavior isn’t exactly criminal, and art crimes are tough to prosecute. “Proving fraud,” says Wittman, “requires knowing someone’s state of mind, and someone who has authenticated a painting can just say, ‘Hey, that’s what I thought it was.’ How are you going to prove they knew otherwise?” Perhaps most fundamentally, in legal terms, art is of dubious worth in the first place. “Art holds no intrinsic value,” Wittman says. “A hammer holds more intrinsic value than a painting, even if it’s by Picasso, because its value isn’t based purely on perception.”

    In this sense, art reflects free-market capitalism at its most pure — art is worth whatever anyone, even someone ill-informed, will pay. And Isen walks a terrific line. He has a buy-back policy, listed on his website, that allows customers to return “most anything” they bought from him for art of the same price. The policy works: He keeps the money and can take another run at selling the returned art. Who can complain?

    He certainly has his fans. Karl Valentine, an avid art collector from Seattle, says Isen “introduced me to a world I love, and educated me, and I’ve heard stories about him, but I’ve had things I’ve bought from him checked out — items I spent $12,000, even $50,000 on — and it was all legit.”

    Even Wittman seems to have developed a kind of appreciation for Isen. When it came time to look at Aloia’s purchases, Wittmanpulled out a jeweler’s loupe, peered at one of the prints Aloia won at auction, and laughed. “Oooh, Nicky!” he said, grinning.

    He handed me the loupe and told me to look, too. “See,” he said, “you can see the dots. They might have printed it from a computer image, scanned. But it’s printed.”

    With the loupe magnifying the image to 10 times its size, I felt like I was looking through a microscope, experiencing a reductionist, scientific view of art. What I saw, more clearly than ever, was paper.

    With dots of color on it.

    BY ALL EXPECTATIONS, perhaps by all rights, Nathan Isen should be contemplating retirement and enjoying his Main Line life without the encumbrance of a criminal charge. But sometime in the mid-2000s, he met Ron Belciano, a man in many ways his opposite.

    While Isen hails from money, Belciano grew up in a constant state of want. He was just a toddler when his father died in mysterious circumstances, washed up on a beach in Wildwood. His mother, also now deceased, suffered from drug addiction. She watched over her son as best she could through a series of apartment evictions at the Shore and later in Havertown. Whatever Belciano accumulated — clothes, shoes, jackets, a football signed by every Philadelphia Eagle — he lost behind padlocks and eviction notices taped to doors.

    Belciano scrambled for some sense of purpose, and an interest in glassblowing landed him squarely in American weed culture. He started small, moving a pound here or there while selling glass pipes and bongs. By the late 2000s he was a full-time pot wholesaler, growing his own high-end product on California farmland and selling it to dealers throughout the Northeast Corridor and locally, from the Main Line to Northern Liberties. He watched the 2005 Super Bowl between the Eagles and Patriots aware, via one of the guys he sold to, that players on both sides of the ball were smoking his weed.

    Around that same time, Belciano met Isen through friends when the pot dealer was looking for a house. He bought a property in Villanova, at 1833 Montgomery Avenue, from Scott Shuster, Isen’s then-partner at I. Brewster. He also started buying pieces from Isen, which accomplished three goals: He learned about art. He got to hang beautiful pictures on his walls. And the money he couldn’t stick into a bank account was freshly laundered, converted into art he could sell legally. Of the three, Belciano says, money laundering was the least important, a side benefit he never discussed with Isen.

    Belciano might have paid more than the art was worth — he says he spent $1 million on work the feds later pegged at $635,000. And he did get one “bad” Picasso from Isen. He paid $15,500 but didn’t like its looks when he got home. Belciano asked Isen for an authentication from the artist’s estate. Isen came back and declared the piece “no good,” a fake. Isen said he’d refund Belciano’s money after he pried repayment from the guy who originally sold it to him. Belciano claims he never did get that money back, or the fake Picasso.

    Belciano has been sentenced to five years in jail for selling pot. He put himself in this predicament. But he could choose to feel bitter about a lot of things: For starters, the feds confiscated $5 million in assets from him, including $2.4 million discovered hidden in a fish tank in his Villanova home. It was one of the largest cash seizures in Philadelphia history — and as the country moves rapidly toward decriminalization, it might go down as the last big pot bust in the United States.

    In direct contrast to Isen, he also told people exactly what he was selling them, and in easily understandable terms. (His sales pitch, as he put it to me: “Great. Fucking. Weed.”) But through all of this, he holds no ill will toward Isen. “I think Nicky screwed me on some things,” he told me in advance of Isen’s sentencing. “But I consider him a friend, and I hope he walks away from this without doing any time at all.”

    They went gambling together in Atlantic City. They met for drinks. “We shared a lot of laughs,” says Belciano. “There’s no one like him. He had such incredible charisma.”

    Belciano met with me twice before reporting to prison for his 63-month sentence, and the heaviness of what awaited him brought him down. But when he talked about Isen, he brightened. In Isen’s shop, he never knew what was going to happen. Isen had a way of presiding over chaos, juggling customers, phone calls and employees with funny, fast-talking ease. A couple of times, when a pretty woman walked in, Isen took one look at her and said: “Turn around for me. Turn around so I can see you.”

    And magically, says Belciano, she’d do it. “They’d turn around,” he says, “so he could see their ass. I mean, who can just ask women to do that?”

    ISEN’S WIFE ARRIVES close to 10 a.m., the scheduled start time for her husband’s sentencing. She’s dressed in black, her hair dark as soot, and dabs at her eyes with a handkerchief. By Nicky’s account, she should be in bed three more hours yet, but she doesn’t look like she dragged herself here. Isen himself, when he finally settles into his seat, pumps his leg nervously under the table. In minutes, he could be sentenced to prison.

    His case isn’t tied, technically, to Belciano’s. The feds didn’t charge Isen with laundering money for him, and while they declined to comment on the subject, there could be numerous reasons for this: The statute of limitations for money laundering runs for five years. Belciano told me most of the artwork seized, 59 pieces in all, came from Isen. But he also told me he talked to Isen about art for art’s sake. In this respect, Belciano bought art only partly to launder money, and in regards to Isen, there was no money-laundering case to make at all.

    So the feds created a case of their own. They sent an undercover Homeland Security agent to Isen’s gallery with cash she identified as coming from her weed-dealing boyfriend from California. She apologized that the bills reeked of weed because he stashed money and product in the same place.

    Medical marijuana is legal in California. Isen might well have argued entrapment, or that he simply figured her boyfriend must be legit. He pleaded guilty, though, and in transcripts from the undercover buy, read in court, Isen agreed not to give her any receipts or invoices. He also advised her to say she bought the art at a thrift sale or received it from a relative.

    They got him for laundering $20,000, the relatively small amount of money their agent spent. But something about the setup still smells funny — of bitterness, like the sort of operation cops launch when they get a hard-on for somebody.

    Previous investigators had tried to find an art-related crime to stick on Isen a decade earlier. They tried again, according to Isen’s wife Leslie, during the Belciano investigation — and failed. The immense effort itself raises questions: With weed decriminalized in 19 states and the District of Columbia, and in 23 states for medical purposes, do we really want law enforcement spending this kind of time and money trying to take down everyone involved, however tangentially, with reefer?

    Isen, it seems, was targeted and prosecuted less for any real crime and more for his shtick — for his history of dancing to the edge, all the way up to the time he did business with Belciano, a weed dealer who happened to have an interest in art.

    In the end, though, for all their evident concern, Isen and his family needn’t have worried. In court, Yaffe and Isdaner speak up for Isen’s character. The judge has received 15 letters of support from people like Center City attorney Bob Mongeluzzi, and a Florida hedge fund manager who typifies Isen as odd, inappropriate, and a great Philadelphia “character” deserving of leniency.

    Isen’s attorney submits data analysis demonstrating that half of all first-time money-laundering offenders receive probationary sentences. He also has notes from Isen’s doctors — a gastroenterologist, a neurologist, an oncologist, a pulmonologist, a cardiologist, an orthopedist and more — along with a study from an expert who warns that the health care in a federal prison could turn even a short stay for a man in Isen’s condition into a death sentence. Isen avails himself of his opportunity to speak to the court: “Now I know what’s important is doing the right thing.”

    The judge issues a soft sentence — three years’ probation and a fine of $25,000. Isen’s sons, all four of them, let out the breath they’ve been holding. His wife cries in relief. Isen wanders over to the gallery, where supporters shake his hand and offer congratulations. “There’s no congratulations,” he responds. “This is embarrassing.”

    I wait a few days, then contact him. We talk a few times over the phone, but he keeps putting off a meeting till June 8th, for reasons he never makes clear. After that date comes and goes, he stops responding. Finally, I drive to his house, a 9,000-square-foot mansion in Villanova.

    The grounds are impressive, decorated in lovely, funny art — a metal dog captured mid-bark; sculpted heads with flowers growing out of them. I pass a vintage Mercedes, a Hummer, a Lexus, a Ford Expedition and a Jag to reach Isen’s door. When I ring the buzzer, the whole house erupts in woofs and shrill squawks. I catch a glimpse, through a fence, of a pair of Great Danes with gleaming polka-dotted coats. Perhaps, given how sick Isen and his wife are supposed to be, I might be greeted by a nurse.

    It’s close to 10 a.m., three hours before Leslie Isen is supposed to get out of bed, but after a few minutes, she opens the door. She wears a housecoat; her hair is tousled as if she did indeed just get up, but she looks fit. By this time, we’ve spoken on the phone and seen each other in court, and she quickly recognizes me, even smiles. I’m no doctor, but she strikes me as the most vital-looking dying person I’ve ever seen.

    “I’ve been trying to reach Nicky,” I tell her. “He said he’d talk to me after June 8th.”

    She nods, retreats, and after a few minutes comes back alone.

    “He’s hysterical,” she says. “He’s not coming to the door.”

    I linger.

    “There’s not going to be any interview,” she says.

    By now, the money-laundering case seems needless. But Isen’s sentence, three years’ probation and embarrassment, suddenly seems right: a stain on a gallery owner and a Main Line man for whom appearance is everything.

    Originally published in the August 2015 issue of Philadelphia magazine.

    The post The Curious Case of Nicky Isen appeared first on Philadelphia Magazine.


    Racial Profiling on the Main Line

    $
    0
    0
    Clockwise from top left: Keith Taylor; Muneera Walker; Anita Friday; Harry Mobley Jr. with his sons Aseda, Omosesan and Akinyele Adebamgbe; Loraine Carter; Schoolly D, Crystal Blunt with her son Michael. Photography by Colin Lenton

    Clockwise from top left: Keith Taylor; Muneera Walker; Anita Friday; Harry Mobley Jr. with his sons Aseda, Omosesan and Akinyele Adebamgbe; Loraine Carter; Schoolly D, Crystal Blunt with her
    son Michael. Photography by Colin Lenton

    This past July, Jordan and Joshua Friday confronted one of those endless summer days that teenagers are given. They journeyed by bicycle to an aunt’s house to swim, met up with a friend, and stopped to get pizza. After lunch, the trio went looking for a fourth friend in the Greens of Waynesborough, a small housing development near their Berwyn home. Jordan and Joshua, 15-year-old African-American high-school students, were unfamiliar with this subdivision. They figured they’d reach the fourth kid on his cell phone or find his house. The identical twins, long and thin, both over six feet tall, were dressed in shorts and colorful t-shirts. They wore school backpacks slung over their shoulders, and bicycle helmets strapped tight to their heads. The twins — mom is a lawyer, dad is a doctor — pedaled slowly past wide lawns and big million-dollar houses, feeling right at home. But this development stretched several blocks from the main road.

    The fourth boy didn’t answer his cell phone. The Fridays weren’t quite sure where he lived. And at some point, the white friend they’d come with pedaled ahead of them. He was almost a full block away when the Fridays noticed the SUV.

    Its driver pulled up near them — a white lady in sunglasses. Her face bore a stern expression, and she held her cell phone, landscape-style, toward the windshield. The twins didn’t know what to think. Jordan Friday waved to her, to say hello. Then they ignored her and went on looking for the other boy. But the woman continued to track their every move. After a few minutes, Jordan wanted out. He pedaled away, hard, to catch up with the third kid. Joshua maintained his slow, rolling pace. But when the woman in the SUV stayed with him, he panicked. He pedaled faster, took every available turn, doubled back on his path. He didn’t know where he was going. He just wanted to lose her. But she stuck right behind him, still holding her cell phone up, presumably to record him. He decided on a new tactic.

    “I just thought,” he recalls, several weeks later, “I’d pedal up to her window and ask, ‘Why are you following me?’”

    He turned his bike around to face the SUV directly. He started forward, toward the driver’s-side door.

    The woman dropped her phone on the seat, put both hands on the wheel, and drove off, her stern expression given over to fear.

    Joshua looked around.

    By now, he was lost. He didn’t see his brother, their friend, or the boy they’d been trying to find. He tried navigating away from dead ends. He looked for turns that led to the exit and the main road. The streets had been empty before. Now he noticed a lot of people outside. He pedaled past one group that gathered near the curb. A woman’s voice rang out shrilly, calling a man’s name.

    “I thought she was calling for her husband,” says Joshua. “I was scared that I was going to be attacked.”

    He rode harder now, catching sight of his brother near the subdivision exit, only to be joined when he got there by the police. The boys were stopped and briefly questioned. One of the cops recognized the twins as neighborhood residents and allowed them to go on their way. But the sweet summer day that had stretched out so beautifully beforehand, that had hours left to run, looked suddenly dangerous.

    The Fridays rode home and told their mom, Anita, what had happened. She immediately went with them to the police station for more details. When they returned to their house, they stayed there, surrounded by 6,000 square feet of luxury and ghosts: Trayvon Martin, Rumain Brisbon, Walter Scott … the roll call of unarmed African-Americans shot to death by citizens or police. The Fridays understood the day’s events as a brush with those tragedies. And they had ghosts of their own, because being targeted wasn’t new to them. Being targeted was more of the same — the same problem that has afflicted their young lives, the City of Philadelphia, the Main Line, and all of America.

    The Main Line is, statistically, one of the most affluent and highly educated regions in the country. It’s also overwhelmingly white and a bastion of privilege. And so when Anita Friday posted about the incident online and the post went viral, that was more of the same, too — the second Main Line racial incident to blow up this year.

    SOME SIX MONTHS before the Fridays took their bike ride, on a January afternoon after a heavy snowfall, Deborah Saldana arrived at her Penn Wynne home and saw two black teenagers her father had hired shoveling her sidewalk. She walked inside, looked out moments later, and saw that the shoveling had stopped. A squad car was parked out front. Police were questioning the kids, and an officer told her they were “conducting an investigation.” She didn’t like the scene already, and liked it less when the police ordered the teens to sit in the snow. She thought the stop was wrong, an instance of racial profiling, and she snapped a picture from her window.

    After maybe 20 minutes, the police left the kids to finish shoveling. Saldana took to the Lower Merion community page on Facebook. The post blew up into a thread more than 1,000 comments long. Local news outlets produced stories. Police subsequently released information about the incident: They said that the snow shovelers were men, 18 and 34 years old; asking them to sit, even in the snow, was just protocol. The police said the stop was legal — the enforcement of a local ordinance requiring any adult soliciting door-to-door to have a permit.

    Deborah Saldana never returned phone calls asking her to be interviewed for this article. In earlier interviews, she expressed doubt about the police version of events. She described the snow shovelers as having “small, skinny builds” and smooth teenage faces. Lower Merion police superintendent Mike McGrath declined to release any paperwork to help confirm the ages.

    The dispute matters. Only adults are subject to the solicitation ordinance. Local residents, skeptical as Saldana, posted fliers looking for the snow shovelers. No one came forward. Regardless, the incident struck a nerve: The image of two working African-American young men sitting in the snow while a white cop stands nearby distills the larger issue of racial profiling to its essence.

    Of course, these incidents — the Fridays’ bike ride and Saldana’s shovelers — are minor in comparison to the police killings that usually spark racial debate. That might also be why they drew attention. Perhaps it’s easier to see what happened here because there is no bloodshed to distort the view, no police claiming they were attacked. These are just kids, definite ones and supposed ones, targeted by civilians and police though they’d clearly done nothing wrong.

    SEVERAL YEARS AGO, the Fridays moved from Sudbury, Massachusetts, to the Main Line, selecting the neighborhood mainly for its blue-ribbon public schools. They enrolled their sons at Tredyffrin/Easttown Middle School, where they learned lessons outside the core curriculum. Anita Friday only discovered how difficult a time her sons had in school after they were asked to write an essay on the topic of tolerance.

    “It was a social-studies course,” remembers Joshua, “and we had just been studying Alabama [and the civil rights movement there]. We were supposed to write about whether or not we’d progressed and whether or not America is an accepting society.”

    The Friday boys were in separate classrooms, navigating the same seventh-grade curriculum. They never discussed the assignment, yet both offered the same assessment. “My personal experiences as an African-American are extremely outrageous,” wrote Joshua Friday, “and kids think it’s just what I should be used to.”

    “I myself am a victim of those intolerant people who say things because of my skin color,” wrote Jordan Friday. “They call me names, or whenever we read or talk about Africa they laugh and point at me. … The N word is commonly thrown around … even though there is literally nothing different about us except our skin color.”

    The boys had found that their white classmates expected them to conform to every stereotype — to love rap music, say “yo,” be good at basketball and struggle with classwork. When Joshua made the basketball team, his white classmates shrugged. “Of course you did,” they told him. “You’re black.”

    “I had almost no pride in the achievement,” Joshua wrote in his school essay.

    An assigned book with an African protagonist, Of Beetles and Angels, marked them for more abuse — “Isn’t this you?” — right in the middle of class. Teachers silenced the white kids, but the Fridays say they never meted out discipline, never used the jokes as a teaching moment.

    African-Americans represent roughly 2.6 percent of the Tredyffrin-Easttown school district, and the Fridays felt worse than alone there. They felt completely disregarded, as if their emotions and desires held no importance. Rough treatment influenced every decision they made. Jordan chose clothes and music in a self-conscious effort to avoid fitting any stereotypes. Once a week, in the cafeteria, the school served fried chicken. The Fridays ordered other items.

    “I didn’t want to deal with the jokes and the comments I got,” says Joshua.

    The image is surreal: Jordan and Joshua Friday sat surrounded by white boys stuffing their faces with fried chicken. But they abstained, to avoid being subjected to racist jokes.

    After a few months, Joshua got tired of the double standard. He ate what he wanted, swallowing the remarks — “There’s Joshua, eating fried chicken” — and his anger with the meal. Jordan never did. The carelessness of the other boys remained consistent.

    Just a few days before the Fridays turned in their essays, in fact, Joshua heard a bunch of kids laughing at a joke he’d missed. Innocently, he asked them to repeat it.

    “You don’t want to know,” one of the boys told him.

    Joshua considered the boy a friend. And he figured from this response that the joke must have been racist.

    “Tell me,” he insisted.

    “Why are black people afraid of chain saws?” the kid asked.

    “Why?”

    “Because,” the kid answered, revving up his voice, “they say runnn-niggerr-rrruuuunnnn!”

    ONLINE, REACTIONS to the police stops of the Fridays and Saldana’s workers veered between outrage on behalf of minorities and race baiting. Official responses were purely supportive. Frank Allen, the rector at Anita Friday’s church, St. David’s Episcopal — the Fridays are the only African-American members — addressed the “heart-breaking” incident in his email newsletter and called upon church members to investigate their own hearts.

    In Lower Merion, Brian Gordon, a township commissioner, called the Saldana event and its aftermath “revelatory.”

    It was Gordon, a corporate attorney, who convened a packed community meeting at the PALM Senior Center to deal with the controversy. Citizens, mostly African-American, lined up to speak. “What got me were the stories,” remembers Gordon. “Person after person. And they were just so moving.”

    The Main Line, in fact, provides too many stories to print.

    We could talk about Kerry Godbold, an African-American and a veteran Lower Merion police officer. He passed the sergeant’s exam three years ago but has yet to be promoted in a department where all the supervisors, and roughly 93.5 percent of the officers, are white.

    We could talk about Nick Lai. Lai, who’s Asian, recently sued the Radnor Township police, alleging that his fellow cops began harassing him after he called them out on what he saw as a pattern of racial profiling. (The township denies the allegations.)

    We could talk about a 15-year-old incident that has left scars in Lower Merion and in the nation — the controversial, fatal police shooting of Erin Forbes, the son of a microbiologist and a Temple University African-American studies professor. Forbes was 26 and employed, and had no criminal record. Lower Merion police claimed Forbes behaved irrationally in January 2000, allegedly robbing a convenience store and advancing on the officer who shot him wielding a walking stick.

    I could tell you about Muneera Walker, a 53-year-old African-American general contractor who was driving along winding, dangerous Mill Creek Road in Gladwyne when a car behind her raced up to her bumper. The car drew perilously close in her rearview mirror, dropped back, then surged forward again, as if urging Walker to hit the gas. She could see the driver, a young white woman around 20 years old, in her rearview mirror.

    This was a balmy day last August. Both drivers had their windows rolled down, and as Walker maintained her speed, around 30 mph, she reached one hand out her driver’s-side window, urging the young woman to slow down.

    The next thing she knew, the young woman leaned, head and shoulders, out her window, waving her cell phone in one hand and steering with the other. “Look at this!” she yelled. “I’m going to call the police. You know they’ll get you! Get your black ass back to Philadelphia where you belong!”

    What hurt Walker most is that all her experience told her the woman was right. If the police came and questioned them both, they’d be more likely to believe the young woman. Walker’s own son had recently been ordered out of a local convenience store because, Walker told me, he “looked like some other black kid” who caused trouble there and the staff wasn’t interested in hearing him out.

    “It spans the generations,” Walker says. “You look at how far we’ve progressed and you realize the further we get, the clearer it is that we really haven’t gotten anywhere. And as a parent, I know my children will face these things. Because I face them.”

    We could talk about the schools. Lower Merion is an epicenter of racial tension, with two recent race-based lawsuits. In one case, Blunt v. Lower Merion School District, seven African-American students sued the district for failing to provide the free and appropriate public education to which every child is entitled. The alleged events are heartbreakingly repetitive: Though testing showed the complainants were generally of average intelligence and learning skills in subjects like math, reading and comprehension, they were misidentified as requiring special education.

    Parents do have the right to demand that their children be “mainstreamed” and receive a regular curriculum. But according to the plaintiffs’ attorney, Carl Hittinger, some parents initially believed district experts who advised them that their children had learning disabilities. Others claim school officials told them their children were being put into “enrichment programs,” as if they were receiving a bonus.

    When parents objected to the district’s treatment, teachers and administrators often confounded them. One woman, Aginah Carter-Shabazz, says requests that her grandchild be mainstreamed were simply ignored. Another parent said she received paperwork indicating that her child would enter middle school in the regular curriculum. Come the fall, it turned out Penn Wynne staff had forwarded an entirely different set of paperwork to the child’s new school. The girl was enrolled, despite her mother’s wishes, in a special-education program.

    During court proceedings for the case, a school psychologist admitted that he’d lied to two parents by saying that the testing protocols — the scoring methods — for their child were “destroyed.” Under oath, he admitted the protocols were intact.

    The impact of such attitudes and actions can be seen not only in Lower Merion, but also in nationwide education statistics. African-American children are 1.4 times as likely as white children to end up in special-education programs.

    The Fridays have also been touched by this issue: While they were living in Stamford, Connecticut, school officials directed Anita Friday’s eldest son into a remedial class.

    She didn’t believe the recommendation. She had his IQ tested. When he scored at the genius level, she saw the principal.

    “Aren’t you a lawyer?” the principal asked.

    “Yes,” replied Friday.

    “Well, you’re one of the good ones,” she says the principal replied. “We’ll put him in regular classes.”

    Of course, being described as “one of the good ones” wounds Friday as deeply as any offense. She is proud of her achievement but does not view herself as exceptional. There is a dominant image of the black citizen that simply doesn’t comport with reality. African-American women have dramatically narrowed the “achievement gap,” graduating from high school at rates near those of white and Asian counterparts. For Friday, though, the issue is that racial tension exists at all — either up or down the demographic scale.

    “To some degree, I got to pass the white people’s test because I went to Georgetown and I am a lawyer,” she says, “but you have the real progress when blacks who haven’t had the opportunities I have are just as valued as I am.”

    The bias here, toward putting African-Americans into special ed, is obvious and can be charitably described as one of low expectations.

    “Largely white administrators and schoolteachers are prone to see African-Americans as less capable,” says Halford Fairchild, a social psychologist who has studied the subject extensively. “The schools are inclined to set them aside into special-education programs. We call this ‘warehousing’ them.”

    In Lower Merion, around the time the special-ed suit was filed in 2007, African-American kids comprised seven percent of the school population and 15 percent of special-ed students. That alone set a strong foundation to move the suit past preliminary court proceedings. But Blunt v. LMSD never made it to a jury.

    “We prevailed at every level,” says LMSD spokesman Douglas Young. “But we don’t crow about it, because we recognize that this is all so sensitive.”

    Young points out that the Blunt suit originated eight years ago. The district’s honors and AP enrollment for African-Americans has doubled since then. African-American kids continue to be over-represented in special-ed courses, but the gap has narrowed slightly: The now eight percent African-American student body makes up 13 percent of the special-ed population. As Loraine Carter, former president of the advocacy group Concerned Black Parents, points out, these improvements suggest the kids were never the problem.

    The district judge, Harvey Bartle III — white, a Bryn Mawr native — declared that the plaintiffs hadn’t provided sufficient evidence that their alleged mistreatment occurred because they were black. Even if all the factual allegations in Blunt were true, in other words — a point that was never determined — who’s to say they were the result of racial bias? In a 2-1 decision, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit concurred.

    The victory for LMSD drew a particularly vigorous dissent from Theodore McKee, the presiding judge and the only African-American on the three-judge panel. McKee declared that Bartle and his colleagues on the appeals court had overturned decades of settled case law. They’d required plaintiffs to offer evidence of the defendants’ state of mind and generally demanded the level of evidence expected at a jury trial — not a civil case’s preliminary stage.

    The rules of the game were set so the plaintiffs in Blunt v. LMSD could never expect to win. And indeed, they lost — in court and in school. Consigned to special-education courses, they learned below-grade-level material and often missed courses in history and foreign languages entirely, dimming their college prospects. And they paid another price — losing confidence in themselves, feeling diminished.

    An independent evaluator, checking up on the school’s diagnosis of one plaintiff, wrote that the girl almost gave up on being tested: “I can’t,” she said. To someone told she wasn’t good enough, the assignment looked too difficult. But “with encouragement,” the evaluator wrote, “she completed it in half the time allotted.”

    ON A SPRING DAY a few years back, barbecue chef Keith Taylor drove to a bank on the Main Line to cash a check. He was in a hurry, his check already out, pinched between his fingers, but a few steps inside the door, he sensed something was amiss.

    The teller stood frozen, staring at him.

    When he met her gaze, Taylor says, she moved only her eyes, between him and another man, presumably a manager. Confused, Taylor glanced over, but the manager, too, only returned his stare. Taylor meekly raised the check in his hand. No one moved to serve him. Then another man slipped into place beside the first, assuming the same strange staring behavior.

    “What is going on?” thought Taylor. “Isn’t anyone going to take my check?”

    Seconds passed. And there Taylor remained: a big black guy standing in a bank, being stared at by three white people who made no move to serve him. Race didn’t enter his thinking until the police arrived.

    A squad car drove right up on the sidewalk outside the front door. Two cops emerged and rushed into the bank. Taylor barely saw their faces. He was fixated on the way the officers’ hands rested on their guns. The bank managers pointed at him, and all else is obscured by the numbness and anger he felt, the familiar nausea.

    The police never told him why they were there. They checked his ID, questioned him, and left. Later, he found out that a bank had been robbed in the neighborhood that morning. The suspect was black.

    This wasn’t the first time he’d been treated with suspicion, or the last. Taylor, who runs his own restaurant, Zachary’s BBQ, providing soul food to the Main Line, faced frequent police traffic stops. He got so tired of being pulled over on his drive home late at night that he got a customized license plate: “BBQ Chef.” He figured the police would recognize the car and let him go. (At times, he says, he was getting stopped once a month.) The gambit worked. The stops ended. But ongoing experience with racial bias doesn’t make it easier. “I went ahead and deposited my check,” he says of his visit to the bank, “and got the hell out of there. I was so disgusted.”

    Like the Fridays’ bike ride, this stands as a “good” story. Taylor, a 51-year-old father of four, isn’t Eric Garner, the 43-year-old asthmatic, unarmed black father of six whose “I can’t breathe” pleas were ignored by the officers who wrestled him to the ground. He isn’t Rumain Brisbon, the unarmed black father of four who was shot to death when police mistook a bottle of pills in his hand for a gun. And because Taylor is alive, he can even laugh, recognizing the episode as a great setup for a comedy sketch: A black man walks into a bank, pulls out a check, and everyone freezes. …

    This is, in many respects, the usual story we hear about racial bias — the racial profiling that leads to mistaken detentions, arrests, assaults and even deaths. These are the sorts of stories that dominated the Lower Merion public meetings, and that so moved township commissioner Brian Gordon.

    There’s Harry Mobley Jr., who was stopped half a block from his house, with a tie on and a computer bag over his shoulder. The police rushed him, guns drawn, because an African-American — described as lighter-skinned and a foot shorter — had allegedly just robbed someone several blocks away.

    “It’s true what they say,” Mobley observes now. “When someone is pointing a gun at you, all you can see is the barrel, it looks so big.”

    A white neighbor intervened. Mobley went on his way. But minutes later, when he was just steps shy of his train station, another policeman stopped him again. The laptop bag over his shoulder, the tie, the foot in height and skin-tone difference — none of it seemed to matter. He was a black guy.

    This focus on racial profiling among police, however, risks missing the more fundamental point: A white citizen in an SUV profiled the Fridays. Three white bank employees targeted Taylor. The kids of Lower Merion were misdirected by educators into special-ed courses. There were no police at all involved in those incidents.

    THE DAY THE FRIDAY TWINS turned in their essays, they arrived home to find their mother, their father and their uncle on their dad’s side all home from work. This was pure coincidence. No one suspected a crisis. But the uncle, a psychiatrist, asked the boys what they did in school. The boys, perhaps wanting to reveal themselves, handed over their essays. The adults began to read, passing the papers around. “We looked at each other,” remembers Anita, “and it was just three sets of eyes meeting in pain.”

    Her parents moved to St. Louis in 1965, and she was among the first African-American kids to desegregate a school there. “I am not new to this,” she says.

    She also understood that her sons had faced some difficulties at Tredyffrin. The previous school year, a teacher allegedly called one of her sons “a black ass.” Anita went to school the next day, determined to force some change, but says that administrators told her work rules tied their hands. (A district spokesperson acknowledges the Fridays made a complaint, but says the teacher involved denied the allegation. “We cannot discuss specific disciplinary matters regarding students or staff,” the spokesperson maintains.)

    The twins, however, kept a lot of stories to themselves. Partly, they didn’t want to upset their parents. More fundamentally, they didn’t think a solution existed. They were being educated by the world outside their walls. “I just figured,” says Joshua, “this is how life is. Because I’m black.”

    The morning after she saw her kids’ essays, Anita Friday went to Tredyffrin and asked for an immediate meeting with the principal. He was deeply apologetic and, according to Anita, asked her to recommend a speaker to address the student body and discuss issues of race.

    Jordan and Joshua embarked upon the day with great hopes. Anita Friday attended both presentations. She found the speaker compelling. Raised as white, he only found out in his mid-20s that he is half African-American. She noticed that only a few teachers attended the event. And she was upset to hear later, from her sons, that there was no classroom discussion afterward. But the memory that sticks with her is what happened during the question-and-answer session. The students lined up at microphones, and one asked: “Don’t you wish you were still just white?”

    LYNN BRANDSMA STRUGGLED to run with an oversized purse over her shoulder, a middle-aged mom more hobbling than sprinting across a Lower Merion field, on the way to her son’s track meet. By the time she reached him, he and his teammates were stripping off their warm-up clothes.

    She expected them to be energetic before the meet, but they all looked listless and depressed.

    “What’s wrong?” she asked.

    “We’re going to lose,” her son told her.

    “Why do you say that?”

    The boys motioned to the other team.

    Brandsma looked at them, standing tens of yards away, stretching and getting ready. Her son’s team, Welsh Valley Middle School in Lower Merion, was almost all white. The other team, from Norristown, was almost all black.

    She pretended not to understand. “I don’t get it,” she said. “What do you mean?”

    The kids knew they were in taboo territory. They moaned a chorus of discontent.

    “Aww, c’mon,” they said.

    “Let me ask you guys a question,” she said. “If you all had to go into the school and take a test in a contest against that team, how would you feel then?”

    “Oh, we’ve got them there,” the white kids all agreed.

    Brandsma was stunned. She felt like she’d raised her son free from any racial bias. She knew all these boys. “My son, these kids, they’re all good kids,” she says. But somehow they were invested in the stereotypes.

    Research shows that racial bias is pervasive. In one 2014 study, people from diverse racial backgrounds remembered “smart” African-Americans as having lighter skin. In another from that year, a mostly white group perceived African-American boys, beginning at 10 years old, to be four years older and less “innocent” than their white peers.

    Stereotypes hurt blacks no matter what: Conform to them — wear a hoodie, get angry, blow hip-hop out the windows of your car — and you’re dangerous. Diverge from them and you’re “not really black.”

    Rapper and composer Schoolly D, who lived on the Main Line for many years, experienced a sense of alienation there. Early on, a neighbor called one day to inform him: “I am not comfortable calling you ‘Schoolly.’ I have not decided what to call you yet.”

    “I was like, ‘What?’” says Schoolly. “‘You don’t get to name me.’”

    Others told him he wasn’t black at all because he was so successful. Still others seemed ready to turn on him. “I’ve been watching you,” he was told by a white man at one party. “Quit looking at our women.”

    “He really said that,” says Schoolly. “‘Our women.’ I blew it off the first time, but then it happened two other times, with other people, and they all used that same kind of phrasing: ‘Don’t look at our women.’ ‘Don’t touch our women.’”

    The phrase calls to mind Dylann Roof, the young man who murdered nine black parishioners last summer in a historic Charleston church. Before he opened fire, Roof reportedly listed the supposed grievances that compelled him to kill, including “You rape our women.”

    Samantha Taylor, a young African-American woman who grew up in Radnor, told me a white friend once sought to comfort her by saying, “Don’t worry. We know you’re white on the inside.” She understood the girl’s intention to be kind. But the judgment laid upon her brown skin was cruel and reflected a belief that being African-American is inherently bad. And aren’t “racial bias” and even the phrase “racial profiling” just euphemisms for the word few white people want to say?

    Lower Merion commissioner Brian Gordon is a white progressive. He told me he wants to make sure regular meetings are held in Lower Merion on the subject of race. But he choked on “racism.” “The word is just so loaded,” he says.

    In fact, Gordon retreated into platitudes about the “excellence” of the Lower Merion police department and the entire community. And yet the problems go on. In early November, another Lower Merion commissioners’ meeting became a forum on race. This time, residents were angry because of an incident in which police detained 58-year-old Nathaniel Williams as he waited for a bus. Police were searching for a suspect described as a black male in a hoodie and wearing glasses, who had allegedly just robbed a bank across the street. Williams, who fit this general description, was forced to his knees, cuffed and detained till a bank employee could come across the street and confirm that he was not the robber.

    Again, the profiling seems obvious: How many bank robbers flee by crossing the street and waiting for a bus? And as one resident at the meeting put it: If the suspect had been described as a white man in a business suit, would he have been manhandled — forced to his knees and cuffed? (On November 20th, the LMPD released the results of an internal review that found the stop was “appropriate according to the policy, training and all legal standards for the stopping of a suspect possibly connected to a violent crime.”)

    Despite the reluctance of Gordon and many others to use it, it’s hard to see how that incident — and many others in this story — are anything but racist.

    White kids openly taunted the Fridays, using the n-word around them and challenging them to object: “Aw, you aren’t going to get offended now, are you?”

    The kid who shared that racist joke at which a group of white kids was laughing was someone Joshua Friday considered a friend. But when he repeated the joke to Friday, he didn’t apologize or appear at all sheepish. “When he finished,” remembers Friday, “he burst out laughing in my face.”

    One can attempt to camouflage this as the behavior of children. They can be so cruel. But the kids at Tredyffrin behaved according to their own feeling of superiority. They must have believed there would be no consequence for them in demeaning the Fridays, in making them feel small.

    “They acted like we should just get used to it,” says Joshua Friday. “This is just what we deserved.”

    Central Baptist Church in Wayne. Photograph by Colin Lenton

    Central Baptist Church in Wayne. Photograph by Colin Lenton

    EARLY THIS AUGUST, Tom Beers and Laurie Sweigard agreed to cooperate in an interchurch event marking the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. Beers and Sweigard run Central Baptist Church in Wayne, two white pastors with a largely white, progressive membership. The event, on Sunday, August 9th, was quiet, a candlelit vigil. One of the event organizers from their partner church unfurled a banner that read “Black Lives Matter.”

    Beers and Sweigard didn’t foresee any problems. Over the years, they’d taken stands on issues related to war and various social injustices. In the Carter years, they took in refugees from El Salvador, housing them in the church while their country was mired in civil war. But this was different.

    “We got the first angry call the next morning,” says Beers, “and they kept coming.”

    The callers all said pretty much the same thing: “How dare you put that sign on your lawn?” “Don’t all lives matter?” “You’re stupid, horrible people.”

    Some callers claimed the banner violated a local ordinance regarding signage. One threatened to call the police. One man, who identified himself as a sergeant from Upper Darby, spoke with Beers for an hour. “It was a good discussion,” says Beers. “But it did feel odd that I had to justify this sign, any sign, to a police officer.”

    A man who identified himself as the parent of a child at Episcopal Academy called. “That sign is not within your church’s First Amendment rights to have there,” he said. “The Episcopal Academy took away my son’s First Amendment rights by not allowing him to use the word ‘nigger!’”

    By Wednesday, the church’s Facebook page had been targeted by white supremacist groups from around the country. “They have a huge banner out in front of their church that says Black Lives Matter,” one commenter posted. “Who is the cult leader? Their lives don’t matter.”

    Fear took hold. Dylann Roof. Charleston. Beers and Sweigard started monitoring the site more closely, removing the racist thread. “You look at the shooting in that church,” says Beers, “and you see all it takes is one person among them to get into their head to do some copycat thing.”

    They began taking safety precautions they decline to specify. And they added a second sign, as explanation. Together, the signs read: “Black Lives Matter. A nonviolent movement for racial equality, justice and redemption.”

    They felt like the country, and clearly many on the Main Line, misunderstood the Black Lives movement. “The question ‘Don’t all lives matter?’ misses the point,” says Beers. “The proponents of ‘Black Lives Matter’ are focusing on the concerns of African-Americans because society already seems to recognize the worth of white lives. It’s black lives society needs to be reminded are important.”

    The day Beers and Sweigard held that precipitating event on the church lawn, they didn’t give much thought to the sign. They had no plans to leave it up. But the Main Line’s anger made the decision for them. The sign stayed, and remains there still. “It became a call,” says Sweigard, “and concretized that we have a huge problem here on the Main Line, and this is what we need to be addressing.”

    “We’d taken a lot of stands,” says Beers. “We had signs up on various political issues. Nothing had set the Main Line off like this until we used the word ‘black.’”

    I MET WITH the Fridays in August, in their million-dollar house, with its cathedral ceilings and stylish, minimalist furniture. What I encountered was a family that had dealt with more than its share of frustration, pain and fear. Even so, they feel “lucky” and know it could be a lot worse.

    The Friday boys are in high school now, at private schools, and both report that they are happier. But the bicycling incident taught them a chilling lesson: No matter how much money their parents make, the neighborhood they live in or the school they attend, they can’t completely escape.

    I got to see the police report generated the day they were stopped for what their mother calls “bicycling while black.” There had been some recent burglaries in the area. The resident who called police described the boys as “suspicious,” and carrying “extremely large duffel bags.”

    I asked the Fridays to show me the bags. They retrieved a typical high-school student’s backpack, which on that day had held a wet towel, a swimsuit and a small bag of candy. The pack looked nothing like a duffel, and the white lady in the SUV now looms as an example of unfounded racial fear. She saw two spindly teenagers with bicycle helmets and book bags; she perceived burglars equipped to carry away all her stuff.

    Of course, this incident recalls others before it: Trayvon Martin, shot to death while walking home with little more than a bag of Skittles; Michael Brown, in Ferguson, described by the policeman who shot him as a “demon” who seemed to be “bulking up” in order to “run through the shots.”

    “I’ve thought about something like this happening,” said Jordan, “like if I am being attacked, or there is some mistake and I am being shot by the police. I just thought, well, if something like this happens to me, I’ll just say, ‘Okay, I’m ready to die.’”

    Tears began to roll freely down Anita Friday’s face. Fifty years after she helped desegregate one of this country’s schools, her child is taking the lesson from his brief life’s experience that he is so very vulnerable, his life so very cheap.

    As our conversation wound down, I asked the Friday twins: “Do you ever start to internalize all of this? The way you were being treated in school … did you ever start to feel like there must be something wrong with you?”

    Jordan Friday started to speak. Then all his young life’s pain caught in his throat. He choked, a guttural sound emerged, and he slumped forward, fighting back tears.

    Picking up for his brother, Joshua answered the question. His words conveyed the sense of strength he’s been forced to acquire. But his brother’s choking silence, his lowered head, said something profound, too — about the damage that’s been done, that continues to be done, and the work that lies ahead.

    Published as “A Place of Privilege” in the December 2015 issue of Philadelphia magazine.

    The post Racial Profiling on the Main Line appeared first on Philadelphia Magazine.

    “This Was No Accident”

    $
    0
    0
    The corner of 22nd and Market streets, June 5, 2013. | Photograph courtesy of Michael Bryant/Associated Press.

    The corner of 22nd and Market streets, June 5, 2013. | Photograph courtesy of Michael Bryant/Associated Press.

    In the last hours she spent with her mother, Anne Bryan offered a sunny proposal: “Let’s go for a bike ride.” Nancy Winkler hesitated. It was early, she was tired, and as Philadelphia’s city treasurer, she wanted to get to her job. But a glance out the window at the big June sky — and at her beaming daughter, already in her cycling shorts — convinced her. The two pedaled off from their Center City home to Kelly Drive. Some events only seem meaningful in retrospect, but Winkler recognized the beauty in these minutes as they happened. Anne had just finished a successful first year at the Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts and was ready to start hunting for an apartment of her own. Somehow, the ride captured all of this — the sense that spring, and Anne, were both in bloom. The smell of honeysuckle hung in the air, and Anne pedaled briskly, ponytail bouncing, as if chasing the scent.

    After the women circled back home, Winkler thought about staying a little longer. Anne, 24, had clothes to donate to the Salvation Army, and was waiting for a longtime friend, Mary Simpson, to join her for a day of thrift-store shopping. Winkler hadn’t seen Simpson in a while, but it was already close to 10 a.m. She pushed ahead to work and hadn’t been there long when one of her employees rushed in with news: “The Salvation Army store just collapsed.”

    For Winkler, the words triggered panic, frantic cell-phone calls to Anne with no answer. For Philadelphia, the words marked a signal tragedy in the city’s history. At 10:41 a.m. on June 5, 2013, a Center City building under demolition at 22nd and Market fell over, crushing the Salvation Army thrift store next door. Six people died at the scene, one died in the coming weeks, and 14 were injured, including one woman who lost the entire lower half of her body.

    Anne Bryan and Mary Simpson were discovered near the store’s center, next to each other. They couldn’t have been there very long, maybe 20 minutes, before the roof caved in. Nancy Winkler continues to marvel at how easily she might have diverted her daughter’s path. If she had stayed home a little longer, delayed the pair just enough, they might still be alive.

    Such stories aren’t unique. In fact, as tales emerged from the rubble, it seemed that chance determined who lived and who died: One employee, 35 and newly engaged, arrived that morning for her first day on the job; another staffer, a Liberian immigrant, felt sick but didn’t skip his shift; a grandmother was in the store for minutes before the roof fell.

    Early on, says Winkler, a lot of people defined the collapse in these terms — a random tragic event. Some still do today. But she knows better. And so for the past three years, Winkler and her husband, Jay Bryan, have tried to get others to see the incident the way they do. “This was no accident,” says Nancy Winkler. “This was the predictable result of a series of choices that were made and not made.”

    Time and the revelations following the Market Street collapse have proven that. Viewed closely, the tragedy doesn’t indict just its perpetrators — the people who failed to execute a relatively simple demolition job and are now defendants in an upcoming civil trial — but also the government that failed to stop them. It reveals Philadelphia, cash-strapped and eager for development, as a city in which the occasional disaster has traditionally been, and remains, the hidden cost of doing business.

    AS A CITY, Philadelphia could easily see the Market Street collapse as an anomaly and move on. Just look around. Business is booming. In the spring of 2015, the Center City District announced that 5.3 million square feet in new residential units, hotel rooms and commercial and retail space was freshly complete or in the pipeline. Keynote projects — the ritzy Market East development, the new 59-story Comcast tower, the renovation of the Divine Lorraine Hotel — tell the story of a city on the move. But as Philadelphia is growing, it’s falling apart.

    Seven months after the Market Street collapse, Anne Bryan’s brother, Chris, attended a birthday party on the third floor of a Center City apartment building. He saw a few people gathered outside. A few minutes later, the fire escape fell out from under them. Two people were injured; one man died.

    Two months after that, a building under demolition at 3rd and Market also collapsed, filling the street with debris that fortunately injured nothing but a car. In January of 2015, bricks from a nearby parapet fell through the ceiling of the Center City Lululemon store, injuring three. In each case, the number of injuries and fatalities was shaped by chance. But “collapses” are commonplace. According to L&I statistics, there were roughly 1,100 total or partial building collapses in Philadelphia in 2014 — an average of three per day.

    L&I spokesperson Karen Guss says the numbers encompass dramatic incidents, like buildings toppling, and small ones, like porch failures. But the numbers reflect exactly what Philadelphia is right now: a vibrant mix of new construction and old buildings, many vacant and in disrepair, yielding plenty to worry about in terms of things that might fall over.

    The Market Street collapse was supposed to trigger major changes in the department of licenses and inspections. And Council has passed legislation, mostly targeted toward more rigorous policing of demolitions. Mayor Jim Kenney is also touting a very small increase in the department’s budget. But L&I, a beleaguered unit charged with enforcing building codes, issuing licenses, and inspecting construction and demolition sites, requires far more dramatic investments to right itself — and in Philadelphia, that kind of investment seems unlikely.

    Some of the reasons are strictly practical: The city’s poverty rate is more than 25 percent, creating a massive hole in the tax base and outsized demand on city services. Budget season too often looms as a series of tough choices, with schools, libraries and rec centers on the chopping block. L&I is an easy loser in that conversation, its workforce of building inspectors largely invisible unless something bad happens.

    The other primary reason L&I remains the underfed child of city government is less savory. “There’s no political will to change it,” says Glenn Corbett, a code enforcement veteran who chaired a commission organized after the collapse to investigate the department. “There’s a political incentive to keep L&I weak. Because to any mayor or Council member, this is the unit that developers and businesspeople are going to complain about. And so a lot of moves were made after the collapse, but not a lot changed.”

    The man who fell to his death at the birthday party, 22-year-old Albert Suh, should have been safe; the fire escape wasn’t overloaded. But L&I is. New agency commissioner David Perri admits his inspectors currently shoulder workloads about two times too large, and the limited new funding Kenney proposed will only keep the agency running in place. One of the most important functions L&I performs is demolition, knocking down buildings deemed “imminently dangerous.” But Perri can’t demolish dangerous buildings as fast as he discovers new ones, given a backlog of about 250 all year long.

    Perri, a licensed professional engineer, is the first truly qualified L&I commissioner in more than 20 years. Building inspectors are among the city’s most skilled employees, undergoing 18 months of training and certifications. But if money connotes respect, they don’t get enough of either: The annual rate of pay for city building inspectors lags roughly $11,000 behind that of counterparts even in smaller cities, like Milwaukee. The discrepancy is large enough that Perri admits that filling the open positions, and keeping them that way, will be a challenge.

    What this all adds up to is Philadelphia’s Potemkin moment: The new construction is grand, but this city sits atop a shoddy foundation of social ills and budget problems. Corbett cites the collapse as the largest, most dramatic manifestation of a danger that has long been with us, and the falling fire escape as another example: “This happened on Rittenhouse Square,” he says, “one of the wealthiest sections in Philadelphia. This should never have happened. But it did because nobody looked.”

    Corbett’s commission recommended that the fire department assume control of fire code safety, as is common in other cities. The report it published cites the fire escape collapse and a food truck explosion in Feltonville, which killed two people, as causing fatalities that could have been averted: “In order for fire code enforcement to be most successful, it must be performed on a routine basis. Currently, fire code inspections in the City are conducted on an ad-hoc basis, often complaint-driven.”

    The language is cool and reasoned, but the content is insane. Essentially, fire code safety has been on us, the citizens. The new Perri-led L&I is working with the fire department to beef up inspections — some classes of buildings, like high-rises, are already subject to annual evaluation — but the dedicated 50-person unit Corbett’s committee report called for isn’t on the docket. Nancy Winkler often refers to the Market Street collapse as a “third-world-style disaster,” and this is an example of how third-world conditions are sewn into the fabric of life here — bridges crumbling, filthy streets, hundreds of shooting deaths each year, some of the worst poverty rates in the nation. Given our problems, a weak L&I is something that most of us have been prepared to accept. Citizens fight for pools, libraries and rec centers; no one fights for city building inspectors. But then, most of us don’t end up mourning a child.

    Anne Bryan with her parents and brother in Alaska, 2006. | Photograph provided by Nancy Winkler.

    Anne Bryan with her parents and brother in Alaska, 2006. | Photograph provided by Nancy Winkler.

    HERE IS WHAT Winkler and Bryan know about how their daughter died. Witnesses said the collapse sounded like an explosion, which Anne must have heard. When she was discovered under a pile of debris, she was curled into a fetal position, with her arms up over her head. The medical examiner’s report listed her injuries: bleeding eyelids, rib fractures on both sides, bruised lungs and a torn liver. She died a slow, painful death by asphyxiation. The rubble crushed her so tightly that she couldn’t expand her lungs to breathe. Most of the victims died in the same manner. “I’ve tried to imagine it,” says Bryan. “I can’t.”

    In strictly demographic terms, the wall that collapsed on the Salvation Army building fell across most of the city, uniting people of strikingly different backgrounds:

    Borbor Davis was a 68-year-old Liberian immigrant who found a wife and a spiritual home in a Lansdowne church.

    Kimberly Finnegan was 35, newly engaged and seeking a job with the SPCA.

    Roseline Conteh, 52, was an immigrant from Sierra Leone, a teacher who fled the civil war there to leverage a better life in America for her five children.

    Juanita Harmon was a 75-year-old grandmother of nine who stopped by the Salvation Army to gift-shop just after paying her PECO bill up the block.

    Danny Johnson, 59, a West Philly truck driver, lived for 23 days after he was pulled from the rubble before his heart failed.

    And Mary Simpson was just getting started, at 24, in a career as an audio engineer when she died next to her friend.

    Of all those who lost family members in the collapse, Winkler and Bryan have been the most public, a role for which they were uniquely well positioned. Winkler’s father was career Army, raising her with a sense of obligation. “We weren’t allowed to walk past a piece of litter on the sidewalk,” she says. “It was our duty to pick it up.” Winkler spent 28 years working for Public Financial Management, rising to partner in a firm that specialized in assisting governments and nonprofits with their finances. When Michael Nutter asked her to serve as city treasurer in 2010, she felt like “giving back.”

    Together, she and Bryan, a civil engineer, raised their kids with the same sense of responsibility. The family’s volunteer projects included making improvements to the Cynwd Trail, where Winkler and her daughter planted cherry trees, learning how to preserve their delicate root systems. “I was proud,” says Winkler. “She never went through the motions. It was hard work, a great day. It meant something to her.”

    Winkler and Bryan have spent the past few years looking for ways to carry her spirit forward. “I think,” says Winkler, “when a parent loses a child, you want something meaningful to come out of it, to make the world a better place in some way.”

    In this sense, their own need compelled them to get involved — to investigate the causes that were obvious and those that might otherwise have been obscured.

    THREE YEARS LATER, what we know about the Market Street collapse is that it was entirely preventable. Numerous people, exercising a basic degree of care, could have avoided the crisis at multiple points.

    Griffin Campbell, the contractor on the job, was spectacularly unqualified. The excavator operator he hired, Sean Benschop, tested positive for weed a few hours after the collapse. Those two men — the lowest ranking and comparatively poorest and the only minorities among those responsible — were the only two indicted. They’re now in jail, serving minimum sentences of 15 and seven years, respectively.

    According to a report filed by Richard Roberts, an engineer subsequently enlisted by city prosecutors, Campbell went about the demolition in exactly the wrong way. The safety concern was obvious: The Hoagie City building under demolition was a four-story structure that shared a party wall with the single-story Salvation Army. To protect the smaller building, Campbell needed not to demolish the Hoagie City shop so much as to deconstruct it, piece by piece, from the top down — roof, walls, floor. Campbell, however, worked from the inside out — removing internal floor joists, which he intended to sell for salvage, while leaving the dangerous shared wall standing tall and growing progressively less stable.

    The entire case is set to proceed, this September, to a mammoth civil trial featuring 19 defendants, 21 plaintiffs, and a cast of big-shot attorneys, including the “Master of Disasters,” Robert Mongeluzzi, for the aggrieved, and peerless 90-year-old Dick Sprague for the defense. The argument will largely boil down to one of size. The defense will claim that the circle of responsibility is small, limited mostly to Campbell and Benschop. The plaintiffs will assert that the blame goes well beyond them.

    At the time Campbell was hired, by a corporation chiefly owned by Richard Basciano, he had no demo equipment, employees, insurance or relevant experience. All he had was Plato Marinakos, an architect retained by Basciano’s firm, STB, to oversee the job. Campbell has testified that Marinakos walked him through the bidding process and requested a $5,000 kickback for his trouble — an allegation that Marinakos has denied.

    The evening before the collapse, Marinakos visited the site. He later testified that he took one look at the shared wall, now unmoored, and knew that it was imminently dangerous. But he took none of the obvious steps — like notifying the Salvation Army, the police or L&I — to prevent disaster. What the Penn-trained architect did do was retain an attorney, immediately post-collapse, to negotiate an immunity deal in exchange for his testimony.

    Basciano, a longtime real estate speculator and former porn merchant who owned Philly’s last adult movie theater on that same block, wears a black hat in this saga as well. Campbell’s winning bid was $112,000, roughly one third that of his nearest competitor. That number should have raised flags, but Basciano’s firm, STB, hired him anyway. In addition to employing a contractor on the cheap, the businessman seems to have been in a dangerous rush.

    Basciano, 90, doesn’t use email, leaving that to his employees. But in emails among his representatives, the Salvation Army and Marinakos, two themes jump out — a general awareness that the job posed serious safety concerns, and Basciano’s impatience with the pace of demolition.

    According to one email in late April, Basciano had walked by the site and was “SHOCKED” to see the building still standing. A couple of weeks later, Basciano’s reps emailed the Salvation Army, seeking roof access to speed up and make safe work of the dangerous job. The next day, STB property manager Thomas Simmonds emailed the Salvation Army, warning that “continued delays in responding pose a threat to life, limb and public safety.”

    A week later, with negotiations still stalled, one of STB’s associates emailed Simmonds to suggest he reach out to the Salvation Army again to secure roof access. Simmonds declined, writing, “Waste more time? Wait for someone to be killed?” Yet he pressed on: “You can do what you want but I am NOT backing off with these people. … I have to look after the interests of the Owners — Richard and his daughters.” These emails speak to what might have been. If the Salvation Army had provided access, even an unqualified contractor like Campbell might have been able to do the job. With scaffolding erected on the store, his workers could have pushed brick from the shared wall into Basciano’s lot. If the Salvation Army had taken these emails seriously, it might have closed the store, or at least warned store employees or customers. But it did none of that.

    Conversely, if Basciano’s firm had simply waited for roof access, its planned residential high-rise would have been delayed, but with some patience, his building would be operational right now. The Market Street victims would still be alive.

    From left: L&I inspector Ron Wagenhoffer; landlord Richard Basciano. | Photos, from left: Facebook; Linda Rosier/NY Daily News Archive/Getty Images.

    From left: L&I inspector Ron Wagenhoffer; landlord Richard Basciano. | Photos: Facebook; Linda Rosier/NY Daily News Archive/Getty Images.

    The emails go on, describing how “Richard” kept an eye on things, expressing pleasure when the pace of work increased. Most incredibly, Basciano came by again on the morning of the collapse. By this time, Campbell had removed so many joists that the shared wall, entirely unsupported, leaned outward over the Salvation Army building like a hammer poised above a nail. But there was to be no last-minute reprieve for the victims of the Market Street collapse and their families. Basciano didn’t move to save anyone, and the emails figure to comprise a huge part of the upcoming trial.

    There is a great deal of money at stake. Basciano, who owned the Hoagie City property, is said in development circles to have set aside up to $30 million to handle a settlement or verdict. The Salvation Army charity is revealed in public documents to be worth around $10 billion. But there is a bigger circle of culpability, which the civil case is unlikely to address, and which the emails capture best by what they don’t say.

    There were no hurried emails from STB expressing fear that L&I might move to shut the dangerous job down. In fact, on May 22nd, STB’s Simmonds even wrote the city to complain about the lack of access to the Salvation Army’s roof: “This nonsense must end before someone is seriously injured or worse. Those are headlines none of us want to see or read.” (Attorneys for Basciano, Marinakos and the Salvation Army, all citing a gag order in the civil case, declined to be interviewed.)

    Simmonds wanted city commerce director Alan Greenberger to intervene. But Greenberger received an email about an hour later from a separate STB representative suggesting that talks with the Salvation Army were continuing. He decided he didn’t need to be involved, and though L&I was under his supervision, he didn’t notify inspectors there of any potential problem.

    Even as the agency responsible for structural safety was completely ineffectual, regular citizens — contractors, an architect — noticed the growing danger. “You could see,” says roofer Bill Roam, “that they were doing it all wrong. They were throwing internal floor joists out of the windows, which was making that whole building less stable.”

    There was no deluge of calls to city officials, however, because witnesses expected that the job — demolitions are inherently dangerous, and this one was in a prominent location — was already very much on L&I’s radar. Roam even turned to co-workers and joked about how the Hoagie City job was going to get shut down. What nobody understood was that L&I was so perilously undermanned that through the Market Street collapse, it was about to reach the lowest ebb of an already troubling history.

    PERHAPS A MONTH after her daughter’s death, Nancy Winkler hand-delivered a letter to Salvation Army headquarters, proposing that the former store site be turned into a public memorial. “I wanted to make sure,” says Winkler, “that nobody could ever forget this happened — or why.”

    She and Bryan also had a meeting with then-mayor Michael Nutter, at which they received his support for their memorial idea. These first moves happened behind the scenes, but Winkler says she and her husband realized they would need to be “more public” if they wanted to reach their goals. So in September, at a press conference in the offices of their attorney, they announced just what they were seeking: justice, via the civil case; the public memorial, which quickly garnered 6,000 signatures of support through an online petition; and, finally, their most ambitious goal, to “make sure it never happens again,” which placed L&I in their crosshairs.

    Winkler and Bryan called for a blue-ribbon committee of independent experts — the committee Glenn Corbett ultimately chaired — to assess L&I and recommend changes. Both parents knew the initiative might put Winkler in an awkward position, knocking the same mayor who’d hired her. But by this time, they were determined to foment a change that was long overdue.

    The previous month, former L&I commissioner Bennett Levin, then 73 years old and 18 years removed from his service to the city, had testified to City Council that the Market Street collapse was rooted in Philadelphia history: the One Meridian Plaza blaze in 1991, which killed three firefighters; the death of Judge Berel Caesar, killed in 1997 after a piece of a city parking garage fell; the 2000 collapse of Pier 34 on the Delaware River, which killed three young women; a 2012 fire at an abandoned industrial building in Kensington in which two firefighters died.

    Each of these tragedies, said Levin, speaks in some way to a culture of lax enforcement. For instance, L&I had cited the building that killed Judge Caesar as a danger yet failed to protect the public. In the Kensington fire, L&I cited the tax-delinquent owners for multiple fire-safety violations, yet never pressed the matter into court. One Meridian’s owners were allowed by L&I to delay outfitting the 38-story office tower with comprehensive sprinkler systems.

    The testimony moved Winkler and Bryan, who grew emboldened as time passed. At a City Council hearing and in subsequent interviews, Winkler suggested that L&I might have stopped the collapse before it happened. The couple also co-authored an Inquirer editorial urging new qualifications for the position of L&I commissioner, demanding that the position be filled by a licensed professional engineer. Further, the collapse revealed “a crying need for significantly improving L&I … where staffing levels have been significantly reduced.”

    While the tone remained polite, the words were slaps at Nutter’s decision-making. As a candidate, he had promised to “blow up” L&I. At the time, his primary focus on easing the process for developers, homeowners and businesspeople appeared to fit with his reformer brand; L&I was confusing, offering 100 different categories of licenses. But once in office, he pressed the plunger, cratering almost 20 percent of the department’s staff. He also reframed the agency’s mission, shifting it out of the department of public safety, where it sat alongside police and fire, to the portfolio of the city’s director for economic development.

    In this instance, for starters, the city’s failure to prevent the collapse traces right back to Nutter’s choices. “Not blaming Alan Greenberger,” says Levin, the former commissioner at L&I, “but if a deputy in charge of public safety gets a message describing risk, they’re far more likely to send someone over there.”

    Further, by the time of the collapse, Nutter had appointed two successive L&I commissioners with no engineering experience: then-32-year-old Fran Burns, a former director for the Manayunk Community Development Corporation, and Carlton Williams, a former supervisor in the streets department. The deep staffing cuts they enacted also bore direct ties to the collapse.

    Ron Wagenhoffer, a city inspector, had been out to visit the Hoagie City site three times prior to when Campbell started compromising the building’s internal stability. He found nothing out of the ordinary. A few weeks later, after Campbell started chucking floor joists out the windows, the building crumbled. Wagenhoffer was devastated, telling colleagues he wished he’d done more. But at the time, he and his co-workers each had roughly 700 active permits to track — about three times what their counterparts in other cities have.

    Wagenhoffer simply had no time. But one week after the collapse, unable to sleep, plagued by remorse and fear that he might be blamed, he shot and killed himself. “The number of inspections he had is completely absurd,” says one L&I staffer, who requested anonymity for fear of retaliation.

    This logic hasn’t gotten enough attention, but if Wagenhoffer’s duties had been the same as those of inspectors in other cities, there might be no tragedy to recount. “If we had a reasonable workload, if the department was adequately staffed, who knows?” says one old colleague, who also requested anonymity. “Maybe he does go back.”

    In fact, if Greenberger had told L&I of the dispute between STB and the Salvation Army, what Wagenhoffer saw inside the building would have been dramatic — a contractor who had no idea what he was doing, and workers undermining the stability of a building poised over an occupied shop.

    Of course, the private individuals and entities involved had a legal responsibility to take the building down safely. They failed. But the city failed, too, abdicating its responsibility to police them. L&I still existed, but in practice, any meaningful oversight had been rolled away.

    Winkler allows that going to work in government offices “wasn’t easy” after her daughter’s death. But she, her husband and Nutter seemed to enter into a kind of truce. He acquiesced to the memorial, and when he stalled on forming the committee they’d called for, Winkler and Bryan spoke up in the press. Coincidence or not, Nutter moved shortly afterward. But there was never any kind of outburst or open debate.

    Perhaps they had each other over a barrel. Nutter could hardly challenge a grieving mom, and if he had, the facts assured he would have lost. For her part, Winkler shied away from aggression. “I wanted to do what Anne would have wanted,” she says, “and she used to come home from the Friends school and talk about Quaker principles.” Staying engaged and working through disagreements meant something to Anne; in turn, that meant something to Winkler.

    Nutter failed to respond to a request to be interviewed for this story. He would likely prefer to put the collapse behind him. For Winkler and her husband, the anniversary of the tragedy arrives every morning, when they awake to remember that their daughter is gone. “I think the Mayor acted throughout this with a lot of grace,” says Winkler. “But I’m talking about change.”

    THIS SPRING, there were signs of hope for L&I. During budget hearings, a cadre of Council members started building a case to give the agency more money than Mayor Jim Kenney had allotted in his budget. Citing a long-established state law, they argued that the city can recalibrate its permitting fees — which haven’t been raised in 10 years — to cover the costs of whatever building safety functions it needs to perform. Seemingly overnight, L&I could be appropriately staffed, funded and maintained.

    This discussion would never have occurred without the Market Street collapse or the efforts in its aftermath by Winkler and Bryan. The entire debate was fueled and shaped by the independent committee they’d called for — its report acting as a ruler to measure the distance between our current, underperforming L&I and what’s merely standard in other cities.

    Of course, this is the kind of “win” Anne Bryan’s parents never hoped for while she was still alive. But such is their life now. This past spring, they experienced another sorry victory when ground was broken on the memorial site. The ceremony included 10 people — family members of the victims and an emotional Mayor Kenney — with silver shovels decorated in yellow bows. Winkler spoke for the families: “By remembering those who died here, the memorial will serve as an enduring reminder that no land development, parking lot, office tower and the profit that they may generate is more precious than human life.”

    When complete, the memorial will include three black granite slabs bearing the names of the victims. Winkler and Perri, the new L&I commissioner, are hatching plans to bring inspectors there during training, to ground them in the importance of what they do. But the memorial site, which might instead have been reserved for some new building, also figures to generate quiet grumbling, perhaps forever.

    Comments pages on news stories about the memorial include a fair share of heckling, often of the If every public tragedy necessitated a memorial, there’d be no land left variety. “The memorial is stupid,” one prominent local business executive told me, requesting anonymity because of the “taboo” nature of his criticism. “The city needs the tax revenue, the city needs the space. I’m sorry Nancy Winkler’s daughter died, but c’mon. The tragedy can be remembered with a plaque.”

    Winkler seems impervious to such criticism. And from her point of view, the carping only serves as evidence the memorial is needed. After all, everyone who holds any degree of responsibility for the Market Street collapse acted to get, keep or protect financial assets at the expense of basic safety. The city government gutted L&I, the department responsible for preventing such tragedies, to save money and reframe it as a revenue driver, again placing dollars over safety. And now seven people are dead in this one incident alone, along with Wagenhoffer, and we don’t want a memorial because we still need to build buildings and generate tax revenue above all else?

    Jay Bryan and Nancy Winkler at the Market Street memorial groundbreaking in April. | Photograph courtesy of Michael Bryant/Philadelphia Inquirer

    Jay Bryan and Nancy Winkler at the Market Street memorial groundbreaking in April. | Photograph courtesy of Michael Bryant/Philadelphia Inquirer.

    Winkler spent a career helping governments manage their finances. But she’s working from a different ledger now. At the memorial dedication, she held up well. She presented herself without any makeup, as if eager to show off the lines in her face. Her voice was strong, but there were moments, in a look or an embrace with her husband, when the loss seemed fresh.

    A day after their daughter’s death, Winkler and Bryan drove to West Laurel Hill Cemetery, in Bala Cynwyd. A staff member there guided them on a tour of possible burial sites. When they got to the second one, Winkler knew they didn’t need to see anything else. The grave was near the top of a hill, overlooking the Cynwyd Trail. She hadn’t thought about the proximity of the cemetery to the trail where she and her family had volunteered. But now she pointed it out to her husband: At the foot of the hill, where she and Anne had planted them, were the cherry trees.

    The moment measured the depth of their loss: Nancy Winkler was about to help her daughter find an apartment. Instead, she and her husband were about to do the only thing left them, and obtain for her this meaningful grave.

    Published as “’This Was No Accident’” in the June issue of Philadelphia magazine.

    The post “This Was No Accident” appeared first on Philadelphia Magazine.

    Generational Poverty: Trying to Solve Philly’s Most Enduring Problem

    $
    0
    0
    McQueen in her West Philadelphia home with three of her 13 grandchildren: left to right, Jaleehah, 5, Mayliyah, 9, and Khaalid “Booda” Casey, 4 | Photograph by Neal Santos

    Mattie McQueen in her West Philadelphia home with three of her 13 grandchildren: left to right, Jaleehah, 5, Mayliyah, 9, and Khaalid “Booda” Casey, 4 | Photograph by Neal Santos

    Mattie McQueen was about five years old when her mother offered a surprise: “Let’s all go for ice cream.”

    McQueen and three of her siblings scrambled out to Mom’s old blue station wagon. They talked, on the way, about what flavor of ice cream they’d get, till Mattie noticed they weren’t traveling the usual route to Dairy Queen.

    “Don’t worry,” her mom replied. “We’re going for ice cream.”

    Minutes later, she parked and led them into an office waiting room. “I’ll be right back,” she said.

    She didn’t come back. That night, the children were placed in foster care.

    Mattie McQueen is 52 years old now, but this story still brings on the tears. McQueen is a big woman, round all over, with straight black hair cropped just above her shoulders, and when she cries, all of her shakes. Throughout her life, she’s been on the move, from Bridgeton, New Jersey, to North, South and West Philly, and through a series of relationships that left her with five kids of her own. “I wanted to do right by them,” she says, “but early on, I was in and out of taking care of them.”

    Today, McQueen is unemployed and cares for her three grandchildren the best she can. Her living room in West Philadelphia is almost barren. What looks like a 20-year-old TV, with its heavy backside, sits against one wall, facing a few metal folding chairs. A tricycle stands in one corner, parked there by her youngest grandchild, Khaalid Casey, known as Booda.

    A cycle of poverty has repeated itself. The poor parents of Mattie McQueen, themselves raised in poverty, gave birth to poor progeny. More than 407,500 Philadelphians live in poverty, about 26 percent of the population — the highest poverty rate among the nation’s 10 biggest cities. The sheer enormity of need strains the city in innumerable ways, from massive social spending to stunted tax revenue to schools. City teachers educate kids suffering from traumas that teachers in suburban districts rarely encounter. The poverty rate among Philadelphia children is a terrifying 36 percent. Many of those children are heirs to a lineage of destitution that stretches back generations.

    Mattie McQueen’s past can’t be undone. But researchers studying the cycle of poverty are now contending that she — and millions of men and women like her — must be seen in context, as the vital heart of a family, a woman whose painful history reaches back generations, and who has three grandkids depending upon her today.

    IN 1868, Horatio Alger Jr. published Ragged Dick, the first of more than 100 books he authored with the same basic plot: Impoverished young man works hard and prospers. More than a century on, the image of America as a place where hard work begets success persists. But the data on the American Experiment tells a different story: Circumstances not of our own choosing — race, class and education — are far more predictive of individual achievement than is work ethic.

    A 2014 paper published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics found that a child’s future financial success is predicated on household circumstances — like parental income and whether his is a single- or dual-parent household. In a separate study drawing on data from 5,783 children now in their 20s, researchers Richard V. Reeves and Isabel Sawhill showed that high-school dropouts from high-income families do as well, economically, as poor kids who graduate from college.

    Photograph by Neal Santos

    Photograph by Neal Santos

    The notion that great opportunity for social advancement awaits immigrants in America — another cornerstone of the national identity — also appears to be based in myth. A 2014 paper published in the Journal of Political Economy follows what happened to two generations of European immigrants who arrived during the age of mass migration, between 1850 and 1913. The study is vast, comparing 21,000 immigrants from 16 separate European countries. What researchers found is that on average, those immigrants who had an economic advantage on their American counterparts when they got here maintained their lead. Those who arrived at a disadvantage stayed behind. And these gaps persisted through a second generation.

    “People don’t like to think of America in this way,” says one of the paper’s authors, Leah Boustan. “That image of the hardworking immigrant who comes to America and makes it big, of each child doing better than his parents, is a big part of how we see ourselves. But the data suggests America is more like a caste system. We do about as well as our parents did.”

    If a child’s success is in great part predicted by a parent’s income, what income should society expect the descendants of people brought here in slavery to earn today?

    Cyndy brown, one of Mattie McQueen’s old neighbors, remembers her as quiet. While Helen and Daniel Chrisden’s other foster kids ran and played, Mattie stayed off to herself, reading. According to McQueen, the Chrisdens provided good food and safe housing. She also liked her home in Bridgeton, a rural area of Southern Jersey she calls “straight country.”

    Helen was short, maybe four-foot-nine, with long hair, cat’s-eye glasses and excellent kitchen skills. Daniel was of average height and thickly built, with a thin mustache and steady work as a mechanic. Mattie lived with them for 10 years, in a tightly packed four-bedroom, 1,400-square-foot house that last sold, in 2010, for $81,000. Mattie and her two sisters shared a room; her two brothers bunked together till the eldest, Alfred, moved out.

    About two years after the children moved in with the Chrisdens, Mattie’s father visited. He’d never married her mother and had recently discovered that Mattie had been shunted into foster care. He brought presents — a little bike, a toy piano and some clothes. Then he was gone.

    Other events occurred in Bridgeton. McQueen says that as a child she was “touched on,” a euphemism for sexual abuse. She says the perpetrator wasn’t her foster parents or a relative and declines to say anything more.

    When her mom, Ida Tucker, came back, after more than 10 years, Mattie moved in with her in North Philly. She’d heard from her eldest brother Alfred, who was 15 when their mom left, that Tucker had suffered a nervous breakdown. The pressure of raising five kids, on her own and poor, was too much. Alfred says that the day his mother took the other kids out for ice cream, he came home from school to find them all gone. A police officer told him he’d be joining his siblings in foster care.

    Mattie wanted to learn about her mother, and her birth family, for herself. “They’d do projects in school, like draw your family tree,” says McQueen, “and I didn’t have one.” Her mother didn’t have many answers. She told stories of growing up in Alabama, picking cotton, but never offered much else.

    Today, records culled from Ancestry.com support that threadbare account. Ida Tucker was born in 1928, and by age 12, when she should have been in seventh grade, she’d only completed the fourth grade. Her father and mother, Martin and Becky Tucker, worked 60 hours per week, farming. They rented a house for $3 a month in Barbour County, Alabama, an area known for cotton. Census records don’t list them having any formal education, and there, documentary evidence runs out.

    Her father’s side is easier to track. In fact, four generations back, a Wm. Baggan appears as her great-great-grandfather. Susan Wilson, a staff member at the Genealogical Society of Pennsylvania, says Baggan may have been either a slave owner or the son of one. In 1930, McQueen’s grandfather, Charlie McQueen, was a farmer in Rocky Springs, North Carolina. Charlie apparently did the best of all her ancestors. He had a seventh-grade education, and he owned his own farm, valued then at $800 — or $11,528 in today’s dollars.

    Charlie’s siblings probably did far worse. Census records show Charlie caring for nine children at a time, many of whom may have been extended family — a common occurrence among the rural poor. And this crowded house included Mattie’s father, Roosevelt. To this day, she and her siblings aren’t sure what Roosevelt did for a living. McQueen says she once saw a picture of him in a big black leather coat with a badge and a holstered gun. He might have been a policeman, she says, in Georgia.

    By the time Mattie left foster care and rejoined her family, her own path was set. Just 16 years old, she’d completed 10th grade. But she’d also become pregnant with the child of a boy she met in Bridgeton. After she moved into her mother’s North Philadelphia home, she dropped out of school. Her thinking was naive, muddled. “I was gonna do things different,” she says. “I was gonna take care of my kids.”

    Sitting there feeding, dressing or holding her baby, she’d ask her mother: “Why did you leave us?”

    But her mother would just shut her mouth, tightly, and leave the question unanswered, as though Mattie never asked at all.

    OTIS BULLOCK JR. was in the second grade at Meade Elementary School in North Philadelphia when a teacher asked him to write an essay on what he would like to be when he grew up.

    Otis wrote A fighter … but in class, his teacher offered another idea. “You’re smart,” she said. “You could be a lawyer.”

    That thought had never crossed Otis’s mind. At this point in his young life, his mom was in and out of crack addiction. His father, with whom he lived most of the time, was a North Philadelphia drug dealer. Bullock Jr. heard his dad described around the neighborhood as a “great fighter” and knew from the way people said it — with admiration and respect — that being good with his fists could mean status in his community. He’d never been told he was “smart.” He’d never heard anyone describe getting good grades with the same reverence people used in noting his dad’s toughness. But that teacher, he says, “spun my head around.”

    Today, Bullock holds a Temple law degree and has already established himself, at 38, as a low-key star in Philadelphia’s political and social firmament. He worked for City Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell and later for Mayor Michael Nutter. His wife, Donna Bullock, just 37, is already a state representative for parts of North and West Philadelphia, including impoverished neighborhoods like Mantua and Strawberry Mansion.

    Blackwell refers to the couple as “beloved.”

    “They have the means to live elsewhere,” she says, “but they have chosen to stay in Strawberry Mansion, one of the city’s most challenged communities, because they believe in that neighborhood and its people.”

    Currently, Otis Bullock Jr. serves as executive director of Diversified Community Services, a nonprofit dedicated to helping the city’s low-income families that he’s positioned at the cutting edge of the war on poverty.

    This spring he hosted a forum on the “two-generation” model, which unites the services provided to parents and children. “It’s really simple,” says Bullock. “You stabilize the parent, or whoever is leading the household, to make the home less stressful so the child can focus on learning. At the same time, you teach those children.”

    In practical terms, the strategy means providing educational support to kids while offering the full range of housing, social, mental-health and economic services to their parents. “In hindsight, this way of approaching generational poverty looks kind of obvious,” says Susan Landry, director and founder of the Children’s Learning Institute in Houston, Texas. “Everyone wants to help children. What the two-gen strategy recognizes is that children exist in families.”

    Educating children without stabilizing the home, says Landry, puts kids in an impossible position — requiring them to lead their parents. Making a child’s home safer and less stressful yields huge benefits in the child’s ability to learn. And two-gen strategies are gaining support among conservatives and progressives alike. Republican governors like Bill Haslam of Tennessee and Gary Herbert of Utah champion the two-gen approach for imparting a sense of responsibility to parents and streamlining government — parking disparate social agencies under one roof. Paul Ryan, Republican Speaker of the House, recently told NPR that helping children requires helping their families — a truism of two-gen thinking. And at July’s Democratic convention here in Philadelphia, former president Bill Clinton extolled the virtues of HIPPY (Home Instruction for Parents of Preschool Youngsters) — a seminal two-gen program that Otis Bullock Jr. brought to Diversified.

    In Philly, Bullock is the tip of the two-gen sword — the philosophy’s most ardent, well-positioned adherent. His recent forum on two-gen practices featured Anne Mosle, executive director of Ascend at the Aspen Institute, one of the leading think tanks in the world. But Bullock conveys no sense of having arrived. “We’re just getting started,” he says. “And we’ve got a lot of work to do. We’re talking about thousands of children who were born into circumstances that were not of their choosing. And that means a lot to me, because I know how hard it is. I was one of those kids.”

    Otis Bullock Jr. with his sons Xavier, 5, and Malcolm, 8. | Photograph by Neal Santos

    Otis Bullock Jr. with his sons Xavier, 5, and Malcolm, 8. | Photograph by Neal Santos

    The lunchroom at Roberts Vaux Middle School was buzzing when a kid stepped up to the lunch table where Otis Bullock Jr. sat — studiously playing a game of chess, by himself — and made a big mistake.

    It was 1991. Bullock was 13 years old, and smaller than most boys his age, with what his guidance counselor calls “the roundest head I ever saw, and the cutest face — all covered in freckles.” He had tested into the Philadelphia school district’s “gifted” program, which got him bused to another school a couple of days a week for advanced courses. This other kid, like many before him, took Otis’s intelligence for physical weakness and stole one of his chess pieces.

    Bullock, at this point in time, led two lives. On one hand, his teachers told him he was smart, that he could accomplish big things, and he believed them. On the other hand, he was still his father’s son. Otis had grown up near the corner of 17th and Jefferson, the city’s infamous “Pill Hill,” where a mass of drug dealers congregated to serve the needs of a far larger 24/7 influx of customers. The same guys who moved product on the corner hung out on the front stoop of Bullock’s house, to socialize with his dad. Once, some men stormed into his home, demanded money from his father, and threatened to kidnap Otis Jr. He watched his father coolly tell the men they’d just walked into a street hustler’s house. “You’ll never make it off the block,” he said. So when this other kid stole Bullock’s chess piece, he just reacted.

    “I couldn’t let myself look like I was getting punked,” he says, “because then everyone would think they could bully me.” Bullock crunched an empty soda can into a flat disk and flung it — cutting a gash over the other kid’s eyes.

    In the principal’s office, they asked, “Why did you do it?”

    “He stole my chess piece,” Bullock responded, as if that should explain everything.

    Today, Bullock looks back and understands his luck. “I had a lot of people go way out of their way to help me,” he says. “I could’ve ended up in the system. But they kept giving me chances, saying, ‘Boy, you could be great.’”

    At home and in his neighborhood, Otis Jr. learned to be tough, even brutal, to survive. At school, teachers and administrators clued him in to a different set of rules entirely — rules he’d need to abide by if he ever wanted to leave that neighborhood behind.

    Years and hindsight show that his parents loved him. His mom, when she was around and free from her addiction, encouraged him in school. And his father — who quit dealing when Otis was 10 — came home every night and spent good money on healthy food for his ever-growing family: one child with Otis’s mom, and seven additional kids with two other women. Of course, his parents were once children, too — born into circumstances not of their own choosing. In fact, Bullock’s family tree looks much like McQueen’s.

    In just four generations, the Bullocks also stretch back to slavery. Post-emancipation, they lived in the Carolinas and Florida, working in tailor shops and turpentine factories, on farms or washing clothes. They rented their family homes.

    On his mother’s side, in more modern times, the ladies raised children without a father’s help, cleaning houses for money. His paternal granddad worked as a line cook. Grandmom took in other people’s laundry.

    The senior Otis Bullock, now 59, grew up in South Philly, eating what he calls “government food” — beans, powdered milk, Spam. A hog maw was a rare treat of animal protein. When he was five or six, he outgrew his only pair of pants. His parents had no money to buy him a new pair. So his mom yanked a curtain down from the window and crafted him some. “It was embarrassing,” says Bullock Sr. “But she was doing the best she could.”

    In the mid-’70s, outdoor drug bazaars became a common feature of the underground economy. Bullock Sr. dropped out of school. “I was tired of being laughed at,” he says, “and wanted to make some money.”

    Today, Bullock Jr. listens to the details of the meager table his father enjoyed — “poor food” — and realizes what his father provided him. “That wasn’t my experience,” he says. “He did better for me than that.”

    Bullock Jr. has 14 half-siblings. They had food but little else. At the start of each school year, his father and the woman Otis calls his stepmom bought each child two pairs of pants, two shirts and one pair of sneakers. To get through the week, he and a brother would rotate through each other’s outfits. “We had different builds,” says Bullock, “so half the time I wore baggy clothes.”

    As time passed and the good grades kept coming, his teachers laid out a possible future: “They’d tell me,” he says, “if I could stay out of trouble, not get suspended, maintain perfect attendance and keep up my grades, I could get into one of the city’s good high schools. And from there? I could go to college. I could get out.”

    A lot of kids might have trouble grasping this concept: What’s “out” to a child whose parents are too poor to take her on a trip to see the rest of the world? His stepmom, the woman with whom his father had six of his children, used to call him an “educated bum.” She didn’t understand, he says, why this sedentary kid thought reading books was a route to anything. His family expected him to blow off school on occasion, to skip class when they were short on money for bus fare. Otis Jr., a child, had to sift through these competing influences. With a wisdom uncommon to children, he did.

    He got into that good high school, the one for engineering and science. And as the good grades kept coming, one of his younger brothers paid him a strange compliment. “I wish I could be like you,” his brother said. “You don’t have any pride.”

    “What are you talking about?” Bullock asked.

    His brother, who’d already begun working the corners to get new sneakers, explained that Otis seemed content sharing pants and donning old, worn shoes. He equated Otis’s acceptance of hand-me-downs with having no pride at all. But by this time, Otis Bullock Jr. knew that his shoes didn’t define him. Today, when he recounts this story, he still looks sad. But at the time, he just knew he had to escape.

    In 1996, he departed for West Chester University, which had offered him the full academic scholarship he needed. On a late-summer day, his family gathered on the front stoop to see him off. They cheered, and Otis Bullock Jr. paused to look back. “I remember thinking, ‘I did it,’” he says. “‘I never have to come back here.’”

    Diversified Community Services evolved from the University of Pennsylvania’s settlement-house camps, established in 1897, which housed poor citizens and added services as time went on, including racially integrated summer camps for boys and girls in the 1920s, when school integration was still generations away. Today, Diversified offers educational summer camps, day care and preschool services in two South Philadelphia locations. Parents can use Diversified to develop job résumés, find work, get job training and affordable housing, and also to gain access to mental-health services for depression or issues like anger management.

    In terms of two-gen work, however, Diversified is just getting off the ground. The agency became the first in Pennsylvania to offer the Clinton-touted HIPPY program last year, and Bullock says he’ll be adding many more two-gen services in the years ahead, including a planned frozen-yogurt franchise. This, too, is cutting-edge stuff in the nonprofit world — a means of generating a regular stream of revenue beyond fund-raising, and a way to put adult clients to work.

    Even small gains in parental income can yield huge dividends. A study published by Stanford found that a $3,000 annual boost in a poverty-stricken family’s income raises a child’s future adult earnings by 17 percent.

    The benefits are also biological. “We know a lot about education now that we didn’t know even 20 years ago,” says Marjorie Sims, the managing director at Ascend. “A child’s brain is like a sponge. The more education and knowledge we offer them at an early age, the better able they are to retain it and learn the skills that will get them through school.”

    Moreover, we also know that stress and depression associated with poverty, addiction and the threat of violence suppress executive brain functions like learning and memory formation. In neurological terms, a child of poverty faces barriers to learning. But two-gen strategies can improve or even reverse this, replacing depression and stress with a routine of work and learning. “No one is going to get rich from this,” says Bullock. “For the parent, it’s too late for that. But work as a nursing assistant is solid and stable. If we can help them gain a basic income and stabilize the home, the child now has a real opportunity to thrive. And isn’t that what we all want?”

    ONE DAY IN 1993, Mattie McQueen woke up with an IV in her arm and a big bank of fluorescent lights ticking overhead. A nurse told her she was in Episcopal Hospital, on Lehigh Avenue, which did nothing to jog her memory. She knew herself, though, and understood she must have been discovered in an abandoned house, blown out on crack.

    At this point, her foster dad and both of her biological parents had died. She’d spent seven years in a fog, ever since she first took the pipe and experienced a high so rich, it spun her up and away — till all her problems were just little dots beneath her, and then gone. In these wild years, McQueen had three additional kids by three different men, scattering them into other people’s houses — an aunt she didn’t know all that well; relatives of the children’s fathers. Then, a couple of days into this hospital stay, the staff told her she was pregnant again, with her fifth child. She was 29 years old.

    McQueen recounts all of this through a sad smile. Her house is mostly quiet today — two of her grandkids, the girls, nine-year-old Mayliyah and five-year-old Jaleehah, are gone. But she stops talking when her grandson comes tromping over — a little treasure four years old, with round cheeks and a round belly. “C’mon, Booda,” she says, “you get on your bike and pedal.” Booda pedals his trike through the mostly unfurnished dining and living rooms. “When I took crack,” McQueen continues, quietly, “I lost my mind.”

    The hospital and the new pregnancy forced sobriety on her. She entered a rehab program to detox and get well. Then she took jobs at food distribution warehouses in South Philadelphia. She brought her kids back to live with her in a home in South Philadelphia and spent several years “moving potatoes and tomatoes and lifting them boxes all day,” till she hurt her back. Doctors also diagnosed her with diabetes. Today she walks with the aid of a big cane. She’s been unemployed for about 20 years, and her kids are grown.

    Her oldest, Cheryl McQueen, 37, is unmarried and unemployed, living in South Philadelphia with four kids of her own. Henry Aaron Williams, 34, has been in jail since a 2004 rape conviction. Tameme McQueen, 28, is an unmarried mother of two and works as a customer-service rep at an insurance company. Stephen Jones, 27, was arrested in July and charged with assault. He was previously sentenced to five to 10 years in jail for a different assault. Mattie’s youngest biological child, Stephanie, is 26 and the mother of the three kids for whom she now cares.

    “She was doing good in school,” says McQueen. “I was really proud of her, but she started hanging out with the wrong people.” And so McQueen is doing it all over again — sober, but still struggling with the same math problem she’s faced for the past 20 years: a monthly ledger that’s short and precariously balanced.

    Her annual income is $17,976, well beneath the federal poverty level for a family of four, which is set at $24,300, and she qualifies for medical care to cover the kids. But she’s left with roughly $100 a week for clothes, transportation costs, school and housecleaning supplies, and personal-care items like toothpaste and shampoo. That money also goes toward the deficiencies in her budget. For instance, the standard food budget for a single parent and three children in Philadelphia County is about $850 per month. “I’m always juggling,” she says. “One month I might spend a little more on clothes for the kids. The next month I might spend a little more on food.”

    To cope, she foregoes cable, most furniture, appliances and air conditioning. She has no window A.C. unit and just one fan. On hot nights, she and the kids pile in front of the fan to escape the heat.

    What will become of these kids?

    There are affluent parents who spend McQueen’s entire annual income on a single semester of private elementary school — for one kid. There’s no percentage for McQueen to carve from nothing. A computer and a wi-fi connection — fundamental facets of any successful millennial kid’s life — aren’t possible. Treats might mean an occasional $10 pizza or Chinese food. Toys, for Christmas or a birthday, or “special” clothes for a school-related event, are extravagances. “Sometimes,” she says, “I’ve got to rob Peter to pay Paul.”

    Photograph by Neal Santos

    Photograph by Neal Santos

    For example, just this spring, when Jaleehah graduated from pre-K, McQueen fell behind on utility bills. She needed to buy new clothes for her grandkids to wear to the ceremony. “I want them to feel like normal kids do,” she says, “like I never did feel, shopping in thrift stores and without any parents around.”

    Bullock saw this thinking in his own upbringing. “A little money here or there isn’t going to get you out of poverty,” he says, “but it will provide you with a good day. And those temporary pleasures are worth a lot when you’re poor.”

    Of course, it’s easy to take a hard line on McQueen. The 47 years since her mother abandoned her is a long time to cry, even over such hardscrabble origins. Today she’s a middle-aged woman who made her choices. She had five babies, dropped out of school, and lifted up that crack pipe. Some will hear her story and think she should count herself lucky that society hasn’t simply cast her beyond the city wall.

    But then Booda pedals back into the room, gets off his tricycle, and runs to her. And McQueen, this conversation about her past finished, begins to stroke his hair.

    IN MANY RESPECTS, college was far easier for Otis Bullock Jr. than his childhood. His tuition was paid for, and a job at Wawa kept him housed and fed. But computers had become essential college equipment, and he couldn’t afford one. He did keep in touch with his old school administrators, however, and within a week of learning that he was having difficulties, his middle-school guidance counselor, Florence Johnson — then a principal at University City High — turned up at his door bearing a Dell desktop.

    “I didn’t do this by myself,” Bullock says of how far he’s come. “People need to understand that. It’s not like any kid can just rise above their circumstances and make it. They need help.” When he graduated from West Chester in 2000, he invited old teachers to the ceremony. One, Salome Thomas-EL, later cast the event as the last chapter of his best-selling book I Choose to Stay: A Black Teacher Refuses to Desert the Inner City. As far as Thomas-EL knows, in 10 years of teaching at North Philly’s Vaux Middle School, Otis Bullock Jr. was the first of his students to go on to graduate from college.

    Johnson had also stayed in his ear, telling him to think not only of getting out but of reaching back afterward to help others. Bullock pursued a law degree at Temple — a choice put in his head by his second-grade teacher. He equated lawyering with the civil rights movement, but in retrospect, the choice reflected how little he’d been exposed to the world. Once on campus, he felt disillusioned.

    “My classmates were not people who wanted to change the world,” he says. “They were very cutthroat, and they were not, most of them, idealistic about what they could do. At all.”

    He became acutely aware of the gulf in experiences that separated him from his classmates, enduring the same stranger-in-a-strange-land feeling that had marked his life to this point. After he’d tested into gifted courses and arrived at Albert M. Greenfield Elementary School, he stood outside for a long time, thinking he was in the wrong place. There were no bars on the windows. Was this really a school? He even called the office at Vaux to make sure he was in the right place.

    Sure, these other kids at Temple had worked hard for their success. But many had attended fine schools all their lives, with the best instructors in the world, and lived without any fear of dying. They learned about success from their parents, professionals with 401(k) plans and multiple cars. And as hard as these kids worked, they also got to play — to plan for summer barbecues, to attend elaborate birthday parties. In high school, they’d dressed in fashionable clothes purchased in late-summer buying sprees. And for most of them, once they left home, their families helped with college costs, with down payments on first homes, while their communities provided a foundation to which they could always return.

    Bullock had a different store of memories. As a young boy, he sat on the living room couch one day and watched his father open the door to a group of rivals carrying baseball bats. He heard gunfire, commonly, on the streets outside his window, and worried that someday a bullet might find him. And when he left home, he saw his family and neighborhood as something he had to escape.

    As Bullock studied at West Chester, his mother, born the same year as Mattie McQueen, hit her roughest stretch yet, enduring multiple arrests. He’d talk to his maternal grandmother about the news back home, but she sagely left the bad bits out. “I think if my grandmother had ever told me, ‘Your mom’s in trouble again,’ I might have just quit school and come home,” says Bullock. “And I think she knew that.”

    He’d come home for a weekend or holiday and engage in a charade in which his whole family was complicit: No one said anything about how much he was missed or how bad things had gotten back home.

    He met his future wife, Donna, in his first year at Temple. Herself the child of impoverished parents, Donna grew up in New Brunswick, New Jersey, never realizing she was poor until a newspaper reporter for the Home News wrote an article in which she appeared, at eight years old, happily eating her Thanksgiving dinner in a neighborhood soup kitchen. Classmates in her predominantly working-class school teased her. But Donna, too, had tested into advanced courses. She also started calculating a path out. At Temple, she and Bullock started going to dinner and seeing movies together, dating for six months before they kissed.

    Post-graduation, Otis worked in the public defender’s office but felt frustrated. “It was not a place where I was going to make big changes in anyone’s life,” he says. He kept an eye out for job openings and saw that Jannie Blackwell needed a legislative aide on City Council. That job, researching and writing legislation, suited him better. And a few years later, he was hired by then-mayoral candidate Michel Nutter, going on to work in the Office of Community Services, connecting impoverished citizens with the programs available to them. Along the way, he made a name for himself.

    In the spring of 2012, Diversified’s board offered him his current job. He’d taken a circuitous path, but the strands of his life had come together. He was poised to fulfill the hopes of those adults who’d recognized the big intellect in the boy so interested in fighting. Bullock no longer wanted to run from his old neighborhood, choosing to make his home with Donna and their kids in Strawberry Mansion. “I consider myself the sum of the people who got me here,” says Bullock. “I am not anything special, and I worry for the kids who don’t have that kind of help in their lives.”

    THE FIRST TIME Mary Bunn arrived at Mattie McQueen’s South Philly rowhouse, last fall, she intended to fill out enrollment paperwork to place Booda in HIPPY, the early-childhood-education program. But there was a problem: McQueen didn’t have a table.

    They made do by going into her bedroom, where McQueen got down on a mattress she keeps on the floor. Her bed served as both chair and desk. “This is how it is,” says Siria Rivera, Bullock’s director of two-generational programming. “Our clients often don’t have very basic things.”

    By signing up for HIPPY, McQueen received books and preschool learning materials for her grandson. She also received an advocate in Bunn, who’d help her understand just how much she could help Booda learn. “They see their child learning,” says Rivera, “and they know they did that. For a parent who is poor, who might be struggling and depressed, that sense of accomplishment is a big thing.”

    Bunn’s title is “parent partner,” positioning her as an equal to the caregiver, not a boss. In practice, though, she’s there to teach the caregiver. For each lesson, she and the parent engage in role-play: The parent plays the part of the child, and Bunn plays the adult.

    A lot comes out in these sessions.

    Bunn remembers one mom who would snap “No, no, no!” whenever her child made a mistake. During role-play, Bunn modeled good teaching behavior — giving positive reinforcement, gently stating the correct answer, never calling the child wrong. “She got to see the best way to teach her child,” says Bunn, “without anyone lecturing her.”

    From the first, McQueen radiated enthusiasm and grasped, right away, the techniques of teaching — turning the sessions into play and a chance for Booda to be the sole point of focus, without distraction. Still, Bunn didn’t expect the results she got. Each week, when she checked on their progress, McQueen and Booda had completed the mandatory exercises and the written “suggestions” for further work. If the booklet Bunn left behind called for them to go out and identify a flower together and press it between the pages of the book, Bunn would arrive to find every kind of flora on McQueen’s block. “We’ve got other, very good parents,” says Bunn. “But no one else was doing all that.”

    The real test of how things are going, however, comes at weeks 10, 20 and 30, when the peer partner tests the child directly. Booda, says Bunn, exceeded any expectation. “The longest session, that I figure will take 30 minutes, he did in 10,” she says. “Mattie is clearly working with him, above and beyond, and he is picking it up.”

    Photography by Neal Santos

    Photography by Neal Santos

    There is, too, a noticeable change in McQueen. Teaching Booda and caring for these grandchildren does something for her. She is largely estranged from her birth family. Two of her siblings are “in the wind,” turning up unexpectedly before drifting out of contact again. She and her oldest brother, Alfred, rarely speak. She and her sister Mary Elisabeth often check in over the phone, and sometimes they fight about the past.

    During one argument, which occurred over speakerphone, Mary Elisabeth reacted angrily to McQueen sharing the family business with a reporter. “I am gonna come over there if you keep doing all of this talking,” she said, her voice raised. “You come over here,” McQueen yelled back, “I’ll crack you upside the head with this cane!”

    There was no violence between the sisters, but there is the sense that there are two different Matties — the one whose past is inscribed and tragic, and the one whose future is still being written. “She’s talked to me about her past,” says Bunn, “and she’s cried. But her whole demeanor changes when she talks about her grandkids.”

    Speaking of her grandkids, McQueen brightens. Her husky voice takes on a singsong tone. “There’s only one thing I really want,” she says. “I want to live long enough to see them kids graduate from college.”

    THERE IS A temptation to seek answers in the stories of people like Otis and Donna Bullock, who did pretty much everything differently than their parents.

    Otis’s parents had 15 children between them. His father had children with three women and married none of them. His mother had children with six different men, marrying one in a relationship that ended after four years. Donna had a similar upbringing. Her mom was unmarried and had six children with five different men. Her biological father was never in the picture. “It’s a mind-set,” says Otis Bullock. “There’s a way you grow up and what you see around you — you take it as normal. But I was fortunate enough to be exposed to other things, so I could see there was a different way.”

    In middle-class society, says Bullock, kids are taught to approach life in a specific order: 1. Finish high school. 2. Graduate from college. 3. Start a career. 4. Marry. 5. Have children.

    Otis and Donna now have two boys, ages eight and five, and are unlikely to have any more children. They have plans, says Otis, to “live a certain lifestyle” and send their kids to college. But they understand why their parents, given their circumstances, chose the paths they did.

    “You’re already poor,” says Otis. “If you do or do not have another child, you’re still going to be poor.”

    “And children,” says Donna, “mean love and family.”

    Otis’s mother, Denita Washington, now 52, improves upon those answers. “Kids are love,” she says, “and you tell yourself, every time, that this time is going to be different. This guy is telling me that he is going to take care of me, and this one means it. You want to believe that you’re going to have that normal life.”

    Conservatives decry the presence of so many poor children born out of wedlock. But the decision to have kids perhaps reflects the potency of that very American, Horatio Alger-like dream. Babies are one piece of that dream the poor can have.

    The teachers who supported Otis Bullock Jr. stepped in and pointed out a completely different path he might take through life, educating him in both academics and how to get along in the world. And though his mother continued to struggle with drug addiction throughout his adolescence, she supported him when she was there. His father dealt drugs through the first 10 years of his life. But Otis Bullock Sr. went straight before his son entered that dangerous period of adolescence when the streets come calling for new workers.

    “The first time I got a paycheck for an honest day’s work,” says Otis Sr., of a job he got unloading boxes at Toys ‘R’ Us, “that night was the best sleep I ever had. I thought, ‘I’m never going back.’ And I never did.”

    Today, Otis Sr. is a church deacon and Denita Washington is 13 years sober, with an accelerated master’s degree in human services from Lincoln University and a steady job helping ex-offenders reenter society. “What Otis probably doesn’t know,” she says, “is that I told his grandmother, ‘Don’t you tell Otis anything that’s going on with me’ — because I did not want him to be distracted.”

    All of this — the dad who went straight, the mom who always had a master’s in her, the teachers who educated him about the different path he might take — is small support next to the elaborate infrastructure available to middle- and upper-class children. But for a gifted, driven kid like Otis, it was enough. Donna’s story is even starker in this regard. Her mother suffered from depression. The man she calls her dad swept in when she was still an infant, getting her mom — who by this time had six children — into mental-health treatment. He also enrolled little Donna in the Head Start program.

    Looking back, says Donna, she can see how her dad executed a two-gen strategy: He stabilized the caregiver, brought some peace to the home, and provided educational support to the child. And this raises some crucial questions: What about all the other kids? What about children with average intellects, extra-large obstacles, and less support in their lives than Otis and Donna Bullock?

    THE CROWD COMES in right on time, filing into a small gymnasium at one of Diversified’s centers, the Dixon Academy in South Philly. Mattie McQueen and her family are the second group through the door. Booda is dressed in crisp khaki shorts and a short-sleeved, vertically striped button-down shirt. McQueen wears a blue floral-print dress and a proud smile, because Booda’s mother, Stephanie, is here, too. “I kept calling,” says McQueen, “and she’s here.”

    There are hugs from Diversified staff members. And there’s a sense that McQueen herself is pointed, ever so slightly, up. She recently moved into a new home, in West Philly, through public-housing assistance, and will pay about $200 less per month. She finally got an air conditioner. She also found a charity to supply her with a dinner table. She and the kids no longer eat picnic-style, with plates in their laps.

    Tonight, she, Booda and Mayliyah are here for Diversified’s “Moving Up” ceremony, a way of acknowledging the achievement associated with completing the 30-week program. The party itself is humble. Balloons and blue paper tablecloths add some color to the gym. A pair of long banquet tables stocked with pizza, sandwiches and grape sodas are arranged underneath a basketball hoop. And a big poster advertising HIPPY hangs at the front of the room as a backdrop for “graduation” pictures.

    Booda smiles, cherubic despite a bee sting that has caused his ear to swell, and seems to understand that his family is here for him. Mostly, he eats pizza and scrambles between his mother Stephanie and McQueen for snuggles as the awards program gets under way.

    Much of McQueen’s life remains unsettled. Her other daughters, Cheryl and Tameme, note that she was absent for great chunks of their childhoods. When they ask about those lost years, McQueen refuses to answer. This is, of course, just what Ida Tucker did to her. But McQueen rejects the comparison. “They know the basics,” she says. “I ain’t tryin’ to hide nothing. I was addicted. But the details … they wouldn’t understand.”

    Even Cheryl and Tameme, however, acknowledge that the present Mattie is different. “I see it in the way she is with her grandkids,” says Tameme. “They love her. She loves them. It’s good.”

    “I see it, too,” says Cheryl. “She’s there.”

    At the Moving Up ceremony, when Booda’s name is announced, McQueen holds his hand and gets her picture taken with him. A little later, though, Siria Rivera calls out her name, shouting, “Mattie McQueen!”

    McQueen goes up, surprised, and gets a hug from Rivera, plus an award of her own. The award itself — a single sheet of heavy paper, unframed and unlaminated — reads “HIPPY Grandmom of the Year.” When McQueen receives it, she surprises everyone, plucking the microphone right out of Rivera’s hand. Her speech is short, maybe 20 seconds, but impassioned: She talks about her love of this HIPPY program and what it can do for the children. Then McQueen booms, with infectious good humor, “These people really care about our children!”

    At that, the whole crowd — which seemed a bit dubious about this woman giving an unplanned speech — offers up applause and shouts. McQueen returns to the table, dabbing tears from her eyes. “I got an award,” she says, seemingly shocked.

    Then Booda throws up.

    McQueen goes over to pat him on the back. She even offers a warm laugh — “Oh, Booda” — as the child opens his mouth and all the pizza he’s eaten spills back out. Then she takes his ear between her gentle fingers and makes an announcement: “We’ve got to take him to the hospital,” she says. “He must be allergic to that bee sting.”

    In less than a minute, with a paper plate and some napkins, McQueen cleans up little Booda’s mess. Then she marshals the procession, three generations long, out the door.

    Mattie McQueen will always bear the burden of her troubled past. But tonight, the role she plays in this world is understood. And in the street, she seems to hold the future right at her fingertips — with one hand always at little Booda’s shoulder and the other still clutching her award.

    Published as “Is There A Way Out?” in the October 2016 issue of Philadelphia magazine.

    The post Generational Poverty: Trying to Solve Philly’s Most Enduring Problem appeared first on Philadelphia Magazine.

    How Luis Cortés Is Quietly Building a New Notre Dame in the Heart of North Philly

    $
    0
    0
    Photograph by Adam Jones

    Photograph by Adam Jones

    When the governor called the Reverend Luis Cortés Jr. in the summer of 2000, the conversation was quick. “Reverend Cortés,” said Governor Tom Ridge. “I have a friend I’d like you to meet.”

    “Okay,” said Cortés. “When?”

    Cortés didn’t inquire about the identity of this “friend” because the governor had already proven to be an ally to Cortés and his organization, Esperanza. The very chair in which Cortés sat reflected the relationship. The leather swivel-back chair sat in the corner office of a building — 240,000 square feet of lovely industrial bones in which Esperanza was founding a college and a charter school — that had been paid for with a grant administered by Ridge. A few days passed before Cortés learned just whom he’d be meeting: Texas governor George W. Bush, the Republican nominee for president.

    Bush had requested that the occasion be informal. Cortés and his staff were to tell no one of his visit. But of course, there were signs. The night before Bush arrived, the Secret Service left snipers on the massive building’s roof. There were also bomb-sniffing dogs. And when the future president arrived, he did so in a caravan of black Suburban SUVs with tinted windows.

    Bush met with Cortés, Ridge, and around two dozen Hispanic clergy. They discussed issues such as the need for immigration reform and better educational results for kids in neighborhoods just like the one where Cortés was headquartered, deep in North Philadelphia, at the corner of 5th and Bristol streets. Cortés noted that Bush didn’t say much but appeared to listen, intently. He stayed longer than Cortés expected — more than two hours. Then he was gone.

    The candidate, the Pennsylvania governor, and the many people — maybe two dozen — providing support and security rolled out in that fleet of black SUVs. Then Cortés’s phone started ringing.

    He’d kept his promise to tell no one of Bush’s visit, so Cortés’s callers all pursued the same line of questioning. “Reverend Cortés,” they asked, “are you all right? Was there a drug bust in your building?”

    Within an hour, Cortés was asking Ridge’s office to issue a press release about Bush’s visit. The sight of all those SUVs, of snipers on rooftops, had signified something unsavory — a big federal drug bust.

    Drugs. Is that how the Rev bought that big building?

    The incident captures the dramatic curve of Luis Cortés’s career: In the early ’80s, he conducted grassroots development in the Latino community. He built a five-unit apartment building for senior citizens. He constructed a laundromat and started a mortgage counseling service. By 2014, he operated schools and workforce-training programs, administered charitable grants all over the nation, and represented a network of thousands of Latino churches. He’d become a regular at White House Christmas parties, and that year he led a delegation of clergy to Guatemala on behalf of President Barack Obama. But in spite of his notable successes — and those of Esperanza — the problems afflicting his community persist.

    As a demographic group, both locally and nationally, Latinos still struggle economically and in educational achievement. Racism persists, too. The Republicans — only eight years ago, still Bush’s party — have just won a presidential election with a radically different kind of standard-bearer: one who was embraced by white nationalists, who vowed to deport millions and build a wall between Mexico and America, who kicked off his campaign by calling Mexican immigrants “drug dealers,” “rapists” and “criminals.”

    America is under a new authoritarian and anti-immigrant leadership. Just what can Luis Cortés do about that? Well, in this instance, the past might actually foretell the future — at least, the distant future. Cortés’s history seems to dovetail with the history of this city and country and suggest just where a tale that leads from Spanish Harlem to North Philly and all the way to D.C.’s halls of power will eventually wind up.

    FOR DECADES NOW, the Hunting Park neighborhood has been considered a no-go zone by many city residents — plagued by crime, drugs and poverty. The architecture speaks of faded promises and lost hope. Block after block of three-story manses loom, now carved into rowhomes and apartments for less-monied tenants. Abandoned factories stand empty — remnants of the long-gone manufacturing base.

    According to 2010 census data, most people here rent homes that hold little value, selling for between $40,000 and $50,000. But in very recent years, a shift began. Color, life and commerce are returning, a slow rebirth that’s due in part to Esperanza.

    Broadly speaking, the mission of Cortés’s sprawling, multifaceted organization is to strengthen Hispanic communities through education, economic development and advocacy. In sharper focus, Esperanza’s chief function is education.

    Nationally, Esperanza — “hope” in Spanish — is a network representing more than 10,000 Hispanic individuals and faith- and community-based organizations centered on issues ranging from education to immigration reform. Cortés, a Baptist minister, has administered $13 million in grant money to Latino enterprises across the nation, $10 million of which came from federal grants during the Bush years. Locally, Esperanza offers a vast range of enterprises. Inside that sprawling building, Cortés and his brother Danny, also a minister and his chief of staff, preside over a nonprofit empire: Esperanza Academy is a charter middle and high school with graduation rates that far outstrip schools across the city and state. Esperanza also runs a cyber charter school for kindergarten through fifth grade, work-training programs, and mortgage counseling. Esperanza has a Christian college, too, offering courses in accounting, criminal justice, business and seven other majors.

    In addition, Esperanza is a community development corporation, with ventures in real estate and planning and a grant-making arm that has dispensed funds to businesses along the 5th Street corridor — the city’s booming “Latin Quarter.” Tierra Colombiana, a Latin restaurant, has become a must-visit for city foodies. New businesses include a spice shop to open in December run by Diana Sabater, a former Philly cop who won the Food Network’s Chopped competition thrice. SEPTA has even rerouted its bus routes here, to provide more service to a neighborhood on the rise.

    Luis Cortés with president Barack Obama, president Bill Clinton, U.S. Representative Nancy Pelosi, Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell, president George W. Bush and Pennsylvania governor Tom Ridge.

    Luis Cortés with president Barack Obama, president Bill Clinton, U.S. Representative Nancy Pelosi, Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell, president George W. Bush and Pennsylvania governor Tom Ridge.

    In the midst of such transformation, there’s a lot of credit to go around. But it’s Esperanza that has provided the community with money and something more: a new soul, a new face.

    “I think I would have put my business here on 5th Street regardless,” says Sabri Ibrahim, who recently established a new Pharmacy of America two blocks from Esperanza’s campus, in the area in which he was raised. “But I made this my corporate headquarters for my seven stores, and the place where I come to work every day, because of Esperanza.”

    Sabater grew up in this neighborhood, then served it as a Philly beat cop. “I swore I’d never come back,” she says. Now she lives right here in Hunting Park. She remembers what it looked like 10 years ago, when she was on the force — the streets swarming with people up to all manner of bad behavior. “But now I can look down 5th Street at 10 p.m. and it’s quiet,” she says. “And it feels like home. Esperanza deserves a lot of credit for helping to make that happen.”

    The organization is far from finished. Cortés is in the midst of a $6 million capital campaign to fund a performing-arts media and technology center, a digital-media production facility and a conference center. He’s also keen on continuing to develop the neighborhood. But just who is Luis Cortés?

    To this point, Cortés has appeared in Time magazine, the New York Times and papers around the country; testified before the Senate on immigration reform; and been featured as a panelist on CBS and Fox. But the focus has remained so singularly on the issues he fights for that the wider public doesn’t really know him.

    “He has achieved a lot without pursuing any kind of celebrity,” says former governor Ed Rendell, “and I think it’s because he is just not interested.”

    “He doesn’t give endorsements,” says Councilwoman Maria Quiñones-Sánchez, “but as a politician, he can put you in a room with people, and there is a value, for politicians, in just being seen with him.”

    For all his involvement in civic life, Cortés seems to transcend the normal cycles of the electoral process. He doesn’t have much to say about his face time with presidents Bush or Obama, passing right over anecdotes to address the details of what they’ve done. Locally, former City Councilman Bill Green acknowledges him as a “must visit” for politicians but says, “I can’t really say I know him.” And Larry Ceisler, one of the most well-connected political operatives in the city, isn’t even sure who he is: “I’ve heard of him, but what does he do? … Honestly, I wouldn’t know him if he stepped on me.”

    This sense of Cortés somehow tucking himself away inside the pages of the New York Times is crucial to his story — a key to his background and philosophy, and the plight of his people.

    TODAY, AT 59, Luis Cortés has the air of a man still enjoying the meat of life. But his hair is graying, and the many pictures in his office that show him alongside presidents dating back to Jimmy Carter give some sense of how far he’s come.

    His family, when he was growing up in Spanish Harlem, spent some time on public assistance. The experience, he says, helps him understand the pain many in his community feel. But his dad ultimately found steady employment in the grocery business, and Luis and Danny were around 10 when Luis Sr. came home one day on a mission.

    By this point, their dad had worked as a manager in another man’s grocery store for several years. “This man had promised him that he would flip him the store,” remembers Danny, “like a profit-share equivalent, but years were passing, and it was clearly not going to happen.”

    Luis Sr. had already been saving his money to acquire that store. But to open his own from scratch, he called upon every resource in the family. “He came into my bedroom,” says Danny, “and he took my piggy bank.” Their father didn’t go to church — he worked seven days a week — but Luis and Danny attended with their mother. They saw their dad mostly while helping out in the family shop. For a time, Luis Jr. made a habit of eating Snickers bars right out of the box, sometimes two or three at a clip. Each time, his father would eye him and heave a deep sigh, till one day Luis Jr. finally snapped, “What?”

    His father led him through the math: the cost of a box of candy bars, the price customers paid for them, and just what his son’s grifting did to his bottom line. “You ate my profit,” his father told him. “There is no more profit in that box.”

    The lessons — from father, ownership; from mother, faith — stuck and intertwined in powerful ways as both Luis and Danny earned divinity degrees. Luis studied at Union Theological Seminary, one of the most esteemed, cutting-edge seminaries in the nation. There, Luis rode the crest of a wave that was rolling out of Latin American churches: liberation theology.

    For many centuries, Christians had been taught their reward would come in heaven. Liberation theology posited that a loving God would want His creations to prosper now. “This was really radical stuff at the time,” says Cortés, “and it was catching on.”

    Cortés excelled academically at Union, and his professors introduced him to some of the finest thinkers in the world — people like Gustavo Gutiérrez, a leader in liberation theology. The instructors Cortés most respected taught him the power of staying out of the cycles of electoral politics. By focusing on his work and issues, by avoiding endorsements, he could grow his influence without suffering the ups and downs of politics. “It is very simple,” says Cortés. “The institution we are building remains. Politicians are temporary.”

    When Cortés graduated in 1981, the Reverend Orlando Costas, a mentor he’d met at Union, hired him to organize Latino churches in North Philadelphia. The Latino population has risen dramatically here in recent years. According to data compiled from the U.S. Census and the Pew Charitable Trust, the Hispanic population (the Census doesn’t classify people of Brazilian or Portuguese descent as Hispanic) spiked from 8.5 percent of the city’s population in 2000 to 14 percent in 2015. In fact, the city’s population growth of 50,000 during that period was driven entirely by an influx of 90,000 Latinos.

    But in 1982, the Hispanic population (anyone of Latin American ancestry) was about four percent. Cortés convened meetings at various ministers’ homes, where those assembled ate from deep pots of asopao, a soup of chicken, ham and rice, and began the discussions that would ultimately lead to Esperanza. The organization, dubbed the Hispanic Clergy of Philadelphia, met with police and elected officials on issues related to the community and tried to figure out how to help Latino families succeed.

    Members also engaged in deep philosophizing, asking questions like, What does it mean to pastor at 5th and York? What efforts would a God who wanted security and contentment for all people expect of them? “If you take it as a given that we are children of God,” says Cortés, recalling those early discussions “and therefore equally worthy of respect and opportunity, where does that lead?” Most dramatically, it led to action in the streets. The Hispanic Clergy gathered at night to sing hymns outside known drug houses, shutting down their operations temporarily. One of their number was pistol-whipped.

    As Cortés’s loose network formalized, it needed nonprofit status and someone to run the organization full-time. “I didn’t particularly want to be in charge of something like this,” says Cortés.

    He was married, with two children. Would this enterprise last, and if not, what would he do? But he took it on, and growth came slow but steady. A laundromat at 2nd and Huntingdon was a big step. There, the group, first dubbed Nueva Esperanza, had a chance to test its philosophy. Washer and dryer cycles are usually set at odd intervals, for instance, to keep customers in the store longer and yield more vending sales. God, Cortés thought, would not run a laundromat that way, so the appliance cycles and prices were set to get customers in and out as quickly and economically as possible. The operation still yielded revenue. Cortés was able to move Esperanza, to the floor above the laundromat, and plow additional profits into more ambitious projects.

    In 1997, Esperanza built 12 units of affordable housing, providing homes — and assets — for that many impoverished families. And it moved again, to its current location, initially renting 10,000 square feet of office space in the former envelope factory. In 1998, Cortés learned that since the building was about to be sold, he’d have to move his operation. The price was $2.7 million.

    This was a ridiculous number for Esperanza, a nonprofit with total revenues of $1.9 million. But Cortés was determined to buy the building. The deal that was in place was strictly verbal, so Cortés negotiated for a few weeks in which to orchestrate a miracle.

    THE CHALLENGE, and opportunity, of buying the building came at a fortuitous time. Cortés had become convinced that public schools were failing Latino children.

    The school superintendent at the time, David Hornbeck, was himself a graduate of Union Theological Seminary. At Esperanza’s request, Hornbeck supplied statistics that Cortés and his fellow clergy had suspected but never seen. “When we saw the dropout rates,” Cortés recalls, “it was upsetting. We did not know it was this bad.”

    The Latino dropout rate in high school, he says, was 30 percent — a horrifying figure, as he knew what it meant for those kids and their families: lower employment rates and wages, higher incarceration and addiction rates. But then Hornbeck revealed the middle-school dropout rate: 15 percent.

    That some kids washed out of the system by the age of 13 hadn’t occurred to Cortés. He and Esperanza’s board began strategizing, and landed on the idea of building a college. “We knew the statistics,” Cortés says. “If people could be raised to a certain degree of literacy, they could find jobs, and we’d never see them in any of our programs again.”

    The huge building he might, however improbably, buy could give him the basic infrastructure he needed. He started making phone calls, and a group of prominent Latino attorneys arranged a meeting with then-governor Tom Ridge.

    Cortés says he met with Ridge and perhaps a dozen attorneys, each of whom shared a friendly exchange with the governor. When it was Cortés’s turn, however, his nerves got the best of him. “Governor,” he blurted, “I need three million dollars.”

    Ridge burst out laughing. “Well, Reverend,” he responded, “I appreciate your directness, but do you mind telling me why?”

    As introductions go, it was a clumsy one. But Ridge remembers the moment fondly. And right there at the table, he provided some wise counsel, telling Cortés that a college for Latinos sounded like a good idea, but so did a charter school — for the kids so underserved by Philly public schools. The governor offered him a $3 million grant through a preexisting program. Under the grant terms, however, Cortés could only get the $3 million if he raised another $3 million to match it. In a circuitous deal, Cortés leveraged a bank loan off the promised grant, bought the building, and used it as collateral.

    “Frankly, Reverend,” Ridge told him when the deal went through, “I didn’t expect you to get the money. But you did, and I’m a man of my word.”

    Cortés suddenly had a huge real estate asset, part of which he could immediately use for schools and the rest of which he could rent out, to generate revenue toward growth for his organization and paying off this new loan. Looking back, says Cortés, the acquisition seems to have been born directly from the conversations he and the Hispanic Clergy had asked themselves years earlier: What would it mean to take on the idea that they are the hands and feet of God, here to bring about equality on Earth? “We asked ourselves,” he says, “what would that look like? What kind of place would that be?’”

    Then he gently lifts his hands, palms up, and looks around, as if taking in his office and all that lies beyond — the many rooms and efforts of Esperanza.

    ONE DAY ABOUT five years ago, Elizabeth Conde-Frazier, the dean of Esperanza College, was startled by the wracked sobs of someone out in the hall. She found a male student there, covering his face in embarrassment as he cried.

    “What’s wrong?” she asked.

    The young man pointed, emphatically, toward the men’s room. “That is the cleanest bathroom,” he said, “that I ever saw.”

    Conde-Frazier quickly understood what must be happening. “You are created in the image of God,” she told the young man. “And that means we gotta treat you right.”

    At this, the young man cried even harder.

    While this story may sound so strange as to be nearly unbelievable, it’s understandable in the fuller context of Esperanza’s aims.

    “That building has been very good for the neighborhood,” says Miguel Garcia, who runs a nearby rummage store. “New life.”

    Garcia knows from experience. One of his daughters attended work-training classes there and then got a certificate to run her own day-care service. Another daughter sends his grandson to the high school. “He is very happy there,” Garcia says. “I don’t think he was so happy before. It is a good place.”

    Some of the success is attributable to infrastructure. The work-training center and the schools gleam, a quality not normally found in city schools or government agencies. “This is all very much by design,” says State Senator Art Haywood, who worked as Esperanza’s legal counsel for 26 years. “When people walk in the door, they have entered a different environment — a place where excellence is provided and expected.”

    And excellence is being achieved. Workforce training stats cite Esperanza as one of the most successful training centers in the state. Further, in a city where the most recent four-year high-school graduation rate among Latinos is a tragic 54 percent, Esperanza Academy is graduating 93 percent of its kids on time, with 68 percent going on to college. The academy’s dropout rate is less than one percent. Four years running, U.S. News & World Report has ranked Esperanza Academy as one of the top high schools in the nation, and as high as in the top 10 percent.

    Jim Ford, an educational consultant who worked with the Cortés brothers when they first started planning the charter school, says he was back in Philly several years ago, walking through the halls of Esperanza Academy, when he saw a male student start yelling during a class change. A small group of Esperanza students took immediate action. Swarming over to this kid, who was evidently new, they said, “Hey, we don’t do that here. If you want to act like this, you should leave and go someplace else.’”

    In this sense, says Ford, the kid Conde-Frazier encountered wasn’t crying so much because the bathroom was clean, but because he was in an entirely new environment — a building where the depression associated with poverty and violence is replaced by people setting goals and reaching them. Latino kids often don’t have an optimistic view of themselves or their prospects, says Conde-Frazier, and attaining a new vision of themselves — as capable people with meaningful prospects — can trigger deep emotions.

    There are occasional complaints about Esperanza. One critic who wanted to remain anonymous questioned Cortés’s salary, which is about $250,000 now, plus benefits. That salary, however, has grown with the organization’s budget. (In the late ’90s, when Esperanza had just 25 employees, he earned less than $100,000.)

    And plans for a K-5 grade school went unapproved by the School Reform Commission for several years, but that operation is now slated for the 2017-’18 school year. The middle school’s test scores have improved with the years but generally aren’t as outstanding as the graduation or college-graduation rates. (Cortés and David Rossi, SVP and CEO of Esperanza Charter Schools, say these scores should improve once they have students from kindergarten forward, and that some of the gap comes back to cultural issues around standardized testing.)

    Overall, the school can only be counted as a success — and another example of Esperanza’s guiding philosophy. Ford remembers trying to talk the Cortéses into emphasizing early childhood education and starting with a K-1 grade school, then adding a grade each year. Kids who have been badly educated and exposed to violence and poverty earn the label “at risk,” and most programs these days start with the premise that those who hit age 12 without intervention are already lost. But the brothers couldn’t believe God would consider any 12-year-olds beyond redemption. So, mindful of those disturbing high-school dropout rates, they started with a high school and worked their way down.

    This decision likely reflects what Cortés calls the “secret sauce” — the reason his school, and its student body, which is comprised entirely of minorities, does so much better than most schools elsewhere in Philadelphia or around the nation. As a charter, it’s free to be bold. Its success hinges on an intimate knowledge of the population it serves and a fervor to try out ideas, to shift resources and policies in ways too dramatic for any large school district to match.

    About five years ago, amid concerns about the implementation of an after-school tutoring program, Cortés sought and got approval from his board to take a big step. Rather than keep certain students after school on a regular basis, the school day was extended by an extra period. For everybody.

    Problem solved.

    “I was part of that decision, or at least included in the discussion,” says Ford. “They did it because they thought it would be good for everyone to be there longer, learning and keeping kids in that productive environment.” (Similarly, the college’s semesters last 20 weeks instead of 14, to allow professors to bring up to speed students who may have been undereducated in public schools.)

    The question arises, again: Given all that Esperanza and Cortés have accomplished, why aren’t they better known? Part of it is Cortés’s relentless focus on ideas and causes. But at least some of the explanation is likely racial: “We’re still invisible,” he says.

    Latinos, Cortés notes, are the largest non-white demographic in the U.S., at 16 percent — higher than African-Americans. Yet TV, movies and music coming out of Latin culture remain largely marginalized. Actor John Leguizamo penned an op-ed last October for the New York Times, “Too Bad You’re Latin,” in which he recounted white colleagues telling him he’d be a much bigger star if his heritage was different. One producer, he wrote, told him flatly: No one wants “to see Latin people.”

    In the past five years or so, Cortés has been looking to make a slightly broader push. “We’ve accumulated 10 to 15 years of data,” he says. “And now I feel comfortable approaching national foundations and saying, ‘Come in and look at what we’ve done. Is this a model?’ I believe it is, and that we can take our organization elsewhere and do this all over the country.”

    TO UNDERSTAND CORTÉS’S master plan, he suggests we look at the experience of other American ethnic groups — from Jews, African-Americans and Italians to the Irish. This part of our history seems largely forgotten, but Irish immigrants in the 1800s were subjected to extraordinary discrimination. Periodicals regularly published cartoons depicting them as subhuman.

    Notre Dame University was founded by a 28-year-old Catholic priest in 1842 in that environment, at a time when the Irish had few opportunities. This is Cortés’s model. “I want to build a new Notre Dame,” he says. “I am building a new Notre Dame.”

    The comparison isn’t exact. But the idea is the same. “Notre Dame provides a bridge for people to be educated and qualified to gain employment,” Cortés says, alongside those who once rejected them. Seen this way, each of Esperanza’s services provides a bridge for Latinos to move into what Cortés calls “the mainstream of America.”

    There is deep irony in any sense of Latino “otherness.” The Spanish were here ahead of English speakers, founding St. Augustine before the Brits settled Jamestown. Hispanic soldiers fought for America’s independence. At least 10,000 Mexican-Americans fought in the Civil War. More than 250,000 Latino-Americans served in World War II. Despite this, Cortés acknowledges the hurdles Latinos still face. They are considered brown in a society where the power structure is white. And for immigrants, English is a second language, heightening a sense of foreignness. But these issues, too, he says, will wash away. Italian immigrants came here speaking another language and, in time, achieved acceptance and economic success.

    Cortés recently added another prestigious platform to his cause. Early last year, he landed a spot on a new Urban Institute initiative funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The VS Partnership on Mobility From Poverty will seek out people and organizations with records of success and try to determine if their programs are replicable. Cortés is cast here not only as an expert, but perhaps as one of these case studies. “Nothing has been determined on that,” says program chair David Ellwood, a political economics professor at Harvard and former dean of its School of Government. “But I toured Esperanza, and I was very impressed with what I saw, and they are certainly deserving of this kind of analysis.”

    Cortés is optimistic — both about how Esperanza will hold up as a model, and about the future of Latinos in this country. He adopts a phrase from Star Trek, employed by the Borg, a race of cyborgs bent on taking over the universe: “Resistance,” he says, “is futile. We’ve got the numbers.”

    The Pew Research Center’s report on demographic trends projects Hispanics to comprise roughly a quarter of the U.S. population just two generations from now. That explains why in the run-up to the latest presidential election, Cortés was less ruffled than many by the candidacy of Donald Trump. The ugliness Trump revealed wasn’t surprising to him. “This is nothing new,” he says, referring to the lack of support immigration reform has gotten from Republicans dating back to the Bush administration. “And in the fullness of history, this will be a blip.”

    The morning after the election, he issued a different kind of statement:

    Now that the election has passed, I hope we can enter into a time of introspective reflection. Divisions exist within our country, and that is normal within a democracy. As a nation, we need to focus on civility, mutual respect, and the space to dissent without violence or punishment. We can uphold the values of respect, integrity, and difference of opinion in a democracy. I pray that our next leader will embrace our country’s diversity and use this new beginning as an opportunity to rebuild our civic virtue.

    The forward-looking, even conciliatory tone suggested the hand he has to play — the long view, the kind of wide lens deployed by theologians and philosophers.

    Cortés wants progress to happen as fast as possible. But victory, he says — ultimate victory — is already assured by the math. “We have no choice,” he says. “If we continue to resist helping Latinos, we will have such a strain on government and social services that we will not be able to withstand it. That’s what we are trying to do — to get Latinos who are in poverty to a place of self-sufficiency. So the question is one of time: Will we respond now, and mainstream the Latino population through education and job training, or will we wait — and prolong this pain?”

    In this long riff, Cortés makes a neat — and seamless — transition, using the word “we” to refer to Latinos, who are growing in numbers; to Esperanza, which is helping that population transition from poverty; and to America, which continues to struggle with issues of racism and how to incorporate this fast-growing population.

    Tellingly, Cortés places no particular emphasis on that word “we” in any of its iterations — a signal of the degree to which all our fates are intertwined.

    His brother Danny further deepens this idea of a unity underneath all the politics, even the racism, by typifying Esperanza as a Latino organization that isn’t particularly Latino at all. “We do not want people to look at Esperanza and see ‘Latinos,’” he says. “I want people — white, black, Irish, whoever — to look at Esperanza and see themselves.”

    It’s a sentiment with which Luis wholeheartedly agrees. “When you look at what Esperanza does,” he says, “we help people get a job, buy a house, educate their children. This is what we all want. All people are united in this.”

    The upshot is, we never really needed to “meet” the Reverend Luis Cortés Jr. at all. We already have. In the great sweep of American history, he has always been clearly visible, under different names, in the various ethnicities that have immigrated here over the centuries. In these terms, he and the people he represents are, simply, us.

    Published as “The Invisible Man” in the December 2016 issue of Philadelphia magazine.

    The post How Luis Cortés Is Quietly Building a New Notre Dame in the Heart of North Philly appeared first on Philadelphia Magazine.

    Do They Still Make Republicans Like Tom Ridge?

    $
    0
    0
    Tom Ridge. Photograph by Shawn Thew

    Tom Ridge. Photograph by Matt Stanley

    On election night, as the foreign country around him lay sleeping, Tom Ridge stayed up all night, watching TV. “I wanted to know who my president was going to be,” he says.

    Ridge was all alone in a hotel room in the Ukrainian capital of Kiev, and he felt surprised but not shocked when the race was called in favor of Donald Trump. Ridge is a former military man and former governor of Pennsylvania — he viewed the crash site at Shanksville on 9/11 — and served as the nation’s first Secretary of Homeland Security. He’d been prepared for Trump’s victory by a trip he’d made back home, to Erie, prior to the election.

    “I’d never seen that level of engagement and support,” he says, “for any presidential candidate.”

    The lawn signs, bumper stickers and billboards seemed to speak of near-unanimous intention, so Ridge, his hotel TV turned to CNN, felt no knot in the pit of his stomach. “I switched modes immediately,” he says. “It was just, ‘Okay, now Donald Trump is my president. I want him to succeed.’”

    Back in May, Ridge, a Republican, had penned a guest column for U.S. News & World Report announcing that he wouldn’t vote for Trump or Clinton. “His bombastic tone reflects the traits of a bully,” he wrote, “not an American president and statesman. If he cannot unite Republicans, how can he unite America?”

    Today, Ridge says, with surprising enthusiasm, “I’m rooting for Trump.” He cites some of the cabinet picks — Kelly in Homeland Security, Mattis in Defense, Tillerson in State — and says, “I have to give him credit where credit is due.” But he hasn’t changed his head or heart. In fact, Ridge is still waging a carefully calibrated campaign of his own. He is pushing, he says, with a pause and a single crisply enunciated word, for “civility.”

    On its face, the 71-year-old Ridge’s mission might appear both laudable and laughable. The news each day is rife with conflict: Protesters decry the President’s policies and overblown, dictatorial methods; each morning, seemingly, Trump hits “send” on some toxic tweet, leveling unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud and “paid” agitators, even that the previous president tapped his phones. His approval rating is at a record low for any president at this early stage of his administration — roughly 40 percent. But who cares? That’s just most of America. The same polling shows at least 85 percent of Republicans think he’s doing fine.

    In this fiercely partisan environment, Ridge seems anachronistic. The first time I interviewed him in his D.C. office, he described bipartisan compromise as “the heart of democracy.” Around that time, Republican leaders in Congress were declining to launch an independent investigation of Trump’s possible ties to Russia, a foreign power, with GOP Senator Rand Paul even admitting the effort would distract them from pursuing their partisan agenda.

    Do they even make Republicans like Tom Ridge any more?

    Of course, the need to ask this question captures why Ridge’s out-of-step ideals are so important right now. “If we have this politics of division and demonization, it doesn’t seem to me that there’s any way forward for a democracy under those conditions,” says Ridge, “and so because I love my country, I’m advocating that we restore civility to our discourse and treat our opponents with respect.”

    Ridge’s opening salvo, perhaps out of an overabundance of politeness, is larded with a gentle euphemism, its concussive conclusion made purposefully indirect: What does it mean when he says our current division permits “no way forward” for democracy if not that on its current course, America will cease to be a democracy at all? And so the first man to represent our Department of Homeland Security is back, bearing an urgent message: Our homeland isn’t so secure.

    Tom Ridge remembers the dinnertime conversation most. His parents engaged in long discussions about politics — and disagreed about pretty much everything. “What I remember is the tone,” he says. “There wasn’t any yelling.” The debates between his mother, a Republican, and his father, a Democrat, evolved like a tennis match in which “neither player was interested in scoring a point.”

    Today, Ridge serves as CEO of a self-named company, Ridge Global, that consults with corporations on matters of cybersecurity and risk management. He splits time between D.C., where his company is headquartered, and Erie. But work takes him all over the world. He might be in Ukraine one week and Dubai or London another. But he remains very much the product of Erie — a small city closer to Cleveland than to Philadelphia — and his parents’ bipartisan dinner table.

    As he grew, his life took turns that would satisfy both right and left, checking boxes associated with Republican and Democratic candidates. He served in Vietnam as a staff sergeant, long a conservative credential, without seeking any deferments or way out. He graduated from Harvard, that bastion of liberalism, with a degree in government studies. He served six terms in Congress in an era when Republicans and Democrats actually compromised. And when he ran for governor in 1994, the Daily News description that became his unofficial slogan — “A guy nobody ever heard of, from a city nobody’s ever seen” — marked him as a politician with the humility and good grace to turn even his weaknesses into strengths.

    “I think Tom’s decency was always apparent,” says former governor Ed Rendell, who worked with Ridge when he was Philly’s mayor. “There was never any sense with him that political party identifications were driving him. My mayoral administration enjoyed a great partner in him.”

    Ridge’s old gubernatorial spokesman, Tim Reeves, was surprised when the administration approached him, back when he was a reporter for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, about serving as press secretary. Sheepishly, he told chief of staff Mark Holman: “Do you realize I’m a registered Democrat?”

    Holman rolled his eyes. Reeves got the job. “As we talked about position requirements and sifted through candidates for various jobs,” says Holman, “the Governor never once asked about anyone’s politics. So I knew it wasn’t important to him.”

    Ridge was, by seemingly all accounts, a personally happy and professionally productive governor. He even prefers to be called “Governor” today, rather than “Secretary,” his last and highest-ranking position. While leading Pennsylvania during the Clinton go-go years of relative prosperity — a distinct advantage — he oversaw a boom in charter schools, steered Pittsburgh and Philadelphia through contentious debates over sports stadiums, and brought shipbuilding back to Philly at the Navy Yard.

    In Congress and later as governor, he watched other politicians live and die with every vote. But he had seen real life-and-death crises, close up, in Vietnam — “Being shot at gives you a new perspective,” he says — and recognized the difference. He had about 16 months left as governor on 9/11. Then President George W. Bush, also a friend, called and asked him to help design and implement the nation’s post-9/11 security strategy, ultimately forming the current Department of Homeland Security.

    Ridge’s gubernatorial staff put together a fast but comprehensive study of the position’s pros and cons, but Ridge never heard it, waving them off. The president’s call, for him, was like Vietnam: He didn’t particularly want to go, but a sense of duty compelled him.

    Ridge quickly became a target for late-night comedians. The nation’s new terror watch system, which included color-coded “threat levels” ranging from green (low) up through blue, yellow, orange and red, quickly proved alarmist and self-defeating. When the threat kicked up to blue or yellow, how could Ridge dial it back? Wouldn’t he be blamed if the drop preceded an attack?

    Citizens also didn’t know what was expected of them — how should we behave on a yellow day as opposed to a green one? At his nadir, Ridge suggested citizens invest in duct tape and plastic sheeting as a hedge against possible bio-weapons attacks. Some panicked citizens quickly bought out all the available stock at local hardware stores and sealed their homes in plastic. Clearly, Tom Ridge had a lot to learn in his new role. What saved him is that the “guy nobody ever heard of” was humble enough to admit as much.

    Our current president flips out after most episodes of Saturday Night Live. But when comedians made fun of Ridge — one night, SNL famously declared the threat level magenta, just shy of oxblood — he never took it personally. He even laughed about the jokes during media interviews, and told some himself.

    Ridge served for about a year in a poorly defined advisory role before winning unanimous confirmation from the Senate to a new cabinet-level position. His ascension marked a moment of American unity, never mind the fractures in our foundation. He became the calm face of America’s response to terror.

    The “no win” job, against all odds, became a big victory, and in 2004 Ridge retired from the role. He’d often been rumored as a VP candidate; would he run for president himself? But just a dozen years later, every political professional I interviewed for this story made the same observation: Tom Ridge would have a very hard time getting elected today. For the House, Senate, governor, president, maybe even school board.

    Ridge, long a pro-choice Republican — “I think the decision is best left between a woman, her doctor and her God,” he says — further undermined his ideological purity by going pro-gay marriage. As governor, Ridge signed a state defense of marriage act in 1996, defining marriage as occurring only between a man and a woman. But years of meeting gay and lesbian people and getting to know them as colleagues and friends caused him to “evolve.” And evolution on these kinds of core ideological disputes is something our current politics don’t allow.

    “I like Tom Ridge, I really do,” says Republican pollster Frank Luntz. “But there’s no question he’s out of step with what the primary voters in the Republican Party want, which is someone far more ideological. I don’t think he could get elected in this environment.”

    Do they make Republicans like Tom Ridge any more? “The short answer,” offers SiriusXM talk-show host Michael Smerconish, “is no.”

    Smerconish and Luntz both consider Ridge’s electoral obsolescence a sign of danger for the Republican Party and perhaps even the nation as a whole.

    “There’s no question we have reached a crisis point,” says Smerconish. “We have to learn how to talk to each other again, across party boundaries, ethnic and racial boundaries and regional boundaries.”

    Luntz, whom I interviewed in February, says our politics are racing toward a new bottom. “I can see it in my own data,” he says. “The hostility, the anger! You can see it grow from the primary to the election, and then it jumped again by the inauguration, and it’s worse now. Every month you can see it get worse.”

    Among Republican voters he polled on Election Day, just 35 percent wanted to see any kind of bipartisanship from their elected leaders. And this was before they knew the results. “It’s a rejection of compromise, and it undermines the democratic process,” says Luntz, “and it’s going to get a lot worse before it gets better. I believe this year will resemble 1968. My hope, and this is the best I can ask for, is that the similarity is in the tone and extent of protests, not in the matter of lives lost.”

    Does he see any sign of hope? “Not much,” says Luntz. “If you want some hope, at least we still have examples, like Tom Ridge, that there is a better way to do things. But I have to admit: I’m not very hopeful.”

    This past summer, Tom Ridge attended a ceremony in Washington, D.C., where he presented the Allegheny College Prize for Civility in Public Life to both Senator John McCain and Vice President Joe Biden.

    Standing there in a conservative blue suit, before a pair of American flags, Ridge spoke on behalf of the award’s founding institution, Allegheny College, a small liberal arts school in Meadville, Pennsylvania. He struck all the right notes, talking about the need for the cross-party friendship Biden and McCain maintain and, of course, for their civility. Ridge, and the Allegheny College prize, seems to define civility broadly, encompassing polite behavior, courtesy, respect and consideration. This last word captures the essence of bipartisanship — that opposing viewpoints should be considered and to some degree accommodated as a matter of course. But the whole affair seemed to convey sadness, even isolation — a gathering of adherents quietly celebrating a niche faith.

    Allegheny College, a campus of 2,000 students in a community of just 13,000, wouldn’t normally be expected to hold annual events that earn national coverage, but the Prize for Civility is becoming kind of a thing, sparking stories in USA Today, the Los Angeles Times and Time magazine. Allegheny College president James Mullen says Ridge has been vital: “To be straightforward about it, he is obviously key to even getting figures like Vice President Biden and Senator McCain to attend.”

    But far from merely attending the ceremony, Ridge also goes to regular meetings to discuss potential winners and strategize promotions and events. This year, Ridge highlighted one key moment from the career of each award winner. He lauded Biden, whom he referred to as “my vice president,” for the speech he gave in October 2015 in which he announced he wouldn’t run for president. “We are opponents, not enemies,” Biden said, calling for a change in the tenor of politics.

    Ridge also celebrated John McCain’s famous “No, ma’am” moment, when a woman at a town hall for McCain’s 2008 presidential candidacy questioned Barack Obama’s citizenship and called him an “Arab.”

    “No, ma’am,” McCain gently responded. “He’s a decent family man, citizen, that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues, and that’s what this campaign is all about.”

    Ridge portrayed both instances, both men, as candles glowing in the current dark. And he brought tremendous gravitas to the task. His face, though jowlier than during his time as governor, remains chiseled, seemingly made for regular public viewings. He is also six-foot-two, with a still-youthful vitality. But that sense of a shrinking cult — Mullen, Ridge, Biden and McCain all spoke about civility as a kind of fugitive on the run — never lifted.

    Some words do provoke a kind of automatic harrumph in our irreverent age — civility, etiquette, politeness. Mullen admits he frequently hears criticism that the prize honors something no longer of value. “I hear that a lot,” he says. “‘Civility is over,’ ‘Civility is dead,’ and ‘Civility doesn’t get things done.’”

    Ever civil himself, he declines to call out any critics by name. What alarms him is that these critics are otherwise “good, respectable people.” Their rejection of decorum further convinces him “that we’re doing something important, and we need to work that much harder at it.”

    The effort did gain a new urgency this past year — and not just because of the election. During one of our interviews, Ridge nodded along as his press agent, Steve Aaron, quoted from memory the “concerning” details of a 2016 study Mullen and Allegheny College commissioned through the Zogby polling firm. The most alarming stat: The percentage of voters who believe elected officials should pursue personal friendships with members of other parties plummeted from 85 percent in 2010 to just 56 percent.

    Ridge’s response to this shift is, as ever, well-meaning. He works, gratis, on behalf of the Allegheny College prize. He wrote about civility in a guest column for Time. And whenever he encounters a member of the House or Senate, he finds a moment to engage on the subject.

    Still, in this divided climate, isn’t any effort to promote civility doomed to failure? Isn’t Tom Ridge, the old soldier, trying to stop a hurricane by blowing a kiss into its howling winds?

    “I don’t know what I can say,” says Ridge, “except that I am doing everything I can, and I am going to keep pushing.”

    Last August, Donald Trump brought his campaign to Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, the kind of white, working-class town that would eventually propel him to victory. Trump had just taken considerable heat for insulting Khizr and Ghazala Khan, Gold Star parents and Muslims who lost their son, a U.S. Army captain, when he was fighting for America in Iraq.

    Nonetheless, Trump and his surrogates served up generous portions of political red meat, triggering chants of “Lock her up!” and “Build that wall!” He castigated the media, cordoned off at the back of the Cumberland Valley High School gym. And he won the crowd by telling them about a meeting he’d had with a group of coal miners in West Virginia, relating their plight to that of laid-off factory workers throughout central Pennsylvania.

    “I asked them, ‘Did you ever think of maybe moving and going into a different business?’” he said.

    The coal miners said they didn’t want to move. They wanted to stay where they’d been born and work the jobs their parents and grandparents had. Trump told the crowd he understood, respected, the coal miners’ argument, and in response he was going to bring those jobs back.

    Of course, his promise is denounced by experts on both the right and left as impossible to keep: The coal industry is being destroyed by the free market, not regulation; natural gas is more abundant and cheaper to obtain. And manufacturing jobs have been reduced because of technology. Robotics are replacing less precise, and more expensive, human workers. But there is a lesson to take from this moment that goes beyond Trump’s lack of understanding of, or disregard for, the true drivers of the American economy.

    The average Trump voter has largely been depicted as racist and uneducated. And yes, race did play a significant role. What, 58 percent of white voters preferred Trump while 88 percent of African-American voters chose Clinton for no reason? Further, Trump did perform much better with voters who lack a college degree. But any insistence on seeing all his supporters through a prism that is both narrow and pejorative won’t do anything to woo such voters next time, or bind this country’s cultural wounds.

    Put another way: A large swath of white America feels it’s been mistreated. Will any argument convince them to feel otherwise?

    Ridge’s old press secretary, Tim Reeves, tells a story about what it was like for him, as a Democrat and former reporter, to become privy to what Republicans said in private. “They took me, because of my position, to be one of them,” he says. “And while I didn’t normally agree with their criticism of the media, I did come to realize that these were very thoughtful Republicans, and their sense of being truly aggrieved, that the media just will not give them a fair shake, was real. It isn’t just a campaign tactic. They really feel wounded by it.”

    From Reeves’s perspective, what to do about the problem is difficult to calculate. The new administration — and Congressional conservatives — shouts “fake news” every time a new and damaging fact is reported. But Reeves insists that accepting the reality of this sense of “injury” among rank-and-file Republicans is crucial to genuine understanding: “It colors all their perceptions of whatever the media reports.”

    Of course, this cuts both ways. The media, right and left, has been engaged in a kind of arms race. Fox triggered MSNBC. Big right-wing personalities like Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly were countered by Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. Both Stewart and Colbert emerged as, foremost, satirists, riffing off of provable facts. But in terms of our current cultural divide and separating right-wing rurals from left-wing coastal elites, did they help?

    “No,” says Reeves. “They didn’t.”

    Ridge looks back at the media and entertainment industry’s treatment of George W. Bush as one of many drivers that led to where we are now. “He wasn’t, and isn’t, stupid,” says Ridge, and he shares a quick story to make his point.

    One day Ridge joined Bush and a team of advisers in the Situation Room. They had what appeared to be solid information about pending attacks on multiple planes flying into the United States from various overseas locations. Bush moved the discussion around the table, hearing out each adviser’s opinion on the seriousness of the threat and the credibility of the intelligence. “The review he got was mixed,” says Ridge. “There was no real agreement about what we should do.”

    In response, Bush offered a brief smile. He said he appreciated everyone’s input. And he offered up one question he wanted everyone at the table to answer: “How many of you would put your family on one of these planes?”

    Ridge, in his D.C. office, looks around, a bewildered expression on his face, mimicking the advisers gathered at the table, all sitting in silence. “He was like, ‘Okay, I guess we have our answer,’” says Ridge.

    Ridge’s point seems obvious: Bush wasn’t a dummy, and in fact possessed a deft emotional intelligence. But the media characterization of him as stupid helped precondition conservatives to reject any negative media narrative about their icons.

    For all his bipartisanship, Ridge remains a “true” conservative in most respects. He is disdainful of Obama’s foreign policy, which he calls “nonexistent.” He remains an advocate for charter schools — eager to see the results-driven free market provide solutions for America’s education woes.

    But in direct contradiction of Trump’s attacks on the media, Ridge says, “There is no such thing as an alternative fact. … The free press is absolutely vital, a cornerstone of democracy. I don’t want to be overly dramatic, but who the hell wants to live in Russia? Without a free press? If you take the free press away, it’s not a democracy.” Still, he fears the line between entertainment and the New York Times has been blurred — that to many viewers and readers, Stephen Colbert, Hollywood and Times editor Dean Baquet are all reading from the same hymnal.

    “It’s a difficult problem,” says Ridge, “because we can’t, and shouldn’t, police the entertainment industry. But there needs to be some understanding, on both sides, of how we treat each other.”

    There is, of course, a problem of false equivalencies. Trump’s fat-shaming and Mexican hating, his treatment of women and his threats to reinstate torture, murder terrorists’ families and steal Iraq’s oil, really are far worse than Hillary Clinton’s most notorious slip, when she referred to Trump’s supporters as a “basket of deplorables.” But Ridge says the current moment requires us all to be sticklers for civility — that restoring American politics to the high road of civil debate about issues, not personalities, requires both sides to be on that road all the time.

    “I was very disappointed when she made the ‘deplorables’ remark,” says Ridge. “And believe me, I hear about it from my Republican friends.”

    As Luntz, the Republican pollster, told me, “The right’s current hatred of the media is so great” that conservatives are likely to reject all arguments, and evidence, against Trump precisely because they can’t stand the messenger. And Tim Reeves agrees. Trump’s flirtation with white nationalists, his late, tepid response to the violence rising up in the wake of his policies, his ties to Russia — none of it seems to be making a significant dent in his popularity with the Republican Party’s new, more extreme base. It’s as if they can’t allow the left, or the media, to get any kind of “win.”

    The current dynamic, then, is so dysfunctional that the only victories are zero-sum — total victory or none at all. And so the biggest question of all is put to Ridge: Is this political moment like Vietnam and his stint at Homeland Security? Is this moment about life and death?

    “I’d like to be optimistic,” says Ridge, “because I am an optimist by nature. … ”

    Ridge pauses then, considering his next words, but nothing to justify any optimism comes.

    On day 27 of the Trump administration, just two weeks after he first told me, “Donald Trump is my president, and we need to give him a chance,” Tom Ridge is eyeing his own personal event horizon, the moment when he might be moved to act, to break his recent public silence on Trump and speak out.

    The previous 72 hours kicked the national angst meter up to code red for Russia, and Ridge wasn’t immune. Trump’s national security adviser, Michael Flynn, was revealed to have spoken with Russian officials about sanctions imposed by the Obama administration prior to taking office. He subsequently resigned. Another story declared that U.S. intelligence officials had discovered the Russia links went well beyond Flynn: Multiple members of Trump’s campaign team had been in touch with Russian intelligence officials throughout the 2016 presidential race.

    These events and Trump’s reaction to them aroused widespread concern: Did Flynn hold these conversations with Trump’s approval? Just why is Trump able to criticize or threaten every pillar of American democracy — presidents, legislators, the military and intelligence services — but not his buddy Vlad? Yet Congressional Republicans had again indicated that they wouldn’t allow an independent investigation, and Ridge was incredulous.

    “Forget Mike Flynn, and forget President Trump,” he says, trying to remove personalities and partisanship from the equation. “This is about the pillars of our government. This is about rallying around the flag. A foreign power hacked into the DNC to try and sway the results of the election? There is some kind of tie, potentially, between a foreign power and one of our presidential campaigns?”

    He sits forward in his chair. “The election process is the pillar of democracy,” he says. “This goes beyond party. No foreign power can be allowed to interfere in that. … This should be a bipartisan effort involving both the House and the Senate. I’m going to stay quiet for now, but I have my limits.”

    There are those who believe his words might yet matter, a lot. “I think a lot of people held their noses when they voted for Trump,” says Stuart Stevens, a strategist for Mitt Romney’s 2012 presidential run. “His support is likely not so great as it seems.”

    There “might” come a time, says Stevens, when criticism from more mainstream Republicans like Ridge or Romney will ratchet up opposition.

    Closer to home, Sam Katz, who lost to Ridge in the governor’s primary race in ’93, agrees and goes further. “Tom Ridge is very smart to spend some time on the sidelines right now,” he says, “and knowing him, I’m sure he will identify the right time, if there ever is one, to speak up. When and if he does, he will provide cover for a lot of other Republicans to act.”

    The Trump administration, then, could be the flash point around which mainstream Republicans and Democrats ultimately unite. And if that happens, perhaps we can start talking to each other again. “I do think there is a possibility that Trump could be the trigger that causes some positive change,” says Smerconish. “But it’s going to take a lot of work.”

    Even now, the current sense of crisis might actually be unifying political forces that usually define themselves in opposition to each other. Just a decade ago, Tom Ridge was one of the nation’s leading Republicans and a living symbol of neoconservative power. Just three election cycles later, though he would never describe himself in such terms — at least not yet — he looms as a budding member of a different group entirely: the Resistance.

    The day after Trump’s inauguration, in fact, Ridge walked along the Women’s March in D.C. as the event came to an end. He had been out running errands and stopped “not to participate, but to observe.”

    Afterward, friends who are serious Trump partisans complained to him that the march — held in major cities across the nation — was “un-American … undemocratic … and just the most awful thing.”

    Recounting these conversations, Ridge looks mystified. “It was a peaceful protest,” he says, “a pure expression of the First Amendment.”

    The women, and men, carried signs. They chanted. Their solidarity, unity and love of country was something Ridge could feel just standing there.

    He would have disagreed with them about many policy issues. But that didn’t matter. The march struck him as reflecting the beating heart of democracy. And this memory, of looking out over the crowd as the opposition party filed past him, seems to answer the question Ridge struggled with earlier — about this life-and-death moment, about whether there is any reason for his natural optimism. Because during that march in Washington, Ridge felt something he hadn’t expected: hope.

    Where so many of Ridge’s Republican friends saw an America in turmoil, he saw America perhaps battered and scarred, but still functioning. “I was glad I went,” he says. “I actually found it … somewhat reassuring.”

    Published in the April 2017 issue of Philadelphia magazine.

    The post Do They Still Make Republicans Like Tom Ridge? appeared first on Philadelphia Magazine.

    Viewing all 32 articles
    Browse latest View live