Letters to the Editor | Dec. 15, 2023

Thank you to President Joe Biden for helping reopen the firehouse in Fairmount. The day after he visited Philadelphia this week, Ladder 1 made its first call when it came to the Philadelphian condos. Fire personnel were at the Philadelphian in a few short minutes. Usually, it takes about 10 minutes to get help here because emergency crews have a longer distance to travel. Both lives and property were likely saved because of Biden’s care and concern for people.

Lita Indzel Cohen, retired, Pennsylvania House of Representatives member, Philadelphia

The interview with the new chief investment officer for PSERS illuminated big issues around the perils and potentials of the public school pension system. I was taken by his endorsement of “near-shoring,” or bringing investments that have been roaming the globe back to the U.S. It shouldn’t be too hard to find worthwhile investments here at home that bring greater returns to our hardworking teachers than those that have consigned PSERS to the bottom 1% of returns for large U.S. plans.

For instance, why shouldn’t the fund invest in housing for Pennsylvania teachers? According to a recent Axios article, paying for a home takes 31.4% of an average Philadelphia teacher’s monthly salary, far too much. In response to similar housing cost squeezes, school districts around the country are building housing for teachers. The state could adopt a similar plan, with fund support. Many other critical needs could also be addressed with PSERS at the table. Let’s bring our teachers’ money home and put it to good use.

Stanley Shapiro, Philadelphia, shapsj@comcast.net

Philadelphia will soon become the national leader in an overlooked area of public safety policy: the cleaning and sanitizing of violent crime scenes. With this pilot program, a privately contracted vendor will professionally clean the blood, biological matter, medical waste, and other debris from crime scenes on public streets and sidewalks. Now we should seamlessly build on this policy foundation by incorporating recognized crime reduction strategies that focus on addressing environmental deficiencies and blight to achieve even greater public safety results.

Studies have found that violent crime may be reduced by greening vacant lots, remediating abandoned buildings, and cleaning blighted areas in affected neighborhoods. And perhaps it’s intuitive, but crime scenes exhibiting the most bloodshed (overwhelmingly because of gun-related shootings in Black and brown neighborhoods) tend to take place adjacent to trash-strewn lots and dilapidated properties. Cleaning these violent crime scenes will organically point us to the areas where environmental deficiencies may need the most urgent (and perhaps sustained) attention.

In that way, these scenes provide a simple road map for where the city could direct and prioritize its blight reduction efforts. It is now justly the city’s responsibility — morally, logistically, and financially — to clean and sanitize the worst crime scenes in public areas. By natural extension, greening trash-filled lots, properly sealing abandoned properties, and providing sufficient lighting in areas near those crime scenes should receive top priority for remediation, and perhaps even additional social services and outreach. At the bare minimum, this approach will reflect our genuine compassion and concern for our fellow Philadelphians in the wake of a tragic and visceral event that occurred on their doorsteps.

Adam N. Geer, deputy inspector general for public safety, Office of the Inspector General, Philadelphia

The editorial in Thursday’s edition comes a few days too late and therefore is meaningless. Where was the Editorial Board’s support for Liz Magill a few days ago, when it would have mattered? Magill was in a “gotcha” trap from a showboating member of Congress and was thrown under the bus for it. Her position was then made untenable by bullying donors. Good people make mistakes, and for the showboaters and bullies to profit from that is wrong. Whatever happened to the teachable moment? Ironically, it has been lost at an institute of higher learning.

Robert Galasso, Blackwood

In response to the op-ed piece by Scott L. Bok, where the former chair of Penn’s board of trustees cautions universities on letting donor money influence policy. I find it interesting that Qatar has donated $5 billion to American universities, and on those campuses, there are active pro-Palestinian organizations. Coincidence? I don’t think so. Who is following the money? Does Penn receive money from them?

Linda Dubin Garfield, Bala Cynwyd

I applaud Scott L. Bok for his openness and his willingness to step down from a coveted position on Penn’s board of trustees because of his strong opposition to what he sees as a current change in the winds at his university (my alma mater from the days when women had to attend the College for Women). I, too, find it distressing to contemplate my university becoming a place where speech and books get banned, and money is the only thing that talks. I hope Bok’s op-ed is a wake-up call for Penn leadership. I do, however, take issue with his statement that “any purported attempts to indoctrinate students with liberal bias are obviously failing, as most — certainly at Penn — grow up to be good capitalists and taxpayers.” In case Bok has not noticed, many of us alumni are not only strong, committed liberals, but we are also capitalists and pay our taxes — and the university needs our viewpoints.

Jean Haskell, Philadelphia

The Inquirer editorial cartoon “The price of free speech” dangerously plays into the antisemitic trope that Jews use money and power to exert control. The only group responsible for what transpired at the University of Pennsylvania this past week is the Penn administration for its inability to denounce without equivocation calls for a Jewish genocide. Free speech is undeniably important, but any speech that serves to demonize or justify violence against Jews, or any other group, should never be tolerated. It is universities’ responsibility to set the precedent that there is no room for antisemitism and hate on campus. Any message that implies otherwise only further contributes to more division and tension on campus.

Jason Holtzman, director, Jewish Community Relations Council, Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia

. . .

The question: Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Penn’s code of conduct? Yet I have yet to read what Penn’s code of conduct says (so much for in-depth reporting). If it says something like “all bullying and harassment complaints will be investigated and judged according to the circumstances in which the alleged bullying and harassment occurred,” then Liz Magill answered her congressional questioning honestly. So the millionaire donor would have preferred that Magill lie? I’m not sure how this reflects on the values of Penn. Tell the truth and lose out on millions, or lie and get the money. So much for free speech.

John R. Waters, Havertown

. . .

The way (now former) Penn president Liz Magill, Harvard president Claudine Gay, and MIT president Sarah Kornbluth were bullied, harassed, and talked down to in Congress immediately reminded me of the Joe McCarthy hearings, where he demanded yes and no answers to questions that required far more nuanced and thoughtful answers. I think the presidents’ measured tones were deemed to be equivocating. They were attempting to answer difficult questions regarding free speech in university settings, yet black-and-white answers were being demanded. We did not learn about the incidents in which “genocide against Israel” was allegedly used. Rep. Elise Stefanik was not asking for clarification, she was grandstanding.

What Capitol Hill interrogators are trying to do is score political points. This will result in students feeling intimidated from speaking out on campuses, which is the sole purpose of these hearings: to put a halt to student dissent. The same thing happened during the Vietnam War, when students were vilified for protesting the war. I encountered many of the same types of offensive verbal attacks when I protested back then. I am a free speech absolutist and believe that no matter how uncomfortable or offended one may be by certain ideas, the right to voice them should be unmolested by denunciations and attempts to suppress them.

Judy Rubin, Philadelphia

Join the conversation: Send letters to letters@inquirer.com. Limit length to 150 words and include home address and day and evening phone number. Letters run in The Inquirer six days a week on the editorial pages and online.