Hi folks -- I've seen lots of debate about whether or not the information that my colleagues and friends released Friday about the police action at 17th and Ridge was enough for folks. There's been much conversation and support bubbling up from the city for the folks who were evicted Friday. Over the weekend they developed this press release, and decided to organize a press conference to answer questions and to hammer home the point -- the city can't use the police, L&I, or any other instrument to stop us when residents ask questions about the rising police presence and surveillance in the city. Hope to see you at the press conference.
RELEASE: Homeowners Fighting Police Brutality Illegally Arrested, Never Charged
Home Closed by Dept. of Licensing & Inspections, Property Seized by PA State Police
Press Conference: Tuesday, June 17th, 1 pm, Outside West Side of City Hall
On Tuesday, June 17th, at 1pm, the owners and residents of 1652 Ridge Avenue will hold a press conference on the western steps of City Hall to inform reporters and interested parties about the June 13th police action seizing their property and sealing off their home. Please read the release below for more details.
Contact: Hannah Sassaman, hannahjs@prometheusradio.org, 267-970-4007
Andy Switzer, andrew_switzer@hotmail.com, 267-269-5448
On the morning of Friday, June 13th, 2008, plainclothes detectives and a Ninth Precinct Police Captain entered a Ridge Avenue home without a warrant and arrested four Philadelphia community members - Daniel Moffat, Trevor Burgess, Andrea Okorley, and Jennifer Rock. These residents were pulled from their home at 1652 Ridge Avenue, arrested, and detained without charges at the Ninth Philadelphia police precinct for over twelve hours. Less than twenty four hours later, almost half a dozen other law enforcement agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security and the Housing Authority, had conducted a tour of the property, and the Department of Licensing and Inspections had closed and sealed the property.
While police claimed entry to the property under the pretext that it was an abandoned building, the residents of 1652 Ridge Avenue have owned and lived at the property for up to four years, while they worked on and improved their house. They have been active members of the Francisville neighborhood – partnering on community food distribution and community garden projects, among others.
On one of the hottest days of the year, these community members were locked into police cars, waiting to discover the nature of the criminal charges against them, as multiple officials searched their home. "They said it wasn't an arrest," says Mr. Moffat. "The police captain [Wilson] said he'd do me a favor, and put us in a cell because it was so hot outside. I asked, if we weren't being arrested, why we were being sent to be processed in jail? He smiled at me in a joking manner, and said, "Call it a kidnapping." That was my last word with Captain Wilson before later that night, when I was in jail." Moffat and his housemates were never charged with a crime.
The residents of 1652 Ridge Avenue learned that night, while in jail, that the Department of Licensing and Inspections had written up their home for multiple code violations – and that they would have only a few hours the next day to retrieve personal possessions, before the house was sealed to them and all other nonofficial entrants. When the residents returned to their home the next day, they found that personal papers, books, and computers had been rifled through or confiscated. Trevor Burgess, who returned to his room Saturday morning under police escorts, noted, “The only thing I really noticed they messed with was my photographs. All my photographs were just, like, torn through and all over my room. [The policeman] kept asking me about the photographs.”
"When I was allowed to enter the building, to get stuff out, when I got to my room, my room had been thoroughly searched," said Moffat. "My computer was gone. I was informed that the Department of State had taken my computer for evidence. I couldn't find my phone list that was posted on the wall. I couldn't find a notepad with a bunch of my notes in it. I couldn't find this little book with a lot of phone numbers in it."
Residents stress that this incident happened just a week after they had begun circulating petitions about police surveillance cameras that had been installed in the neighborhood. Francisville, which abuts the newly affluent areas of Fairmount and Spring Garden, has seen a rise in police presence and in residents being asked for identification in their own neighborhood and in front of their homes. "It's clear to me that you don't have to be doing something wrong in order to be targeted by the police," said Andrea Okorley. "The fact that we were communicating with our neighbors about the presence of surveillance cameras was threatening enough."
These residents have called on press to not only hear their story, but to deepen coverage of increased police presence in the city – and the ways in which the city is driving out residents who have lived there for generations. "I want to go home," says Jennifer Rock. "But this is not an isolated incident. So many others are losing their homes or their freedom – and they can't be here to speak today."
Again I wonder if this is locally driven
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
I wondered this too
Largely because of the SHAC raid/prosecution, but I talked to Danielle for a while this morning (who was present on the day of the arrests), and she said that things said by the Lieutenant on the scene suggested it was local (specifically, he said he called Homeland Security).
I am going to write a short summary of what seems to be publically known about the arrests in a bit.
This blog may be helpful...
More words from the Police who ran this action:
http://www.citypaper.net/blogs/clog/2008/06/14/theres-something-fishy-in...
--
-----
hannah sassaman
prometheusradioproject
building radio stations = awesome
http://www.prometheusradio.org
Thanks Hannah
The police officers involved sure had a lot to say (they don't sound all that media savvy...).
it sure looks pretty bad
holding people without charges is always a no-no, right? But the officers on record with the City Paper sure make it sound like they are accusing these folks of being terrorist for protesting police actions. I am no constitutional expert, but sure sounds like a violation of free speech to me. Hmm, police state much?
More than that
Grounds for a civil suit. This whole incident may cost the city a whole lot of money in the end if the comments quoted in the PW blog are accurate.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
Yeah
my 'not savvy' was meant to be understatement. That's exactly the kind of nonsense that gets the city potentially on the hook for civil damages.
Agreed.
On the flipside. As idiotic and unconstituional as this raid may turn out to be I still wonder it was in response by anti-camera activism or something else. Does anyone remember when Darrel Clarke's ballot iniative autorizing the cameras was on the ballot? Was it the primary or the general in 2006? It passed by pretty big numbers as I recall. For my own amusement I was going to look up how popular it was with voters in Francisville.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
No not media savy
But Charles Ramsey most definitely is - a lot more so than some of the posters over at IMC are.
....
I maybe have been wrong in my earlier doubts. At this point I'm definitely wondering who ordered this (i.e. at what level) and also what literature they claim to have seen calling for "killing cops" or if that was just made up.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
Note: Sean, I am editing this. You can link to IMC and to comments there but I don't really think it is necessary to cut and paste them here. --Jennifer
OK.
Additional background
It doesn't look like I'll have time to write this up separately. Here's some additional background I gathered talking with Danielle (if anything is inaccurate, Danielle or Hannah, please let me know).
There has been heightened police presence in the Francisville area recently. Typically, police will stop people (including residents, repeatedly) and request ID. There has been some back and forth at some of the stops over the extent of police right to request ID and citizens' rights not to carry or provide them.
Recently (last week or so) new surveillance cameras were put up in the area. There had not been surveillance cameras before. Both the cameras and the ID stops were a topic of conversation, interest, and some concern in the neighborhood. Some people, including some later arrested at the property (described in Hannah's press release above) circulated a petition demanding information about what process of citizen notification and input was required for the cameras, and requesting a meeting with city officials.
Reportedly, though there have been neighborhood meetings around the city to discuss police plans and strategy generally, there was not a specific meeting in Francisville to discuss what appears to be a concerted heightened policing effort. (There had not been a specific incident or murder recently as would typically give rise to greater police presence.)
It's unclear what triggered the initial raid. The policeman who first knocked--at that point, reportedly without a warrant--said there had been a report of people living in an abandoned building. As Hannah's press release alludes to, there seems to be some tension connected to development efforts in the area, including a CDC that received a Wachovia community development grant earlier this year.
From what Danielle said and amply reflected in the linked Citypaper write-up, it does sound like the city police were the driving force, and brought in L&I, homeland security, and the fire department.
Obviously, there is much that is unknown, and it appears that both (real) reporters and some city and police officials are looking into what happened. Please take anything I am reporting with some grains of salt, as it is at least secondhand.
However, it seems undisputed that several people were arrested and were released later without being charged. (Additionally, police officers' public statements to the media at best show some questionable motivation.) Regardless, an L&I morass is ahead of the property owner.
Hope this is helpful to those concerned.
Something's fishy, indeed
Ok, they found sufficient reason to call them a "hate group," "terrorists" (as quoted in the PW article without a full quote), hold them, and call in Homeland security. Yet, they were released after 12 hours? Which means that either the pretext for the police action was fradulent, or they let potential "terrorists" back out to roam the streets. I'm guess that the former is more plauable than the later.
And, sorry Jennifer, but it will be interesting to hear clout's response: you know, a professioal journalist's perspective - someone who works for "credible media" and who obviously was a star at his elementary school newspaper.
Speaking of
I shut off comments on Clout's thread as well, simply because I think it's better to channel any dicussion to one place (here).
PS I am not a real journalist but I HAVE been arrested by the Philadelphia police!
I thought it was mostly that
petty fiefdom thing. You being drunk with power, and all.
ahaha
ba-dum.
Sean, that might be true but I don't think that it means that (1) there couldn't have been an overreactive or unjustified arrest, i mean, one is not really related to the other, and (2) that general public support in the form of voting for a ballot initiative is really determinative of community feeling about the installation of new cameras in the context of a sharp increase in police stops and (again reportedly) the attempted execution of old warrants (maybe an excuse to get into a search houses?). Again, not trying to speculate, but that goes in both directions...!
There is no more effective way to undermine public support
for measures such as security cameras than to, in any way, give credibility to the notion they these measures might be used differentially to advance the objectives of people (with disproportionate political influence) who are interested in displacing the current residents of a community.
How are decisions made about how many cameras are placed, and where? An implication that can be drawn in this situation is that security cameras could be used to clean up an area that is generally undergoing gentrification. Are more resources being devoted to that area than to high crime-rate communities that aren't gleaming in the eyes of developers?
Cameras
People will be prone to gentrification fears no matter what you do. In West Philly whenever a church or housing group starts an affordable housing project people always, always first assume its Penn gentrifying when really Penn has got a lot smarter about to feed gentrification - fix the schools and provide better security - i.e. do what city government doesn't - and let the market do the work. Of course I would be one of those who argue that the activists themselves are probably way more a tell-tale sign of gentrification than the cameras.
In terms of cameras there are two types. Some blink blue to announce "Hey I'm a camera" and those drive down crime rates in camera range. They are monitored. The others are unmonitorerd and not supposed to be noticed but the tapes can be subpoenaed. Those slghtly drive up reported crime rates because they lead to more arrests and convcitions.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
I'm not wondering if the cameras
are a "sign" of gentrification, but a "tool" of gentrification - which seem to be suggested by the information we have on this situation. Why were more cameras placed in that neighborhood? How was that decision made? Is it an area with a higher crime rate than other areas? Is there some particular design to how neighborhoods are being targeted? If this is some kind of a crackdown directed at sketchy residents in that neighborhood (the cameras along with ID checks), why is that neighborhood being prioritized over other high-crime areas? I'd be curious to hear the reasons.
At any rate, if this really is a 60's-like targeting of activists, this is a serious, serious situation.
As I recall
The sites of the current cameras were determined by Commissioner Sylvester Johnson based on crime stats. Or rather as I recall from following it in the papers he generated a list of corners which the district concilmembers then argued over suggesting changes as they sparred for getting more placed in their districts, which led to the list being revised somewhat. I don't think that Ramsey has had any say in any of the cameras so far. So yeah if you choose to believe that Darrel Clarke lobbied to place the camera in Francisville on John Westrum's behalf its possible but I seriously doubt it.
One of my biggest problems with gentrification conspiracies is they presume a level secrecy and organized collusion between the police and city council I have a hard time seeing actually happening.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
I am still not speculating!
But if we are talking about generalities, believing in both the ideas that people with power get the way paved for what they want (in general) and that there occurs politically-motivated L&I action (in particular) do not take an inclination towards grand conspiracy theories.
PS
Let's just take another second to note that the Citypaper article quotes the police captain as saying this:
Drum up charges!! I don't know whether or to worry or be grateful that the police dept has apparantly not funnelled its scarce money into media training.
Unfortunately typical?
I don't know which gentrification conspiracy theories you're referring to - but if you think I'm a conspiracy theorist, you're wrong. However, I do believe that developers and others who stand to benefit from neighborhood gentrification, in the name of "development," have disproportionate influence on City Council and in how City policies are implemented.
As for your answer to my questions, well... the fact that a plan and rationale existed, doesn't mean that they were implemented as designed. From the accounts, there were a lot of cameras installed in Francisville recently, and a step-up in ID checks. Are the reports accurate? If so, was Francisville more targeted than other high-crime areas? If so, why? No conspiracy theory. Questions. For which you haven't provided answers.
Calmly
The camera sites were picked by Johnson with some input from then Mayor Street and City Council as I remember it. Coverage at the time protrayed the process much more as each of the district council people pushing to get more of the camera sites in "hot spots" their districts. If you think that there was a specific conspiracy to drive out black folks from Francisville that involved Nutter, Street, Johnson, Ramsey, Darrel Clarke and some unnamed real estate developers - well that would be a remarkable story indeed. And of course the only people stopping their coordinated plot was a handful of plucky young (I'll go ahead and assume) mostly white activists (I'll go ahead and assume again) who grew up in the suburbs who then decided they would become the brave last stand against the evil plot from their abode in a long abandonned shoe store - which they have just so happen to not apparently have gotten round to installing windows in the gaping holes in the upper floors yet.
Look I'll be frank - thats a crock. What is entirely possible is that the activists in the house did put up some materials that the captain at the local police district found highly offensive and he took it upon himself to as he so eloquently put it "drum up some charges" against them.
Is it the way the law should work? No. Is it an example of an insular and ignorant police culture? Yes.
But to suggest that 5 of the most powerful black men in recent Philadelphia history despite much touted ill will between some of them formed a secret cabal to jointly drive black people out of Francisville -if it weren't (zoinks - ScoobyDoo reference coming up) for those meddling punk kids - well I'm sorry thats a bit much to swallow.
Ramsey wants to impress with the biggest crime reduction numbers he can muster. Nutter wants to be reelected after sucesfully driving down crime rates. Clarke wants also wants to be reelected, also to bask in the glow of being part of sucesfully making North Philly be perceived as safer place to live. That's their motivation. Nothing more, nothing less.
The captain and various officers in the police may have a grudge against these activists or they may sincerely believe them to be "terrorists" in a distorted view of the world but i would be willing to bet $100 that that is as far as it goes.
I agree its an abuse of power - but c'mon do you really think the Mayor and the Police Commissioner were so afraid that these 4 were such a grave threat to their overall policing strategy they had them arrested and released 12 hours later to frighten them into silence? Really?
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
No one's saying that
and we don't have to be quite so all-or-nothing...!
I am not going to quote, cause it's more hearsay, but reportedly there's already been some apologizing to those arrested. I don't think there's a cabal of those politicians you named. And that's not exactly what Josh was talking about (people with power having influence, not so shocking).
But I know you and I have both been up and down the 'politics of gentrification' conversation (individually and probably together) and I def do not want to open that one up.
One last try, Sean
I think the conversation is not served well when you reformulate what I say to fit your preconcpetions.
Saying that that developers have influence in how the City government approaches managing specific neighborhoods doesn't equate to a conspiracy to "drive out black folks." If you think that developers don't have such influence, more power to you. Francisville is an area that a lot of developers see as an investment opportunity. It stands to reason that one every large obstacle to flipping houses there is the level of crime and the numbers of decidedly not middle/upper class residents.
We might differ in our perspective on the overall benefits of gentrification, or whether different economic sectors benfit more than others from gentrification, but obviously, reducing crime is a goal we'd both support. We might differ in our priorities about what policies should be stressed to reduce crime, but that's not what I'm looking at here.
I'm asking whether or not any particular policies are being implimented in some areas more than others, and if so, why. From the accounts, there has been a notable step up in police activity in Francisville. Apparently, there has also been a step up in L&I activity there. Are those accounts accurate? If so, does the increased activity reflect some disparity relative to other high-crime areas? If so, why? Have the police and L&I similarly stepped up their activity three blocks from my house in the heart of East Germantown? What about in other areas of North Philly which don't represent the same level of potential to developers? If not, why not? Is it due to the influence of developers? If it is, is that justifiable?
And outside of that issue, from the accounts, what went down recently appears very much like unjustified harassment of activists. I think your description of a local captain overstepping his authority, might, just a tad, be mischaracterizing the situation as described. I don't think all the facts are in, but just as assuming a vast conspiracy behind what went down seems imprudent, so would, I'd think, a knee-jerk reaction that this was simply a benign and appropriate exercise of law enforcement or even just an inappropriate statement of an zealous official overreacting to some significant threat to our community.
I'm going to leave it at that until I learn more about what happened.
If you you are going to go there, go there
Causality means causality. If you sincerely believe that police patrols are driven by real estate interests I put it on you to explain how it happens, how it is coordinated, how the agenda is articulated and refined. Don't do sophism. "Its obviously true so it must be true". Lay out a believable chain of cause and effect.
I will give one- sometimes middle class people who have lived in places where building codes are actually enforced and who expect the laws to be enforced call in complaints expecting the system to work the way they have seen it work in less dysfunctional cities. Sometimes those people become chronic complainers who through pushing the system persistantly sometimes get L&I and the police to sometimes actually do the job they are obstenisibly charged to. Sometimes not. Thats a way I have seen "gentrification" drive law and building code enforcement. More than that I have seen a lot of red herrings self-righteously called up as self-evidently true. But if you can articulate a chain of cause and effect, please do.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
Dave Davies
He's real, right? I think I've met him.
Totally
And it sounds that for whatever reaon the cops went after Moffat et al that they would not be responsible neighbors. They've owned the building for 4 years and managed to accomplish this with the building.
In the photo on the city paper blog an empty window hole is plainly visible. That means no safe heat in the winter and pipes that freeze in cold weather.
I would submit that if a landlord collected rent for building in this state and had not gotten farther in terms of getting the building up to building code a few people on this site would be calling for L&I to throw the book at them. The problem is the law is the law. Once L&I got called in, this place where they managed to build a grow house on the roof over 4 years but not install ehat PHA calls "proper running water" or a year round working toilet would have gotten shut down and sealed anyway and I would submit it should have. Building codes about what a "habitable building" is exist for a reason. They may have owned the building but they were dropping the ball in a way far, far worse than a lot of well run squats I have seen.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
Grow house?
I'm sorry, but I just find that a loaded term. They have a greenhouse on their roof, where they grow food and plants, which they share with neighbors.
--
-----
hannah sassaman
prometheusradioproject
building radio stations = awesome
http://www.prometheusradio.org
Fine green house
Its still an expenditure of construction materials and time that didn't go into getting the building even remotely up to code - after 4 years of owning it. Its an example of misplaced priorities in an unused commercial space illegally converted into a residence, that probably was not up to fire code and hence a potentialy liablity to the other buildings on the block and to the rest of us that pick up the tab for paying for fire protection. The path to hell is paved with good intentions and all that.
I feel pretty comfortable saying that vegtables or no Mofett et al probably fell short of my ideal of the "worlds best, most responsible neighbors".
Look if people want to piss away any credibility to talk about legitimate police-community relations problems on this incident, knock yourself out. I just don't think its smart or strategic politics. And beyond that when I see extremely dubious insinuations about the Police Commissioner and the Mayor conspiring illegally to "drive people out of the neighborhood", I'm going to call B.S. I just see no-doubt well-intentioned people in the end doing incremental but palapable harm to legitimate and public supported crime prevention and then evoking absurd conspiracies to cover the fact that net - they had contributed a grand total of $490 to the city and public schools in property taxes over the course of 4 years according to the BRT, risked using a lot more in fire prevention expenses and if the police accusations stand up destroyed what I recall to be a close to $10K camera that voters strongly supported installing there in the first place.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
RE: Cameras and public approval
Darrel Clarke did put the idea of cameras up to a popular vote on a ballot iniative and it passed by wide margins (more than 75% approval as I recall). Some would argue that as long as they worded correctly "yes" always wins, no matter what but it did pass handily. Several mayoral candidates - most noticably Chaka Fattah even more enthusiastically than Nutter - ran on increased cameras. In his campaign for City Council Curtis Jones did attempt to make a small amount political hay over overseeing the installation of crime prevention cameras under his reign at the PCDC and when it turned that many of them didn't work, his opponent Carol Campbell tried to make a whole lot more political hay about their failure - not that they were installed in the first place.
Its been my impression (perhaps wrong) that in the abstract that cameras are very popular with African American voters in this town. Perhaps less so with specific ones on their own corner but in general, popular to the point of almost being gimmicky - i.e. something every candidate just says they support automatically.
On the other hand diehard FOP types tend to be not so hot on the cameras because they tend feel they don't have the impact of more cops on the street. According to them its a gimmick to keep from hiring enough officers. Its an area where at least to my impression the assumptions guiding a lot of acvitist civil libertarian types are somewhat out of synch with what sides they would assume everyone to be on.
My gut instinct is leaning more towards the activists putting up some flyer (perhaps about cops themselves - not cameras) that really pissed off the local lieutenent, who then reacted rather stupidly (and illegally) - but I'll wait and see.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
I thought folks might want to read this...
I thought folks might want to read this blog about Francisville resident Ms. Edna Williams, and her thoughts on the owners and residents of 1652 Ridge Ave:
http://www.phawker.com/2008/06/17/valley-of-shadow-fear-loathing-francis...
Hannah S.
--
-----
hannah sassaman
prometheusradioproject
building radio stations = awesome
http://www.prometheusradio.org
"Good people" but less than ideal neighbors
To be absolutely clear. I think its horrible that L&I threw the book at the Francisville Four simply because the cops asked them to. L&I should have cited and if they continued to fail to comply sealed the building several years earlier. About the best thing that can come out of this mess is a discussion of how disfunctional L&I is by default as an agency. It does give me a new idea for neighbors who feel that their years of complaints about truly awful neighbors get ignored - suggest they are "terrorists". Apparently thats the only thing that works in this town.
http://www.philly.com/dailynews/local/20080620_Dave_Davies__To_get_L_I_o...
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
Code Violations....
I think it's worth pointing out that while the Francisville four may or may not have succeeded in rehabilitating their building over the last four years, the city has failed to rehabilitate entire neighborhoods in the last 30. If you want to talk about conspiracies we should talk about redlining - where banks refuse to give mortgages for houses (even clean, intact houses) in low income neighborhoods. We should talk about cycles of divestment -where city resources are drained from neighborhoods which are falling apart, driving values down - and gentrification, where the undervalued properties are bought by speculators and developers. And we should talk about eminent domain, which is taking people out of their homes to make way for large developement projects (everyone in this city should watch the movie: All For the Taking which documents an elder Philly woman's fight to save her house from eminent domain, and her eventual displacement). These things are very real in this city, and police harrassment of poor people is very real also - You have to be very sheltered not to see this. How well coordinated are these powerful forces? At least well-coordinated enough to work hand in hand.
Paul
PS - Does anybody know where the movie, All for the Taking is available? My online search has proved futile.
I agree in part
The problem is that people don't talk about how the best way to prevent ham-fisted "bulldoze-it-all" "redevelopment" projects is not to let situations like the simply blatantly inadequate level of rehab these four had accomplished to fester for years on end. If you are going to jump into the game of owning a building - proper heat, windows in all the places there are supposed to be windows, fully functioning plumbing - all of that should happen in the first year. Our city literally can't afford to install in water fountains in our public schools, its a bit much to expect it to foot the bill for rehabbing every private property owner's building's for them. Preventing the waste of eminent domain driven redevelopment (which I agree primarily screws longtime, often elderly poorer homeowners) means being smarter about making those who can afford to get their buildings up to code and habitable (and that means L&I enforcement) or setting up a system to nudge property speculators (of which I include the Francisville Four - because in reality thats what they were despite any "anti-authoritarian" trappings) who won't step up to the plate to sell to someone who will.
P.S. - RE "All for the Taking" You can purchase for official use here. If you want George McCollough's email contact me offline I may have it. Actually he's a member in good standing of Neighborhood Networks to the best of my knowledge, so they may have more recent contact info.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.