Arnie

The Clock is Ticking!

Opportunity knocks

The CHCA’s traffic and transportation committee is looking for feedback. If some of the proposals made by Cope Linder in their streetscape study are to be included in a planned Germantown Avenue reconstruction project, PennDOT needs to know soon – by the end of September. With the work already fully funded, the opportunity exists for this community to “customize” this state project at no cost to local residents or the city.  Important issues include traffic calming and how best to reconfigure the Germantown-Cresheim Valley intersection to make it more pedestrian friendly.

If you couldn’t make it to last week’s meeting at Hiram Lodge, contact the association (215-248-8810) or committee chair Bob Previdi (267-235-8523) with ideas and feedback. This is one opportunity that won’t knock again for a long time.

Not political?

In the public arena, rhetoric matters, and the stated interpretation of a group’s mission is often as important as what’s written in its bylaws (just think of the Barnes Institute). This rule applies to the Chestnut Hill Community Association, where the public pronouncements of some members of the group’s board of directors have, of late, attempted to frame the group as a service, rather than political, organization.

Such an idea, while well-meaning, is detrimental to the association and its mission.

“We’re not a Rotary Club. We’re not a service organization. We’re a political organization,” board member Mary Anna Ross Cowper told the executive committee a few months ago. And she’s right. When the CHCA fights McDonalds, mediates a zoning dispute, protests when Cresheim Valley Drive is not promptly repaired, joins the effort to save a regional rail line or meets with an elected official to discuss street construction or crime, it is being political. It can’t not be political. Therefore, no member of the board should express shock or dismay when proposals advanced by the organization that have broad public repercussions, such as those related to the Water Tower, meet with some kind of public resistance.

A belief that the CHCA is something other than a political actor within our diverse neighborhood and city is to embrace a kind of paternalism — one that sees the association as a body working for people, rather than with them. Unlike, say, Rotary, the CHCA claims to represent the community (before the zoning board and in many other forums), but can only do so if it makes the extra effort to reach out to citizens and be transparent in its processes and procedures. Involvement in the sturm and drang of local issues — as messy as they can be — is what has always made this group relevant; playing down the CHCA’s political function is, for this reason, not good strategy if the group hopes to reverse its membership decline.

A failure to see the CHCA as political also has concrete, negative ramifications for Chestnut Hill. A good example of this can be seen in the current fight to repeal legislation, backed by the billboard industry, that stripped community groups in Philadelphia of much of their power to challenge zoning decisions. This law could represent a significant threat to the CHCA’s ability to fulfill its core mission — the mission for which the group was founded 50 years ago — of ensuring the community has a say in development issues.

Many organizations in Philadelphia are lending their support to a bill that would rescind the provision of the act that restricts community groups. Among the supporters listed on the hallwatch.org Web site are East Mt. Airy Neighbors, West Mt. Airy Neighbors, Mt. Airy USA and the Northwest Greens, all four of which played prominent roles at a June 13 press conference called by state Rep. Mark Cohen announcing the new house bill.

Significantly — and embarrassingly — absent from the list, and press conference, was the Chestnut Hill Community Association, the Northwest’s premier community group. In January, then-board member Elizabeth Masters introduced a resolution calling for the CHCA to support efforts to fight the law. It was passed by the full board. So, where was the CHCA on June 13?

Probably off somewhere trying not to be political.

James Sturdivant

Opinion:
Travel and privilege

by ANTJE MATTHEUS

MLast week’s travel article featured Jimmy Pack’s trip through New Mexico on Route 66 (“The ‘white man’ comment sparks genocide debate,” Local Life 7/28). But its title, and much of the content were about Pack’s encounter with a "dark skinned man with long black hair" who asked him for a dollar.

Apparently Pack expected – or somehow thought himself entitled – to travel through an area heavily populated by Native Americans without having to see or hear about their poverty, or about how they became impoverished and dispossessed of their lands.

By Pack’s own account, the problem started before the request for the dollar. Pack also expected to sit in the lobby of his hotel without having to sit next to a Navajo, or a Navajo who "starts to smoke." He doesn’t tell us if it was a smoke-free lobby. Or why a travel writer wouldn’t be interested in talking to local people.

As the Navajo man sat, he asked if Pack minded. Sounds courteous, and since Pack tells us he minded, he might have said so and ended it there. But Pack says his response was, "‘No,’ I say, lying." Might Pack’s attitude, and lie, have showed a little?

The Navajo man explained why he needed money. "I live on the reservation around here. Don’t have a job, you know." Pack didn’t want to know, and "shoved my face back into my pad." Could the Navajo man by now feel ignored, or insulted?

The Navajo man, whose name we don’t know because Pack wasn’t interested in him, said it was "the white man" who had caused his people’s genocide and his personal poverty. With that, Pack tells us, "My patience is gone." It isn’t clear what patience he’s talking about. Anyway, it doesn’t seem to matter to Pack that what the Navajo man said might be – is – true.

Pack then got sarcastic, and mocked him (for using the phrase “the white man”) with stereotypical, B-movie Indian language. "Are you going to offer to ‘smoke-um peace pipe’ with me?"

And why is Pack so upset, besides his perception that the negativity that developed between them was wholly the Navajo man’s doing? Because Pack is not personally to blame. Pack, or his family, knows oppression – In Poland they were "waiting to be butchered by Hitler in the 1930s and ‘40s" – which absolves him and entitles him to ignore our country’s responsibility for genocides and poverty in America.

I don’t know Pack, but he’s probably not a bad guy, and my heart goes out to his family for their suffering. Sadly, Pack’s family’s ordeal hasn’t translated into a keen eye and empathy for those who suffer now. Rather, there’s a heavy dose of avoidance, sarcasm, and defensiveness: "Really? So my Polish ancestors...corralled all the Navajo onto some sh--ty part of the desert ... All white people? Not my white people." And, I am afraid, this sums up a common attitude these days.

Historians estimate that 10-15 million people lived on the North American continent when the European conquest started in 1492. Ninety percent of them would ultimately be killed through genocide, war, European introduced diseases, and starvation resulting from land-displacement. The land was emptied so white Europeans could settle here, build a better life, escape persecution, and perpetuate their cultures and belief systems.

This displacement and genocide are not only of historical interest. The Lene Lenape, who inhabited this area, were expelled and many were killed making it possible for Pack, me, and all of us to live here.

It’s hard to imagine how being born into the most desperate conditions in the United States wouldn’t deeply hinder one’s life chances. And in our not so distant history, laws, government, institutions all openly favored whites, and excluded and punished others, even prohibiting work or education of most non-white groups. Many white immigrants had it bad, but they benefited from being white. And we still do, for example when we try to get a job, a home or a taxi.

At the end of Pack’s short encounter with the Navajo he gets up — angry, indignant, and proud to tell us ‘back home’ about it. He showed the Navajo that he could not be called out as "a white man", although...he is, and like most white man of ages past, he blames Indians themselves for miseries that have befallen them.

There is a gift hidden in this story. It is the reminder that our wealth and our rights are fragile, they can disappear in Poland and in New Mexico. It is therefore incumbent upon us to not give in to the temptation to think of ourselves as more deserving than others, but to vehemently stand up for all, no matter how different a person might be or look — in someone’s eyes, we are all a "dark" stranger.

Antje Mattheus is a resident of East Mt. Airy.

Opinion:
These People Are You and Me

by Pamela Waters

In the July 14 edition of the Chestnut Hill Local, Martha Haley wrote an opinion piece about whether or not Ardleigh Street should feel included in, and represented by, the Chestnut Hill Community Association. This article jumped out at me for a number of reasons. It grabbed my attention initially because when Martha referred to one board member aggressively questioning another board member at our June 23 meeting, the aggressive board member in question was me. “Who are these people?” I asked, and apparently my question was interpreted by Ms. Haley as being dismissive and ill-spirited. In fact, she thoroughly misunderstood my intention. It was because I was honestly looking for clarification.

At that June 23 meeting, we had another board member repeatedly standing up and telling us that she wished to speak for the members of the community who are not being heard. It was clear that her intentions were heartfelt. However, if a board member wishes to present themselves as representing a segment of our community during a board meeting, I believe that board member must be prepared to make it clear exactly who it is they claim to represent, and be specific about their agenda. Without this clear focus on the issues presented, however heartfelt your speech may be, it boils down to empty rhetoric for rhetoric’s sake only and delays the proceedings of the board meeting.

I applaud Ms. Haley for being clear and specific about whom she believes the CHCA leaves behind. She referenced books and case studies as well as articles in The Philadelphia Inquirer and The New York Times. She was clearly ready to answer the question “Who are these people?” However, her assertions open up more questions.

When did Ardleigh Street become the poster child for the impoverished of Chestnut Hill? I drive along that street almost every day. By the way, I do not own an SUV, I do not speed (on that street) and I avoid talking on the cell phone while driving. Since Ms. Haley’s article, I have been consciously taking stock of all the homes that I see along the way. It made me realize how many people I know along that street. Six households came immediately to mind. Among these six homes, there are three attorneys (one who is on the board), one surgeon, one investment banker and a successful sole proprietor. Five of these families have children either in or entering The Springside School or Chestnut Hill Academy. Clearly, these are not “the poor of Chestnut Hill.”

Ardleigh Street does not hold the title for smallest homes nor does it hold the title for lowest income residents. Take a stroll down West Roanoke, West Abington, parts of Shawnee and Gravers Lane as well as any one of the 100 unit blocks either east or west of Germantown Avenue. What about the residents of Chestnut Hill Village? If you continue to cite Ardleigh Street as solely representing those citizens of Chestnut Hill who are working poor, who are without a voice, you are just as exclusionary as you accuse the Chestnut Hill Community Association of being.

The 8100 block of Ardleigh Street is important and deserving of the attention of the CHCA, but the needs and attitudes of one block cannot be repeatedly held aloft as representing the whole of the street, nor can they be said to represent the attitudes of all the smaller homeowners in Chestnut Hill.

Still, it is our responsibility as a community association to make it clear that we do mean to include all the members of the community. Ms. Haley feels that this message is not reaching her friends and neighbors. We must make that right. One of her complaints was the lack of accessibility of the Hiram Lodge to the elderly and handicapped. I have looked into this. The only handicapped accessible venue appropriate for our meetings is the Chestnut Hill Library. Unfortunately, due to budget cuts and the lack of personnel available to keep it open late for us, the library is unavailable until October. The Hiram Lodge is currently our only option. In a community where most of the buildings are a minimum of 80 years old, there will always be issues of accessibility. There were no ADA guidelines when the Hiram Lodge was built and when this community was founded. Because we do not own the Hiram Lodge at this juncture, we are unable to address the issue of accessibility to its meeting rooms structurally.

Currently, the only solution is one that we have proposed before. We have gentlemen on the board who are willing and able to assist those who need help in getting up the stairs. I feel certain that if someone cares fiercely enough about being heard and participating in the issues of this community, they would not allow themselves to be deterred from attending the CHCA meetings because we have no elevator.

In addition, I have received authorization to make the following proposal to Martha Haley. She closed her opinion piece in the Local by asking whether she should walk the block, encouraging her neighbors to join the association, add their voices and affect change. Yes! The message — and I hope we are now sending it out loud and clear — is that we do want those voices. We do. I encourage Ms. Haley to go to her friends and neighbors and invite them to join the Chestnut Hill Community Association. Every 10 people she signs up to join will receive their first year of membership for $20 instead of the regularly charged rate of $30. I think we all look forward to seeing the many new faces and new voices she will bring to the community association.

Lastly, the time for the Black and White Gala is again approaching. There are many people who work tirelessly to make this event a great success. I hope that some of those new community association members will allow this event to become meaningful for them as well by sharing some of their time to help make it happen.

The gala is an event that benefits the Avenue, its beauty and its upkeep. Germantown Avenue is something we all share, whether we live at the top of the Hill or at the bottom, whether we live in a big house or a row home. It is the centerpiece of our community and should be looked upon as the place where we are joined together and not the place where we are divided.

Pamela Waters is a member of the CHCA board of directors.