On the Beat: City to Deploy More Officers to Street

Police Chief Thomas Carter at Wednesday morning's press conference in City Hall.

Police Chief Thomas Carter at Wednesday morning’s press conference in City Hall.

The Harrisburg Police Department will be moving an additional 17 officers to street patrol, according to an announcement by the mayor Wednesday morning.

The boost will help address the high volume of calls that has taxed the existing patrol force, frequently requiring officers to work overtime.

The decision was several months in the making, but the city was waiting until rumors of a “mass exodus” of cops had settled after the unveiling of the recovery plan, Mayor Thompson said Wednesday. The plan, crafted by state-appointed receiver William Lynch and his team, requires that the police force’s labor contracts be renegotiated, which some feared would prompt officers to leave. Now that the plan is public, the rumors have been shown to be unfounded, said Thompson.

“Our police force is stable,” she said. “There has been no mass exodus.”

The 17 officers, along with two administrative positions, will be drawn from specialty units that focus on areas like street crime and housing. The move demonstrates that having sufficient cops on patrol is the department’s top priority, according to Police Chief Thomas Carter.

“The core function of any police department is its patrol unit,” he said. “We had to answer more calls.”

Harrisburg’s police force has steadily declined since the 1990s, when it employed over 170 officers. A spate of early retirements has whittled that number down to 129.

One consequence of having a diminished force is that officers have often been required to work overtime. On Sept. 10, City Council confronted the overtime cost when it reviewed a proposal for budget reallocations. Having already spent more than $300,000 on police overtime so far this year, the city would need to allocate an additional $200,000 to cover anticipated overtime for the rest of 2013, according to Finance Director Robert Kroboth.

Despite the reduction in numbers, Thompson said she is confident that the department is adequately staffed to meet the city’s needs. “It’s all part of the global comprehensive plan for public safety,” she said. “Our cops will be all over the city.”

The department also announced that its K-9 unit has grown to six, after a donation of three additional police dogs in September.

Continue Reading

Dear Prudence

The legislature giveth, and the legislature taketh away.

On Monday, the Senate Local Government Committee heard testimony on a package of bipartisan bills that seek to still the rough waters of municipal debt. Two of the bills—SB 903, sponsored by Sen. Folmer, and SB 904, sponsored by Sen. Teplitz—impose a statewide ban on interest-rate management agreements, also known, in the sporting parlance of finance, as “swaps.” The ban would reverse a bill, exactly one decade old, whose overriding purpose was to permit them.

Swaps, like fireworks, come in many shapes and colors. In their simplest form, their function is to trade a fixed interest rate on a quantity of debt for a potentially more favorable variable one. (Or vice versa.)

Like fireworks, swaps can explode. When they do, the results can be catastrophic: as former Auditor General Jack Wagner testified on Monday, bad swap agreements have led to the loss of “huge sums of public money”—by SEPTA, the Bethlehem School District, and the Turnpike, to name a few—in the “area of tens of millions of dollars.”

When swaps were first permitted, in 2003, the outlook was sunny. Rick Frimmer, then an attorney at Greenberg Traurig, who helped craft the legislation, described them as a “favorite tool of tax-exempt bond issuers and their advisors.” (Frimmer is now a partner at a firm in Chicago, specializing in, among other things, restructuring troubled public debt.) Variable interest rates tended to be lower than fixed ones; by entering into a swap, a local government (or a school district or authority) could realize substantial savings.

So why the intensified interest in a ban? The immediate spur for the new legislation is Harrisburg’s debt crisis, which produced a pair of hearings last fall to investigate where laws governing municipal debt had failed. In the course of those hearings, legislators learned about inadequate oversight by the Department of Community and Economic Development—whose staff, apparently overworked, was essentially rubber-stamping the debt filings it was supposed to vet—and a semi-incestuous league of elected officials and their legal and financial advisors. Some of the proposed legislation seeks to curb these offenses, by bolstering DCED’s regulatory role and by strengthening conflict-of-interest provisions.

But additionally, during the hearings in 2012, the senators heard testimony explicitly warning against the use of interest-rate swaps. David Unkovic, Harrisburg’s former receiver, referred to their allowance in municipal finance as a “failed experiment.” Swaps, he said, are incompatible with the pressures of public office: too often, they offer enticing upfront gains and push the pain onto future administrations. And their potential for harm extends well past the confines of the capital city, as Wagner detailed in Monday’s litany of losses.

Despite this, swaps still have ardent advocates. Charles Linderman, the director of business affairs for Great Valley School District, in Chester County, testified that Great Valley’s swaps over the past eight years have “resulted in positive cash flow.” Noting that there are “many successful swaps,” he urged the legislature to “preserve the flexibility of local government officials to have access to all the tools of the financial markets.”

Nancy Winkler, treasurer for the city of Philadelphia, likewise testified that the swap ban “would harm Philadelphia’s ability to manage effectively its own financial affairs.” Repeating the favored metaphor for utility, she referred to the swaps as “important tools” that “allow the city to generate savings, reduce risks, manage our investments and access the financial markets.”

It may be true that, managed well, swaps can produce savings on government debt. But what’s the guarantee they’ll be managed well?

At various points throughout the hearing, it was observed that swaps present elected officials with decisions they don’t understand. As a result, they’re forced to rely on professional advice. And an important sentiment simmering beneath Monday’s discussion was taxpayers’ lingering distrust of financial professionals.

Folmer, for instance, questioned Lucien Calhoun, the president of Calhoun Baker, Inc., a financial and management consulting firm, over what happens when an advisor “fails.”

“If a swap does go bad, who pays that bill? The taxpayer,” Folmer said. “And it seems like there’s no risk for the investment advisor.”

Judith Dexter and Michele Cann, who served on the board of the Bethlehem Area School District during a period in which it lost millions in swap transactions, spoke about officials’ susceptibility to bad advice. “We wanted to understand the transaction, and we thought we did,” Dexter said. “I do not feel that in Bethlehem we got any truly independent financial advice, because if we had, someone would have unraveled the kind of risks that we could face and the potential devastation to our district.”

Suspicion of high finance, whatever its benefits to rhetoric, is not always a reliable route to good legislation. (“Wall Street never loses,” Teplitz said after the hearing, as he took questions from reporters. “I think what we’re really doing is privatizing the profit and socializing the risk.”) Whether or not the swap ban succeeds, elected officials will continue to be shepherded by financial experts who will collect substantial fees.

But the concern about compromised guidance is relevant here. After all, in the tally of swap transactions, who really stands to gain? When Folmer asked about the cost of swaps to Philadelphia taxpayers, Winkler’s response was that, all told, “it turned out to be about a wash.” For taxpayers, perhaps. But what about for the industry that invented and sold the products that yielded the wash?

The 2003 legislation on swaps included a definition of an “independent financial advisor.”  Such an advisor was to be a “person or entity experienced in the financial aspects and risks of interest rate management agreements.” Greenberg Traurig, the law firm that helped shape the bill, announced its passage with an article on its website; at the bottom, they note that their public finance lawyers “are experienced in these sophisticated transactions.” It’s not hard to see why the senators were intent on questioning the impartiality of advisors.

The immediate weakness of the swap-ban bills, judging by much of Monday’s testimony, is that they legislate caution where many would argue caution is already observed. Linderman, with the Great Valley School District, noted that his team has “always proceeded very slowly.” Winkler said that, though swaps come with risk, “we are highly conservative and prudent in using them.”

The trouble with this line is that it addresses the wrong question. The goal is not to ensure care after calamity: it’s to ensure care when calamity is far from everyone’s mind. This legislation would turn temporary prudence into lasting policy.

In so doing, it would mimic existing state law regarding municipal investments, which already prevents the staking of public money on highly speculative risks. The same logic—that stability and transparency are preferable to experimentation, however lucrative it might be—should apply here. Public money is public money, whether it’s spent on debt service or investments. The gains of such an approach may be less spectacular. But the losses will be, too.

Continue Reading

The Guns of September

“Pop. Pop. Pop.”

It had been six months since I’d heard that sound. Last February, if I recall. It was then that the guns were put away for the season, a time that most of us who live along the Susquehanna River welcome as surely as late winter’s first not-so-cold day.

Indeed, it is pleasant to be able to sleep past dawn on a Saturday without being startled awake by the pops and booms of shotguns being fired at passing flocks of geese and ducks. Six months had passed so quietly that I had forgotten all about the annual rush of hunters to Harrisburg’s waters and islands.

Only on Saturday, during a late-afternoon walk in Riverfront Park, did I realize it had begun again. It was a spectacular September day, the river full of small craft, their occupants not hunting, but having fun–drinking, eating, socializing–while anchored in mid-river, when the shooting began. I wondered if they all were aware what was happening and, if they were, if they still were startled, as I was.

With that in mind, I thought I would share a story that I wrote a year ago and that appeared in TheBurg last October, coinciding with the start of last year’s six-month-long waterfowl season. Two hunters kindly took me out with them so that I could experience the sport from their side of the sight. I can’t say that the experience changed my mind, which is that allowing hunting in the middle of a dense urban area may not be the wisest idea. However, I remain appreciative that they shared their day with me.

To update the story: The 2013-14 waterfowl season kicked off Sept. 2 with Canada goose season, which runs until Sept. 25. In the south zone, which includes the Harrisburg area, the more-popular duck season runs Oct. 19-26 and Nov. 15-Jan. 15. The resident goose season is Oct. 26-Nov. 30, Dec. 18-Jan. 15 and Feb. 1-28. You can find all the details, including bag limits, at the Pennsylvania Game Commission website.

 

WaterfowlHunting

Friends Chris Price and James Eirkson hunt on the Susquehanna River, with the Harrisburg skyline in the background.

Susquehanna River: Where City Bustle Meets Country Sport 

“Here they come. They’re banking around that building.”

From his skiff, Chris Price sees the familiar V-shape of a flock of Canada geese heading for their overnight grounds shortly before dusk on a warm, late summer evening.

The flock never gets close enough for a shot by Price, who is joined in the boat by friend James Eirkson and Price’s golden retriever, Pearl.

Instead, the young men look on with disappointment as the geese fly past, high above City Island, with the state Capitol in the background, toward the shore in Shipoke.

Yes, City Island, the Capitol, Shipoke.

The friends are not hunting out in the country or in some remote swamp, but in the busy, densely populated city of Harrisburg.

From the boat in the middle of the Susquehanna River, one can see streams of traffic on Front Street, joggers along the river walk. Pleasure craft drift close by.

And it’s all completely legal.

To the surprise of many newcomers on both the east and west shores, the state allows waterfowl hunting in these Harrisburg waters, as long as hunters don’t shoot into the safety zone, defined as 150 yards from occupied structures on shore.

This situation is perfect for local hunters, as geese and ducks both flock to the numerous little islands and grassy patches that span the mile-wide river. In addition, the stretch of river is easy to navigate and, with numerous boat launches, convenient to reach.

Price and Eirkson, for instance, both live in Riverview Manor, the condominium on Front Street in Midtown Harrisburg. So they can put in practically from their front door.

Some people who live near the river, however, have a different take.

The waterfowl season is long. In the Harrisburg area, a three-week  resident Canada goose season began Sept. 1, and geese can be hunted throughout much of the fall and winter until Feb. 28.

The even more popular duck season runs Oct. 13 to 20, then again Nov. 15 to Jan. 15.

Therefore, for about six months, volleys of gunfire often start at dawn, startling hard-working people who would rather not be jolted awake at 6 a.m. on a Saturday.

“It’s an annoyance,” said one Midtown resident who asked not be named. “People who don’t like to be woken up in the morning consider it an annoyance.”

In addition, over the years, some people new to the area have called 9-1-1 with reports of gunshots.

Just last year, one Olde Uptown resident put in a frantic call to police and then reported on Facebook that an all-out gun battle had broken out in her neighborhood.

In a way, this story is an old one, as hunters and homeowners long have had disputes about noise and safety on and near hunting grounds.

However, the situation here is unique, as the sheer density of the population on both sides of the river makes this truly an urban hunting experience—with its own set of benefits and challenges.

Even hunters Price and Eirkson expressed surprise that they’re able to hunt within eyeshot of downtown Harrisburg, with traffic streaming over the bridges that span the river.

“The first time I was out here, I was almost waiting for a police officer to come out because it just didn’t seem right,” said Eirkson. “You have the Capitol and the governor’s mansion and people walking around.”

Other than some noise complaints, there have been few problems between hunters and residents over the years, said Jerry Feaser, spokesman for the Pennsylvania Game Commission.

He believes that the far majority of hunters know and respect the law—that they don’t shoot into the safety zone, don’t shoot when it’s dark out, keep off of privately owned islands and respect bag limits.

To enforce the law, conservation officers patrol the river and cite hunters for unlawful practices, he said.

“You always have somebody who is going to go against the rules,” he added.

Kermit Henning, an avid local outdoorsman, offered some perspective.

He said that waterfowl hunting in Harrisburg  goes back a long time, but has become more popular recently due to the decline in the area’s pheasant population, once a preferred prey, and because the river north of Harrisburg can be difficult to access.

“Hunting has really grown here,” he said. “Almost every island now has a hunter on it.”

In addition, in the 1960s and ’70s, Harrisburg police often chased hunters from the river, but the state intervened to stop the practice.

With the increased popularity of the sport, some problems have arisen, Henning said, including shotgun pellets that have fallen on cars and bridges. He said he personally has witnessed conservation officers arresting hunters charged with rules violations.

But, for the most part, the lengthy season proceeds without much incident. Even residents who, at first, are surprised—even shocked—that hunting is allowed in this congested area eventually seem to accept the loud wake-up calls at dawn as just another inconvenience of living in this always-challenging capital city.

“It’s strange that this presumably rural activity is allowed here,” said a Midtown resident. “But, given the menu of problems involved with living in this city, it probably doesn’t rise to the level of major concern.”

Continue Reading

Harrisburg Strong Meetings Set

It’s been a busy week for Harrisburg City Council, which has begun discussing elements of the “Harrisburg Strong” recovery plan. Next week will be even busier, as the debate continues and the voting starts.

The following lists the remainder of the committee meetings related to the plan, as well as special legislative sessions on Sept. 10 (note early start) and on Sept. 16. The legislative meetings will include votes on such key elements of the plan as the incinerator sale, the parking lease and the earned income tax hike.

  • Administration Committee: Monday, Sept. 9, 5:30 p.m. (union-related legislation)
  • Special Legislative Session: Tuesday, Sept. 10, 5:15 p.m. (Council will vote)
  • Administration  Committee: Tuesday, Sept. 10, 5:30 p.m (parking-related legislation)
  • Administration Committee: Wednesday, Sept. 11, 5:30 p.m. (water/sewer-related legislation)
  • Administration Committee: Thursday, Sept. 12, 5:30 p.m. (incineratorrelated legislation)
  • Special Legislative Session: Monday, Sept. 16, 6 p.m. (Council will vote)

In case of an overflow crowd, the meetings will be aired live in the City Hall atrium, with additional seating available.

 

Continue Reading

Back Taxes

Fred Reddig and Neil Grover before members of City Council Wanda Williams, Eugenia Smith, and Brad Koplinski Wednesday night.

Fred Reddig and Neil Grover before members of City Council Wanda Williams, Eugenia Smith, and Brad Koplinski Wednesday night.

“Someone suggested that we think of the citizens of Harrisburg,” said former Mayor Stephen Reed, during a public meeting of the Harrisburg Parking Authority board in May of 2008. “Well, I can tell you that we have.”

The room was crowded, and the atmosphere was tense. The issue before the board was the long-term lease of the city’s parking garages, to the developer Jacob Frydman, in exchange for $215 million. Frydman had already given his talk, promising—unpersuasively, judging by the tone of Reed’s speech, which was half entreaty, half rebuke—that the authority’s union employees, many of whom were present, would not lose their jobs.

Reed spoke for ten minutes. Public approval of the proposal was waning, and his plea grew increasingly strained. “I’d have to be out of my mind to come to a press conference, to a public meeting of the parking authority, in front of all of you, and offer a transaction here that was bad for the city of Harrisburg,” he said towards the end. “Why would I do that? Why would any mayor of any city do that?”

In hindsight, it’s hard not to see that night’s speech as a prelude to Reed’s unraveling. Though the board narrowly voted for the deal, City Council would ultimately reject it; a year later, Reed would lose the Democratic primary. But at the time, it seemed almost possible that the lease would buy the mayor a fresh start. The Frydman deal, he pledged, would wipe out both the parking authority’s and the city’s debt. And best of all, it would mean lower taxes—including a 100% rebate to homeowners making less than $40,000 a year, and, starting in 2009, “an across-the-board rate reduction that becomes permanent.”

Five years later, another long-term lease of the city’s parking assets is taking shape. After months of delicate brokering behind closed doors, the state-appointed receiver’s roadmap for recovery, alias Harrisburg Strong, has surfaced for public review. A major component is the 40-year lease of the city’s lots and garages and on-street meters, in exchange for which, as promised before, the parking authority’s debt and much of the city’s debt—particularly debt related to the retrofitted incinerator, which will be sold—will be wiped clean.

The difference, this time, is what happens with the taxes. As one of the plan’s many legislative conditions, City Council must pass an extension of the hike to the earned-income tax, or EIT, to 2%.

Last night, at a three-hour committee meeting, members of City Council reviewed three bills linked to the implementation of Harrisburg Strong. Two of them pertained to the parking assets: one would add 88 meters in Midtown, and the other would raise on-street hourly rates. The third was the EIT ordinance. When it came time to discuss it, the reaction from most council members was predictably cranky.

Council President Wanda Williams observed that, when council voted to raise the EIT to 2% last October, they did so on the understanding that the increase would only last a year. “We’re still putting the burden on the citizens of Harrisburg who had nothing to do with this financial debacle,” she said.

Councilwoman Sandra Reid harped on the continued absence of a so-called commuter tax. Recalling that the state legislature expressly forbade Harrisburg from implementing a tax on nonresidents who work in town, she complained that the city was “not taking every revenue stream available.”

Resentment towards commuters, a time-honored tradition among urban voters, is a reliable whipping post for elected officials. (Reed, at the 2008 meeting, flogged it twice, at one point referring to the garages as “facilities that are largely used by non-residents who come into Harrisburg and at the end of the business day go out to the suburbs.”) Sympathizing with voter pain is likewise a standby. Even the council members who approved of the hike, like Bruce Weber, were keen to show that they understood the frustration. Throughout the night, a frequent refrain was that comments were “just for the record” or “just so residents know.”

This posturing on taxpayer pain—that it afflicts the blameless, per Williams, or that it’s unequally shared, per Reid—distorts reality. Nobody likes higher taxes, of course. But an increasingly common perception is that the ignominious incinerator debt, whipped up by a handful of politicians and professionals, is being settled on the backs of city residents by way of the EIT. As Neil Grover, an attorney for City Council who worked closely with the receiver’s team, explained at Wednesday’s meeting, this isn’t the case.

Though the EIT hike is included in the recovery plan, it’s only indirectly related to the debt solution. Even if there were no debt, the city would still face a structural deficit—that is, the rise in the cost of city services would still outpace, as it has for years, any growth in the city’s revenues. It would seem that the answer is to trim the services, but the city, having already gouged its payroll, can’t go much deeper without disrupting essential functions. “We’ve had cuts as close to the bone as you can get, and yet we’re still short on our budget,” Grover said.

The reason it’s a part of Harrisburg Strong, according to Grover, is that it’s a critical signal to creditors and investors that the city is willing to work “in good faith” towards a solution. When council adopted the hike for one year, he said, it “got creditors to come to the table and put their skin in the game.” Part of the continuing negotiation towards recovery depends on Harrisburg’s enduring effort to balance its own books. “Everyone has come to believe the city is capable of righting its own ship,” Grover said.

Beyond that, the increase to 2% would make Harrisburg’s rate comparable to other distressed cities. As Fred Reddig, with the state Department of Community and Economic Development, explained at the meeting, many other municipalities under Act 47 have EIT rates even higher than Harrisburg’s. (Reading is at 3.6%; Scranton is at 3.4%.) Deciding that further city services can be cut, of course, is one matter. But if residents want to keep the services they’re getting, the cash has to come from somewhere. And as Grover explained, there are virtually “no other legal means of raising revenue.”

Since the recovery plan was made public, many have rather cynically remarked—including here on the blog—that tax hikes, once passed, are never repealed. That’s true, and the idea that this one will actually expire at the end of 2016, as it’s supposed to under the ordinance, is probably fantasy.

But it’s nothing compared to the much worse fantasy that was peddled for years under Reed: that the city could somehow provide more and better services while its revenues stagnated. “Each of Reed’s deals,” the receiver recently said in an interview, “if you peel it back, was to fix a $5, $6, $7 million hole in the general fund.”

By 2008, when Reed promised a tax cut, people saw it for what it was. At the end of his speech, he remarked, sourly, that throughout almost everything he’d said, two members of the public at the back had been shaking their heads. “You just rejected out of hand—you don’t want to hear anything,” he said. “God help us if that’s how we’re thinking about the future of Harrisburg.”

He was right, at least, that the city’s prospects depended on a change in thought. The recovery plan seeks to replace wishful thinking with long-overdue accounting. Citizens enjoyed a cheap ride for years—and voted, against their better judgment, to keep it going. Painful as it may be, it’s time to pony up.

Continue Reading

Gamut Theatre Purchases, Will Relocate to Historic Downtown Church

GamutChurch

Come next year, Harrisburg theater-goers will have a new venue to experience some of the area’s finest children’s and classical theater, as Gamut Theatre Group announced plans today to relocate to an historic downtown church on N. 4th St.

Gamut last week finalized its $435,000 purchase of the First Church of God, constructed in 1854, which was long the home parish of the Harrisburg-based Church of God. It now will renovate the 12,000-square-foot church to accommodate its two troupes: the Popcorn Hat Players Children’s Theatre and Harrisburg Shakespeare Company.

Plans for the new theater space include a renovation of the 12,000-square-foot church building to create mainstage and children’s theaters, classrooms, offices, a reception lobby, a scene shop, costume shop, dressing rooms, storage and more, said Gamut. Renovation will also include facilities improvements such as installation of an air conditioning system, ADA-compliant entrances and upgrades to electrical and plumbing systems.

The renovation will proceed in two phases, said Gamut’s Executive Director Melissa Nicholson. Phase one, estimated to cost $700,000, will include construction of a mainstage and a complete upgrade of the building’s physical infrastructure, she said. Phase two will include a second theater for children’s productions, as well as classrooms and other supporting spaces. It will cost about $400,000, said Nicholson.

“It’s a beautiful building,” said Clark Nicholson, Gamut’s artistic director, “and although there will be some cosmetic changes, we are very excited that we will be preserving much of the original architecture, including the lovely stained glass windows. There is a feeling of history here, a love and respect for those things that have come before, that lends itself nicely to the telling of classic stories.”

The building at 15 N. 4th St. is located directly across the street from Strawberry Square, which has been Gamut’s home for 20 years.

Gamut has kicked off a fundraising campaign to raise the $1.6 million needed to complete the property’s renovations, which are projected to be completed by fall 2014. The company will continue to produce plays at his current location on the third floor of Strawberry Square through its 2013-14 season.

Last year, Gamut announced plans to relocate to a former fitness center in Lemoyne, but ultimately decided against the move amid uncertainties over parking, among other issues. For its new location, Gamut hopes to reach agreements to provide spaces in area parking garages, said Melissa Nicholson.

Harristown Enterprises, Gamut’s current landlord in Strawberry Square, represented the theater in the purchase and helped finance it, said Nicholson.

“We have been working cooperatively with Gamut to help them acquire and renovate their new property into a long-term theater asset,” said Brad Jones, vice president, community development for Harristown.  “We are very supportive of this new project and are pleased that Gamut has chosen to remain part of the downtown community.”

Nicholson said that Harristown knew Gamut was looking to purchase its own, permanent home and wanted to ensure that the theater group stayed in downtown Harrisburg.

The purchase marks yet another conversion of an historic downtown property in Harrisburg. Brickbox Enterprises, for one, has bought and renovated several century-old office buildings for residential use in recent years. It currently is transforming the Barto Building at N. 3rd and State streets into condominiums.

The Church of God is a native Harrisburg denomination formed following a break by the evangelical Rev. John Winebrenner with the German Reformed Church in 1825. After 160 years at the location, the church put the building on the market several months ago after its congregation became too small to support the large church building. It now meets at the United Methodist Church in Midtown.

“By having Gamut go into the building, it preserves a lot of the history,” said Melissa Nicholson. “We’ll be good custodians of the building.”

For more information about the project or how to donate to Gamut Theatre Group, contact Melissa Nicholson, executive director, at 717-238-4111.

Note: This story has been updated to include the purchase price, renovation costs and other information.

Continue Reading

Harrisburg Strong, Once Again

Something very important happened in our political system recently in Harrisburg.

Led by Receiver Bill Lynch, officials across the political spectrum came together to solve a very difficult fiscal problem for the city. In doing so, they demonstrated that our political system still works and that seemingly intractable problems can be solved through hard work, persistence and a willingness to trust and cooperate – the essence of leadership. This is the best that we can ask from any of our elected and unelected public officials.

Hard as it may be to believe on the surface, Democratic Mayor Thompson worked cooperatively with Republican Gov. Corbett and a bi-partisan team of Dauphin County commissioners to put together a negotiated plan to solve the Harrisburg debt crisis while avoiding the crushing prospect of bankruptcy. All of those leaders deserve our thanks and appreciation.

Is the plan perfect? Of course not. By its very nature, a negotiated solution will leave every party wanting, as is the case with this plan.  All parties are taking a “haircut,” so to speak, to make the deal work. No doubt there is shared pain required by the city’s residents. The extension of the 1 percent increase in the EIT will cost the median family making $30,000 a year an extra $300 annually. However, if a tax increase had to happen, which under any scenario it certainly would, this is the fairest tax and far preferable to any increase in already-high real estate taxes.

But look what also happened: the bond insurance company (AGM) took an $89 million haircut, as well they should. And the commonwealth will have to contribute $5 million a year to the city budget (a dramatic increase over every year prior and one that they will be under tremendous pressure to continue) and has helped to guarantee the parking revenue and price for the sale of the incinerator. Yes, parking rates will go up about 15 percent (or $23 per month for a space in a public garage), but even this is a good thing from the perspective of Harrisburg citizens. This is one of the few ways that we have to raise money from people who do not actually live in our town (in other words, a commuter tax). A few more people may carpool or take the bus instead—for the sake of the environment I hope so—but the rest will pay their small part.

Despite this favorable progress, not all city leaders are willing to demonstrate the spirit of good faith, cooperation and optimism required to get things like this done. An example is the call by Controller Dan Miller for an “independent” review— whatever that means. A review has already been conducted at the local, county and state levels, with further review coming from a commonwealth judge. What is Miller now suggesting? That the officials involved are not to be trusted in representing and negotiating for each party’s best interests? Or that they are to be trusted, but it is still not the outcome he wants? In which case, he needs to explain how an independent review and the costs and delays associated with it will somehow result in a better outcome for the city’s residents. And he needs to tells us who exactly will pay for that review. What exactly would this independent reviewer have the authority to do?

As much as Miller wishes it were so, we are not Detroit, and we are not going bankrupt if this plan is carried through. The only thing that further delay and dithering will do (after four long years) is cost us more money while preserving Miller’s central campaign theme of bankruptcy. But anyone who knows anything about business knows that all the parties have to agree to a deal, and, if one backs out, the entire deal falls apart. While Miller may want that in order to somehow prove he was “right,” the rest of us should reject it wholeheartedly. His attempt at a delay in disguised hope that the deal will fall apart in the meantime is exactly what is wrong with our political system. And it shows why Harrisburg voters rejected Miller’s failed candidacy for mayor in the recent Democratic primary. I suspect that Republican and independent voters who tend to understand business and how a deal comes together will see through this personally motivated charade, joining with the Democrats to vote for change.

Let’s move Harrisburg forward and not waste one more day or one more dollar of our citizens’ hard-earned money on personally motivated delay and obfuscation. There are many more issues the city has to deal with, including finding ways to attract more residents and businesses so that we can turn our city around and begin to grow our population base. Issues of safety, economic competitiveness, infrastructure and schools are high on the list of our problems to solve, but we can solve them if we finally get this crisis behind us.

Nearly 100,000 people lived in Harrisburg a half-century ago, almost twice as many as today. However, if we get back to work and focus on growth and opportunity for jobs, housing and investment, I believe that Harrisburg has the potential to rediscover its former glory and rightful spot as a leading capital city. This plan will help us become Harrisburg Strong.

Alex Hartzler is publisher of TheBurg.

Continue Reading

The Great Divorce

Shannon Williams, Executive Director of the Harrisburg Authority, and Mayor Linda Thompson.

Shannon Williams, Executive Director of the Harrisburg Authority, and Mayor Linda Thompson.

Last November, David Unkovic—the city’s former receiver, who resigned in March of 2012 with a single page of urgent, tilting scrawl—sat before the Pennsylvania Senate Local Government Committee and talked about a failed experiment.

The experiment was a 2003 amendment to the state law governing municipal debt. It permitted local governments to enter into interest-rate swaps, the bedeviling financial instruments that, through their potent mix of opacity and risk, helped multiply the pain of the Great Recession. Unkovic advised that the amendment be reversed, and that entering into swap agreements by local governments be banned.

“They’re incompatible with the way public officials and elected officials operate,” he said. He meant that the pressure to do what’s politically expedient often makes it impossible to do what’s financially sound. (As an example, he described a Pennsylvania municipality whose officials, unwilling to take a loss in the limelight, delayed in terminating a swap gone sour, until the toll had grown from $4 million to $24 million.)

Today, at a press conference in City Hall, Mayor Thompson announced a plan to sever political expedience from a major piece of the city’s operations: the sewer and water systems, currently run under a tangled partnership between the city and the Harrisburg Authority. Joining her were the new receiver, William Lynch, whose recovery plan sketches out the general terms of separation, and Shannon Williams, the Authority’s executive director.

The split, for all its merits, is messy. This is partly because of the dizzying complexity of the existing arrangement. The wastewater collection system—the pipes under the streets, the inlets and manholes—is owned by the city, operated by the city’s Department of Public Works, and serves only the city of Harrisburg. The infrastructure for the conveyance and treatment of wastewater, including “interceptor” sewers, pumping stations, and the sewage treatment plant, is owned by the Authority, leased to the city, operated by the city’s Bureau of Sewage, and serves Harrisburg along with several outlying townships and boroughs. The water system is owned by the Authority, leased to the city, operated by the city’s Bureau of Water—you get the idea.

Under the terms of the transition agreement, the city will relinquish every piece of both systems to the Authority. The Authority will take over operations, assuming the city’s current employees under a collective bargaining agreement, adopted Wednesday night by the Authority board. It will also acquire the collection assets (pipes, inlets, manholes) that the city currently owns. It will cease to be the money-printing enterprise it had become through the machinations of former Mayor Stephen Reed, whose compulsive exploitation of its power to issue debt was written about at length by Nick Malawskey, in an investigative report for the Patriot-News.

“It used to be a financing authority. It’s now transitioning to an operating authority,” Bill Cluck, chairman of the Authority’s board of directors, said.

For everything it’s giving up, what will the city receive in exchange? At the press conference, the mayor was at pains to define the primary gain as freedom. “This action removes the city’s liability for antiquated infrastructure,” she said. The agreement was about “liberation,” she added later; the Authority would have to “stand on its own, on its own borrowing,” allowing taxpayers “to be free from these types of convoluted deals.” When someone asked whether the change would result in a rate hike, she sounded almost gleeful. “The Harrisburg Authority will be completely independent,” she said. “As an elected official, that won’t be my concern.”

One needn’t look far to find the reasons for Thompson’s relief. The historic abuse of the Authority, particularly in the form of the staggering incinerator debt, backed by the city’s guarantee, was a profound betrayal of Harrisburg residents. (It was also, incidentally, a reversal of one of the Authority’s original purposes, which was to insulate taxpayers from the cost of capital utility projects by tying them to user rates instead of city budgets.) In addition, the impending tally of system improvements, required for compliance with state and federal environmental law, would likely have been too high for the city to absorb.

But the claim of complete extrication is a bit misleading. In the first place, the Authority and the city remain intricately linked. As part of the agreement, the Authority has pledged to pay for future green infrastructure improvements undertaken by the city, under terms that have yet to be decided. The city has committed to street-cleaning services essential to the sewers’ smooth function. And the Authority, recognizing the city’s solicitor couldn’t navigate the specialized legal matters involved, is paying for the city to retain a separate lawyer.

Second, the idea that the city is now “free” puts the reality rather backwards. The benefits to the Authority extend far beyond the acquisition of the city’s wastewater assets. The agreement has granted the Authority access to $26 million from PennVEST, the state’s infrastructure investment program, whose first condition was that the Authority shed its connection to the city. Williams also said that the Authority would seek to repair its credit rating, which dissipated largely because of dysfunction in city government. (Moody’s downgraded the Authority’s bond rating, and ultimately de-rated the Authority, as a direct consequence of the city’s failing to submit financial audits on time.)

In short, the Authority, in severing its operations from the city, has removed itself from the toxic reach of political maneuvering. “They appear to like and trust us at the Authority,” Cluck said, referring to the EPA and the Justice Department, with whom his board has been in negotiations. “We aren’t subject to political pressures.”

Perhaps the question of who is liberated from whom puts matters in the wrong frame. We’re still speaking, after all, of the city’s authority, with a board appointed by the city’s mayor, and approved by City Council. The Authority’s customers are the city’s voters; the city’s streets perch above the Authority’s pipes. What requires separation is not only water and politics—it’s also the city’s aspirations for recovery and its sordid financial past, to which it is still unfortunately bound. “Like a bird on a wire,” as the Leonard Cohen song goes. We will try, in our way, to be free.

Continue Reading

Beyond Their Control

In the course of a long political season, outside events sometimes monkey with candidates’ best efforts to keep their campaigns on message and tightly controlled.

An extreme example is in New York, where another round of below-the-belt selfies seems finally to have sunk the campaign of Anthony Weiner, perhaps the Big Apple’s least camera-shy person.

On Monday, Harrisburg had its own major outside event, one that may override every other issue leading up to the Nov. 5 general election. Receiver William Lynch issued the “Harrisburg Strong Plan,” a comprehensive solution to the city’s financial crisis.

For months, Lynch had telegraphed that his plan was about to be filed with the Commonwealth Court, which is slated to hold a hearing on it on Sept. 19. However, the plan’s contents and creativity took many people by surprise, including, it seems, the city’s mayoral hopefuls.

At first, both Democrat Eric Papenfuse and Republican Dan Miller issued rather brief statements on the plan, but later expanded on their comments. Not surprisingly, Papenfuse gave it a qualified thumbs up, while Miller gave it a qualified thumbs down (here, here and here). Both men say they’d like more information as the process plays out, but the trend seems pretty clear and in keeping with their stances during the primary (Papenfuse, pro-receiver, anti-bankruptcy; Miller, anti-receiver, pro-bankruptcy).

When people step into a voting booth, many things cross their minds. Some vote on whether or not they like a person, which is a fair criteria, particularly in a small place like Harrisburg, where many voters know the candidates personally.

Other people may be influenced by what they’ve read in a newspaper or heard during a debate. In the mayoral debates to come, it will be interesting to see how the candidates respond to the inevitable charges that will be hurled at them. For instance, Papenfuse better have a good answer to the charge that he’s a lackey of big money, while Miller should brush up on his response that he’s a liberal Democrat opportunistically running as a Republican.

But, in the end, I suspect that the race will be won or lost on how the people of Harrisburg feel about the receiver’s plan come the first week of November. By then, the Commonwealth Court, almost certainly, will have approved it, and City Council likely will have passed a rash of enabling legislation. The plan should be well on its way to implementation.

If the general spirit has been uplifted by the plan, and it seems workable, Papenfuse should have a clear advantage in the general. On the other hand, Miller, who I believe starts this campaign at a disadvantage by losing in the primary and needing to run as a Republican, might be able to make up ground if the complex plan begins to unravel.

In the interim, Papenfuse will need to speak convincingly about why city residents will have to endure a multi-year increase in the earned income tax rate and a head-spinning parking meter fee hike. Miller will have to explain how municipal bankruptcy (a black box of unknowables that could take years to resolve at great cost) is a better deal for Harrisburg. He also needs to state clearly what, if anything, he could and would do to change Harrisburg Strong upon becoming mayor in January.

At the moment, my sense is that most residents are willing to give Lynch the benefit of the doubt. They’re tired of the dysfunction of the city and the disorder to their lives. Meanwhile, they’ve largely become (unhappily) accustomed to higher taxes as a price to resolve the years-long financial crisis. More than anything, they want a new beginning, a new era for the city and for themselves. That feeling, though, could change fast. If the plan gets bogged down or, worse, begins to fall apart, hope quickly could turn to anger and despair.

The candidates are staking their positions in this battle, giving voters a distinct choice. However, events beyond their control ultimately may decide who is right — and may well determine who will be the next mayor of Harrisburg.

Note: Independent Nevin Mindlin also expects to run for Harrisburg mayor. You can read his position on the Harrisburg Strong Plan here. His status as a candidate is unclear after a Dauphin County judge recently threw out his nominating petition. The hearing on his appeal is slated for Sept. 12 in Commonwealth Court. If he does not succeed in his appeal, he has said he may mount a write-in campaign.

Continue Reading

Return of the Native: Master Gardeners want to create an arboretum in Harrisburg Cemetery, but find they’re up against centuries of damage.

Screen Shot 2013-08-30 at 11.53.24 AMNot long ago, Jane Lawrence of the Dauphin County Master Gardeners was at the entrance to Harrisburg Cemetery, looking for the right plant for a low limestone wall across from the caretaker’s cottage.

The difference between the right plant and the almost right plant, to adapt a line of Twain’s, is the difference between a fox and a foxglove, and the right plant for Lawrence would have to meet several demands. For one, the view over the limestone wall, of the Capitol dome, had to be preserved. So whatever variety she picked would have to be small—under 3 feet if possible.

It would also have to be interesting to look at for more than one season of the year. Every plant has seasonal offerings. Some, like the crabapples on a nearby plot, have spectacular spring blooms and ornamental fruit in autumn, but are dull in winter. Others, like the Kentucky coffee trees just up the road, are scrappy most of the year. The ideal plant for the prominent entrance spot would have something to show every season: flowers in spring and summer, leaf color in fall and berries in winter.

Lawrence decided, provisionally, to plant hydrangeas. But there were further considerations. Price mattered, as did ease of propagation. Her selection had to be limestone-friendly and had to tolerate being exposed. And the question of height remained. Most hydrangeas grow to 3 or 4 feet. There are dwarf varieties, but only in a narrow range of colors. One has pink blossoms, the other blue.

“But I wanted white,” Lawrence told me later, when we met in town. “So I’m still holding off on that one.”

Lawrence grew up in Detroit Lakes. Her grandmother, an avid gardener, gave her a plot to tend in her backyard. She later moved to Muncy, Pa., and raised chickens, rabbits, fruits and vegetables on an 11-acre farm. At the same time, she taught social work in the graduate school at Temple. “I liked people. I also liked growing things,” she said. When a position opened at Temple’s Harrisburg campus, she moved. She eventually settled in Bellevue Park, a bosky, undulating neighborhood to the city’s east, near John Harris High School.

Lawrence is short, with a sandy pixie cut and a sweet demeanor. She expressed a concern for animals and insects that “can’t feed their babies.” A few years after she moved to Bellevue Park, a series of heavy storms struck the region. A wooded area in the neighborhood lost several large trees, and the resulting hole in the canopy allowed plants closer to the ground to thrive. “I began really watching the woods,” Lawrence said. Soon, the floor was overrun with honeysuckle, privet and other invasive species. She became interested in the challenge of repopulating hollowed-out woods.

In the fall of 2008, Lawrence joined the Dauphin County Master Gardeners. Master Gardeners are unpaid volunteers who apply for certification by the Penn State Cooperative Extension. The certification process is rigorous. They must pass an exam and complete 40 hours of training, plus eight hours of update training each subsequent year. They volunteer time and expertise in their communities, answering hotlines, maintaining demonstration gardens and offering public workshops and lectures. According to Penn State guidelines, their role is to disseminate “unbiased, research-based information” to home gardeners. They are not to attach themselves to commercial products, nor can they charge a fee.

They also frequently involve themselves in civic beautification. Lawrence got involved with a group of Master Gardeners who had started working at the Harrisburg Cemetery, cleaning up overgrown patches and identifying trees. Eventually, seeing that some of the oldest canopy trees were in decline, they started thinking about planting saplings. They noticed that the cemetery was missing a “middle story”—that is, trees between the canopy and the low ornamentals. In late 2010, they developed a list of preferred trees for new planting, with an emphasis on native species, including mid-height trees like sourwoods and yellowwoods.

“We decided on a focus on native plants because these seem to be outnumbered in most private and public gardens,” Lawrence told me. “We are very concerned about promoting native wildlife, and the best way to do so is by providing them the food sources they evolved with.”

In 2011, one of the Master Gardeners, inspired by a visit to Morris Arboretum in Philadelphia, suggested the group pursue the creation of an arboretum in Harrisburg. Lawrence did some research and came up with a list of goals. When it came to choosing an appropriate site, the group did not look far. “We were all so fond of the cemetery plantings no one considered looking elsewhere for an arboretum, feeling we had the makings of one where we were,” Lawrence said.

Through this effort, the Master Gardeners will be adding to the appeal of one of Harrisburg’s most remarkable, and yet least-known, historical landmarks. They’ll also be waging a local battle in what might be described, with only modest exaggeration, as a nationwide horticultural war.

Feel of a Park

Harrisburg Cemetery is the largest and oldest cemetery in the city. It sits on a bluff at one end of the State Street Bridge, overlooking the railroad and the Capitol dome. Chartered in 1845, its grounds were carved from the city’s largely rural outskirts, and they gradually filled as church graveyards in town were relocated to make room. In time, it became the resting place of prominent local families. The headstones now feel like a survey of Harrisburg street signs: Verbeke, Calder, Cameron, Reily, Boas, Herr and Forster are there, among others.

The cemetery is also home to an astonishing variety of trees. There are flowering dogwoods, cherry trees, cedars, ashes, oaks and maples. They have a global pedigree: not far from the entrance is a towering European beech, whose gray trunk looks like a swollen elephant leg, and nearby is a bald cypress, native to the United States, with a thin coat of feathery needles. There’s a dawn redwood from China, several Korean dogwoods and at least one English Hawthorn that, despite its name, is believed to hail from Africa.

The trees, combined with the grounds’ crisscrossing avenues, lend the cemetery the feel of a park. The effect is deliberate and reflects a taste in the mid-19th century for cemeteries one could visit and walk around. Nowadays, visiting a grave with a purpose other than to mourn can seem like a form of trespassing or disrespect, but, in the last century or two, it was nothing unusual. (In Woodlawn, a historic cemetery in the Bronx, N.Y., where I once gave tours, some mausoleums had rooms where relatives could sit, read and even picnic.)

In May, on the first day of spring landscaping, I took a tour of the Harrisburg Cemetery with David Via, the resident caretaker. I found him halfway down a row of headstones, next to a plume of blue-white smoke. Via and two colleagues were clearing some graves of stiltgrass, a tenacious invasive weed, and had resorted to lighting clumps of it on fire.

Via apprenticed at an art conservation shop in Watertown, Mass., the area of the shootout after the marathon bombing, a little over a week before we met. “Actually, the diner we used to go to was in the news, because of those two idiots from Boston,” he told me. He travelled often, mostly restoring bronze. “But then the economy tanked, and there was no money for public art.”

He now works at the cemetery full time, addressing whatever needs addressing, which is usually some combination of overgrowth, fallen trees and damaged markers. In the winter, when he can’t do landscaping, he works in the cottage. “I have paperwork going back to 1843,” he said.

We headed for the cemetery’s western edge, past patches of grass dotted with flowers. “Traditionally, it was the time to start mowing when the violets started dying,” Via said. He pointed out a toppled headstone. Vandalism is a recurrent issue, and cutting back foliage often comes with the tradeoff of making for easier trespassing through the woods.

As we approached the cemetery’s boundary, we came upon a massive tower built into the hillside, like the last remaining turret of a ruined castle. This was the monument to Marlin Edgar Olmsted, a statesman who drafted Puerto Rico’s constitution and served as a member of Congress for 16 years.

A few steps away, on a stout square pedestal, stood John Geary, the only bronze statue on the grounds. The inscription notes that Geary, who died at the age of 57, was a colonel in the Mexican War and major general in the Civil War, as well as San Francisco’s last alcalde (a Spanish municipal official) and first mayor, governor of Kansas and, later, of Pennsylvania. “He packed a lot of life in,” Via said.

As we walked, Via plucked up the occasional weed. He held up some garlic mustard, a European herb that is currently invasive across much of North America. “The funny thing is, you can actually eat this stuff,” he said.

Tastes in burial, like tastes in cemetery styles, have changed over the years, and, as we walked, we passed a diverse assortment of markers. Some graves are ornate and imposing, while others are humble and spare. Some convey the presence—or rather, absence—of a singular individual; others present a collective, identities lost among the closely packed stones.

Via pointed out the Lutherans: several crammed rows of headstones, their lettering faded. They were dug up and relocated from a churchyard in town to make space for the railroad station. Not all were identifiable, and an obelisk now marks a single large plot where unknown remains were piled. Further along, we came to some shining white headstones. They marked the graves of Civil War soldiers who died at Camp Curtin, the major Union camp in Harrisburg. A year ago, for his Eagle project, a Boy Scout replaced the old graves with new, legible markers.

We circled back to the lot with the burning stiltgrass. Terri, a part-time employee, was working with a handsaw, cutting at weeds growing between the stones. “I disturbed an ant colony and now they’re biting,” she said.

Via lit a cigarette. With one hand on his hip, in a straw hat, his leg cocked at the knee, he looked not a little like the statue of Geary. Though he laments the lack of money for conservation across the state, Via is pleased that the cemetery, at least, faces no imminent threat of a funding shortage. Harrisburg Cemetery has an endowment that pays for its upkeep, and it requires no outside grants. It is also, so to speak, still open for business.

“It pays to keep the cemetery running,” Via said. There are plenty of available plots, and, with current tastes tending towards cremation, the number of potential internments per plot is high. Unlike some cemeteries, Harrisburg has virtually no restrictions on the number or type of burials. “If you can fit ‘em in there, go for it,” Via told me. “We just buried a gentlemen in a fishing tackle box.”

The Perfect Earth

Gardening, with its bent towards trading and collecting, has not always had benign effects on ecosystems. American horticulturalists, seeking plants that were both hardy and aesthetically interesting, historically transplanted species from abroad, especially from Europe and East Asia, where temperate climates harbor varieties that easily can flourish here. But the feature that makes non-natives desirable for gardens—their resistance to native fauna and disease—also makes them dangerously resilient in forests, where the lack of local predators gives them a competitive edge.

Eric Burkhart, the program director at Shaver’s Creek, a nature center connected to Penn State, has fought the spread of invasive species for years. Burkhart, who holds a Ph.D. in forest resources, teaches courses on plant identification and invasive forest plants. He explained that Pennsylvania, like many states, has witnessed an increase in invasive populations over the last few decades.

“Most of our native stands have seen slow change happening,” he said. “In a state like Pennsylvania, it’s mostly been due to fragmentation.”

Fragmentation refers to the division of intact woodlands that comes with urbanization—the paving of highways, for instance, or the clearing of power-line valleys. Fragmentation creates exposed edges, where invasive species tend to flourish. “When you create a zone of disturbance, you set up for a species adapted for disturbance to make its way in,” Burkhart said.

“Invasive” is not a straightforward distinction. It describes a tendency or pattern of growth rather than an inherent quality. Not all non-natives are invasive: hostas, native to northeast Asia, are popular in the United States, but deer love to eat them, which keeps them from outgrowing other species. And many plants that are native here have invasive tendencies abroad. An American species of black cherry, for instance, is becoming invasive across Europe; red maple, native to the Northeast, is invasive in Hawaii. “Generally, what defines an invasive is that it will spread to an adjacent ecosystem,” Burkhart said. “It’s not the non-native wildflower in your garden, but what spreads from your garden to the state park down the street.”

Invasives not only spread quickly, but also are often difficult to eradicate. Take garlic mustard, the edible herb Via pulled up in the cemetery, which is a tall weed with floppy green leaves and clustered white buds. In certain months, it’s easy to remove manually. But an individual plant produces 1,500 seeds each year, and the seeds can sit in the soil for seven or eight years, waiting for a chance to grow.

Coupled with the non-natives’ resilience is their relative uselessness to the rest of the ecosystem. I met with Steve Kidd, the owner of Perennial Gardens, a nursery in New Bloomfield that specializes in native trees and shrubs. Kidd sells plants out of a tent in the Farm Show Complex parking lot on Friday mornings, and the Dauphin County Master Gardeners are among his regular customers. Like Lawrence, he is keen to emphasize the importance of natives to local wildlife.

“You have to think back to the perfect Earth, before the white man showed up,” Kidd said. “Why do birds and bees migrate? They have certain plants that they need to eat.” He offered the example of the monarch butterfly, which depends on milkweed. “It can’t complete its lifecycle without it.”

At the same time, though, non-natives can be easier to maintain, and they offer characteristics a gardener can’t get from a native plant. “We’ve historically always moved plants around,” Burkhart said. Watermelon, for example, is originally from Africa—the Spanish introduced it through Mexico. Lawrence and some of the other Master Gardeners have created a list of natives with similar traits to popular non-native species; they distribute it to other gardeners to encourage substitution. But even their plans for the cemetery include non-native varieties. (At the time of this writing, Lawrence’s plan for the limestone wall was deutzia, a genus of flowering shrubs whose species are mostly the right color and height—and mostly from China.)

Kidd also sells non-native plants. In the back of his truck was a miniature nursery, and among green weeds was a flower that stood out for its bright red blossoms. “That’s not a native,” Kidd said. “I also have to attract the American woman. It is a business. People will say to me, ‘You’re not a native plant vendor! You’re someone who sells some native plants!’ Well, yeah.”

Burkhart’s outlook is not apocalyptic. He discusses the problem with an academic’s tranquil tone. “Many of these plants, they’re not bad plants—they’re just plants,” he said. “They have many positives, like medicinal uses and removing carbon.” He worries, however, about the virulence of invasives, particularly when it comes to out-competing native sources of food.

“People say, ‘Things change in the world,’” Burkhart said. “While that’s true, it doesn’t mean there isn’t a negative impact. We’re creating areas where there’s nothing to eat.”

Call It a Pin

On a Wednesday in June, the Master Gardeners met for their monthly meeting on the Harrisburg Cemetery grounds. Lawrence arrived early, her middle finger wrapped in a ball of bandages. It had been a difficult couple of months. After recovering from successive bouts of illness, she had snipped off the tip of her finger with pruning shears.

A clunking sound came from the lock on the cottage door. Via emerged with a cigarette and a cup of coffee in a Ball jar. “How you feeling, Jane?”

“My one problem’s over, but I’ve had other problems since then,” she replied. “It’s just gonna be a year of agony.” She laughed.

As the gardeners arrived, they crowded around a table in a front room of the cottage. Above the lintel of the open door was a trio of papery flags on thin wooden stems. Birds chirped in the trees.

For the arboretum project—as for anything involving the growth of trees—the gardeners have had to take a long view. They’ve started some saplings in a nursery, but, in the meantime, they must also keep up with basic maintenance. Lawrence mentioned the rhododendrons planted on either side of the entrance gate.

“They’re facing south in the sun all day. It’s not their natural habitat,” Lawrence said. “They’re sick and they’ll never make it.”

The group discussed possible replacements. “Since we’re Master Gardeners, maybe we should put in demonstration gardens,” someone suggested.

“I would just say, something like that is high maintenance,” another gardener replied. “With all the maintenance already…”

“Could it demonstrate maintenance-free?”

“There’s no such thing!”

The group knocked around several options. Someone had seen a variety of Indian grass bearing pink and blue blossoms. Woodland sedum, a perennial herb, was considered but passed over because it would require too much shade. Then someone brought up epimedium, a genus of low-growing perennials. It began to gain traction.

A newer member piped up. “For those of us not fully indoctrinated—epimedium? Help me out.”

“Barrenwort,” another gardener replied. (Epimedium has been bestowed with a number of colorful names, including barrenwort, bishop’s hat, fairy wings and horny goat weed.)

“It has a thin, wiry stem and little heart-shaped leaves,” said Lawrence, “and yellow, white and red flowers.”

“And there’s a native variety,” someone added.

“So, if we had that with some shrubs…” said Lawrence. The group settled, for the moment, on an evergreen shrub with native epimedium beneath.

The next order of business was finding a rose bush to plant by the grave of Horace McFarland, a proponent of the City Beautiful movement, who was the first president of the American Rose Society. There was discussion of his favorite rose.

“I still think, if he had lived long enough, he’d have loved the Knock Outs,” someone said. The room erupted into laughter. “Knock Out” is a disease-resistant variety of rose, bred in the late 1980s. It was a gardening joke.

The group walked out to a huge bush of pink roses growing by a nearby grave. They tried to determine how old it was, based on the burial dates on the marker—1910 or 1936 or later. No one knew. They looked it over and decided it was worth taking a few cuttings. “We already know it can live in this space. It likes the cemetery,” someone said.

“I do like it,” said Lawrence. “It’s a very pretty color. Who else will take a cutting? That way we’ll hedge our bets.” Four gardeners agreed to pot a piece of the bush at home, in the hopes that one would take.

The final task was tree identification. For the arboretum, in addition to rearing and planting new trees, the gardeners must label what’s already there. The gardeners divvied up the plots among identification teams.

Lawrence set out with two other gardeners, Alicia Mercik and Marie James. James, a newly minted Master Gardener, admired Mercik’s official pin. “It’s a mixed blessing,” said Mercik. “You show up at a public function, and people think you know everything.”

Identifying trees can be painstaking work, and Lawrence is constantly looking for volunteers. Some species are common, but others in the cemetery are over a century old, and knowledge about them has departed with the people who planted them.

“We had a couple of professors come in, and even they were having trouble,” Mercik told me. The variety is also an asset, however. “They said it was a teacher’s dream in here.”

The group headed for a plot just south of the cottage. A row of Norway maples, a non-native, highly invasive breed that can be found all over the city, stood on the side of the road. The Norways, the gardeners told me, are insidious; they shoot up anywhere their seeds drop and excrete a chemical that suppresses other growth. Via hopes to scrape together funds to have them all removed.

We gathered beneath a towering oak whose leaves were far out of reach. Lawrence peered at them. “They’re pointed, so it’s a red oak,” she said. “But the leaves are small. So it could be a scarlet oak.” She sat in the grass and opened a guidebook, a sizable, hardback tome. Mercik and James scoured the grass for fallen acorns or leaves.

The tree, despite its imposing size, was dying. Half of its branches were bare, and bark had fallen off in patches. “Oaks are in serious decline because of warming,” Lawrence said. “It’s just too warm for them to survive.”

Mercik found a leaf, and, with a bit of reading, they confirmed their initial guess. Lawrence took out a pen and wrote the scarlet oak’s Latin name, quercus coccinea, on a long white tag. She nailed the tag to the trunk.

Nearby, another huge oak stretched towards the sky. Its leaves, too, were high above the ground, but Mercik found a fallen branch loaded with dried-out, caramel-colored leaves. They noted their narrow shape and deep, U-shaped lobes. Lawrence opened her book to a set of pin oak drawings. Just like the sample sketches, a twig on their specimen had spots, as well as a pair of forked buds at its tip, like the upturned hoof of a deer. They cross-checked the entry for red oak, just to be sure.

“I’m ready to call it a pin,” said Mercik.

“We’ll call it a pin,” said Lawrence.

“Call it a pin,” echoed James.

Lawrence scrawled with her marker—quercus palustris, “swampy oak”—and hammered the label in.

Continue Reading