Dear Mr. King,

I read with great interest your comment in today’s Patriot-News regarding Wednesday’s downtown shooting. I am truly surprised that the city of Harrisburg chose this particular posture in response to such an unsettling incident. Although I hope I am mistaken, your statement appears to represent a “head in the sand” approach to downtown crime.

For the past half decade, downtown Harrisburg has enjoyed a complete turnaround from its former, less reputable days. Alleys and sidestreets that were once too dangerous to traverse after nightfall are now well-travelled shortcuts to favorite parking hotspots. Second Street itself, once all but deserted after the exodus of evening rush hour, is now a vibrant mesh of activity and friends until the early hours of the morning. And while our downtown choices for dining and entertainment were once limited to a handful of establishments, we now have a broad choice of restaurants, sports bars, pubs, and nightclubs in which to socialize and enjoy ourselves. Truly, downtown Harrisburg has been completely revolutionized over the past few years. While credit can not be attributed to any one individual, I certainly feel that Mayor Steven Reed — and his vision — has been a critical link in making downtown what it is today.

However, downtown isn’t — and will never be — a utopian mecca. Downtown is an oasis in a city that saw its violent crime index surpass Los Angeles and New York City in 2005. The Harrisburg city police have done an outstanding job of keeping the peace on weekends, and I have nothing but admiration and appreciation for the manner in which they keep order downtown. I am certain that some will disagree with me, but I believe that the Harrisburg city police show considerable restraint, judgement, and skill in picking out the troublemakers from a sea of thousands of — let’s not mince words here — 2am drunks.

The fact remains, however, that Harrisburg is a city struggling to keep afloat amidst a rising tide of crime. The “how” and “why” of this growing crime rate is fodder for much speculation and conversation. Admittedly, I moved to the region as Harrisburg’s worst era was in remission (so I’m told), so we may very well still be better off than we were 20 years ago. However, the fact remains that we are rapidly approaching a critical event horizon where all of our hard work and pride will be lost beneath our city’s criminal element.
That is, if we’re not there already.

Mr. King, your comment in the Patriot News regarding Method Man represents the result of a dangerous miscalculation. Saying that this shooting was caused by a concert, rather than recognizing Harrisburg’s ever-creeping crime rate, evokes the numerous adages about an ostrich with its head in the sand. Worse, being that this statement came from the city itself, I am left stunned just enough to reflect upon how “in touch” our city government is with our city problems.  It doesn’t help matters that your statement comes as the city is reeling from a budget shortfall, and shortly after the city’s dismissal of 2005’s crime statistics on the embarassingly flawed logic that they somehow don’t apply to us because our population is under 100,000.
To call Method Man the “type of programming” that has a “thug following” and “draws problem crowds” is suggestive of a gross misunderstanding, if not a knee-jerk decision to point fingers. I’m not a big fan of Method Man, but I do know enough about him to understand that he caters to an older, more mature audience than whatever “type of programming” you intended to refer to.  Have you seen Method Man’s venues for his 2006 tour?  I hardly think VH1 qualifies as a “thug” media outlet.

Truthfully, Mr. King, I’m not even certain which artists you are suggesting are inclusive in that “type of programming”. Could you furnish us citizens with a list? Would you say that those in attendance of Wednesday’s performce are “thugs”? Dragonfly certainly tends to draw a more urban crowd than some of the other downtown venues; would you say that Dragonfly’s crowd is a “problem crowd”? Would you call them “thugs”? How about the less-urban venues; would you refer to Fisaga’s, Eclipse’s, or KoKoMo’s patrons as “thugs”?
In your comment, you also stated that “(The city of Harrisburg) has repeatedly warned Dragonfly owner Judd Goodman about booking this type of act and the problems it inevitably draws to the downtown”. I am almost afraid to ask — and doing so requires me to stifle a chuckle — but which acts did you warn him over? Is the city of Harrisburg truly concerned that Bridges And a Bottle or QST are going to spark riots amongst Harrisburg’s residents? Perhaps you were concerned that Sugar Hill Gang or Ice T — both acts who peaked in the early- to mid-80s and who now cater to audiences in their 40s and 50s — would trigger gunplay. I certainly can’t believe that you are referring to Big Tubba Mista, Lez Zepplin, Back In Black, or Brett Michaels. Is it just mainstream hip-hop acts that Harrisburg is concerned with?
Even more troubling, however, is the city’s assumption that the shooting was related to Dragonfly. Mr. King, what leads you to believe that Method Man’s performance — which was still going on when the shooting occured two blocks away — had anything to do with this incident? I’m willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you didn’t single out Dragonfly simply because it draws an urban crowd. Such a grave misstep would be political suicide, and although some in the local forums strongly disagree with me on this point, I do not believe you to be a racist.

However, I am having considerable difficulty coming up with an alternative reason for your association.

Mr. King, I have given this city my unwavering support over the years. I have repeatedly used floor9.com to stand up for Harrisburg amidst a flood of negative opinions ranging from disappointment to disgust. As a registered Democrat, I have always used my support for Mayor Reed and his rampant success at the city’s helm as proof that I have always supported what’s best for my community — regardless of party lines. Aside from this disappointing statement, I believe that we have reached an almost unheard-of balance between development and sustainment. Until your statement today, I felt that Harrisburg had just hit a temporary hiccup in our path to becoming (and remaining) a model city in which to live and work. I was certain that our city leaders had a plan in place to deal with and overcome this temporary setback.

Now I’m not so sure. Frankly, Mr. King, your comment is the icing on the proverbial cake of recent events.

Our city needs effective leadership, not half-baked accusatory commentary, to stem the tide of rising crime. Downtown Harrisburg is the safest and cleanest downtown of any of our neighboring cities — for the moment. Instead of playing political favoritism, let’s focus on improving the blighted areas of our city. Instead of talking about thug crowds, let’s talk about subsidized home improvement loans to help brighten the appearance of uptown. Instead of suggesting that a hip-hop act is to blame for the city’s woes, let’s suggest a greater police presence throughout the city. Instead of threatening to close the only nightclub that caters to an urban crowd, let’s threaten to close the doors on our city’s deadbeat landlords and property owners.

Don’t get me wrong; I’m still with you guys.  My opinion of Mayor Reed hasn’t been tarnished (though truthfully, I’m going to listen to his challengers a little more closely the next time an election rolls around).  But much like the drunken partygoer who blurts out an socially unacceptable exclamation, you seem to have given myself — and I’m certain a number of other city residents — cause to awkwardly shuffle away.

As one of the more staunch supporters of Harrisburg’s government, even I am surprised and disappointed by your response.  I think you owe us all some clarification.