The Mail HARTMAN

To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

In December 1969, Dean Kilbridge of the GSD informed Chester Hartman that he would not be reappointed as Assistant Professor of City Planning. Dean Kilbridge argued that Hartman's competence "in the field of housing is too narrow." This argument was unanimously accepted by a faculty vote. However, the decision has been heavily criticized by both alumni and students. The GSD alumni association "reject [ed] the official reason given for not renewing the contract of Professor Chester Hartman." Two-thirds of GSD students signed a petition demanding that Hartman be rehired and promoted and the student body charged that the reasons for his dismissal were "political and not academic."

By every relevant criteria-research, teaching, and other factors-Hartman deserves to be promoted, not fired; he was dismissed for political reasons.

Hartman is perhaps the outstanding scholar in the City Planning Department. In the last ten years he has published three major articles in the leading professional journal, the Journal of the American Institute of Planners; the other 13 professors in the department combined have produced only one article. The Harvard-M.I.T. Joint Center for Urban Studies lists three publications by Hartman; zero by other professors in the department. In the last few months Herbert Gans, Nathan Glazer, and other leading housing experts have testified to Hartman's academic ability. The School has produced no evidence to support its view that Hartman is not "the best person available for the job."

Hartman's teaching is respected by students. Last semester Hartman had the third largest class in the City Planning Department. Two years ago a student teaching evaluation rated Hartman top in the department. The Dean may be better qualified to judge Hartman's teaching than students are, but he has not attended one of Hartman's classes.

Hartman has worked hard to help the poor and the black. He is director of Urban Planning Aid. Boston Urban League, and Planners for Equal Opportunity. He was recently nominated for Vice-President of the American Institute of Planners. He founded and directed the Urban Field Service, which allows students to receive academic credit by working for community groups. The Urban Field Service has been praised by such diverse sources as Harvard's Wilson Report, Der Spiegel and Dean Kilbridge, who described U.F.S. as "one of the finest programs in the School."

I feel that the reasons for Hartman's dismissal are not academic but political. He has been a persistent and effective critic of national, University and School policies. In 1964 he ran as a peace candidate against Senator Edward Kennedy. He opposed University expansion in Cambridge and Roxbury, demanded that the University build low income housing and supported the April 1969 strike, after which the Corporation announced plans for low-and moderate-income housing in both areas. During the Organization for Black Unity's campaign for more black construction workers at Harvard, Hartman pointed out that Archibald Cox's arguments for 11 per cent minority workers were based on incorrect statistics. He has criticized the quality of teaching at the G.S.D. and protested the decision to spend eight million dollars on Gund Hall.

Hartman's criticism of Harvard and the GSD has clearly angered the tenured professors of the City Planning Department: Nash, Vigier and Isaacs. Prof. Vigier recently rang up the Ford Foundation and dissuaded it from funding the U.F.S. In June 1969 Professor Nash, then chairman of the City Planning Department, wrote as follows to Hartman: "I have decided that I cannot support your reappointment... and will urge my successor to consider next year as terminal. I am doing this because I am convinced that your method of teaching conveys a sense of political strategy more than the substance of city and regional planning. Furthermore, it seems to me that your loyalties to the School and University have lessened rather than increased during the past three years." This letter seems at variance with the Dean's statement that: "Professor Hartman's political persuasions have not been a factor in this decision."

On the basis of the evidence, I do not see how an unbiased observer could accept the official explanation that Hartman was dismissed because his "experience and knowledge in the field of housing is too narrow," or believe that his unpopularity with the senior faculty of the department and his criticism of the University and the School were not factors in the decision. I feel that justice, truth and academic freedom have been sacrificed to personal dislike and a fear of sit-ins. It is such minor, but totally indefensible decisions, that are dividing Harvard and the country.

THANKS To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

Charlie Wong wishes to extend his deepest gratitude to the four students-Bob Hicks, Jim Hawkins, John Peters, and Dirk Davidson-who made it possible for him to have his window at 5 Mt. Aubern St. replaced. It was damaged during the May 8 riot. He also thanks the many patrons and citizens of Cambridge who donated money towards the window.