This is the first part of a planned multi-part series about Penn's Gaza Solidarity Encampment. Check back at thedp.com for more inside information about the discussions behind the encampment's 16-day duration. 

---

On May 2, Penn's provost was striking a hopeful tone with pro-Palestinian organizers, offering concessions if they took down their encampment on College Green. But behind the scenes, Penn's president was escalating the situation to the mayor of Philadelphia, pleading with city officials to help him "secure our campus" from criminal activity and prepare for arrests, according to private communications obtained exclusively by The Daily Pennsylvanian.

The trove of previously unseen emails and documents — which the DP acquired through a series of open records requests under Pennsylvania's Right-to-Know law — reveal a University that was gearing up to disband the spring Gaza Solidarity Encampment, with assistance from the Philadelphia Police Department, at least eight days before it was ultimately removed at dawn on May 10. However, the city resisted pressure from Penn for more assistance and rebuffed Interim President Larry Jameson's allegations of disruptive behavior at the heart of campus, with Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle Parker urging the University to instead push for a peaceful resolution to the encampment. 

The back-and-forth that ensued appears to have prolonged the encampment's duration. And the revelation of the city's disagreements with Penn about how to handle the demonstration — along with Jameson's sense of defeat at the status of negotiations with organizers — show how the University was working on the fly to approach a wave of unrest against the Israel-Hamas war that swept college campuses nationwide. 

The DP examined the private communications to understand how, within a three-week stretch in April and May, Penn went from banning its largest pro-Palestinian student group to arresting 33 protesters on College Green — and how the University might approach similar protests more stringently in the fall.

“Penn, the Mayor’s Office and the Philadelphia Police Department have an excellent relationship and will continue to work collaboratively to assure the safety of the Penn community,” a University spokesperson simply wrote in response to a series of questions about the documents. Parker's office declined a request for comment.

A request for aid

As the spring semester approached its end, the University escalated its crackdown on campus' largest pro-Palestinian student organization — only to be met with an even greater wave of resistance that eventually forced Penn to lobby city officials for help over several days, emails show. 

On April 19, Penn revoked the student group registration of Penn Students Against the Occupation of Palestine. A week later, on April 25, a protest organized by the Philly Palestine Coalition made its way to Penn’s campus and met with a faculty walkout before the group set up an encampment shortly after 4 p.m.

The next day, Jameson sent two emails to the Penn community. The first said that Penn was “closely monitoring the encampment” and pledged “follow-up action as appropriate.” In the second email, Jameson urged the encampment to disband immediately, citing “blatant violations of University policy” and listing instances of harassment and vandalism.

He then went radio silent about the encampment publicly. But in private, he was taking the University's response to the highest levels of city government — disclosing information that was not shared in campus-wide communications. While he told the community that activists had "attempted to provoke" Penn Police, he was telling Parker that they had made "threats to kill our officers."

On May 2, the encampment's eighth day, Jameson drafted a letter to Parker asking for the Philadelphia Police Department to aid with Penn’s management of the College Green demonstration, citing “grave concerns for the safety of all in our community.”

Jameson wrote that Penn had closely monitored the encampment for its first seven days, with himself and Provost John Jackson meeting with demonstrators to “hear their concerns, attempt to de-escalate, and offer alternative paths to protest within our policies.” According to the letter, Penn's efforts to engage in negotiations with protesters were "rebuffed and met with additional demands."

---

---

The interim president then alleged that, at the time of his letter, administrators and the Division of Public Safety had "encountered a steady decrease in cooperation and willingness to engage in dialog on behalf of the camp leadership and members.” He cited threats against officers on the night of May 1, adding that demonstrators’ conduct “poses an imminent threat to our campus community.”

While the DP reported at the time on chants critical of public safety officials, the DP could not independently confirm death threats against Penn Police.

Much of Jameson’s letter to Parker focused on his concerns that many demonstrators were not Penn affiliates. He claimed that the University, due to its open campus, could not contain the “problem," as he described the situation. Likewise, Jameson wrote, Penn could not prevent non-affiliates from gaining access to Penn facilities if the situation escalates — demonstrating an acute awareness of the many building occupations that were taking place at campuses across the country. 

Therefore, Penn was requesting that the PPD aid University police in ensuring only individuals possessing valid PennCards were allowed on campus, he told Parker.

Citing demonstrators’ ignorance of warnings to disperse, Jameson also requested support from the PPD to disband the encampment “in the event that we deem it necessary for the health and safety of our community.” He stated that in such a situation, Penn would need additional resources “in light of possible arrests and to secure the previously occupied encampment area.”

"[A]s we have watched other tense situations unfold on other college campuses around the country, we also see the potential for sudden escalation at any moment that could lead to violence or other criminal activity,” Jameson wrote.

Penn did not publicly acknowledge requesting PPD assistance at the time — despite the DP reporting that the University did make such a request. But a University spokesperson at the time said Penn had reached out to the city “to ensure we have the necessary resources to keep our community safe.”

The correspondence obtained by the DP also reveal how Penn dispatched administrators up and down the chain of command to coordinate its response. Jeffrey Cooper, Penn’s vice president for government and community affairs, sent Jameson's letter to several members of Parker’s staff shortly before 10 a.m. on May 2. 

“Timing is important as there is potential escalation this morning,” Cooper wrote in a follow-up email.

Later that day, police presence increased in the area of the encampment, along with a larger barrier of barricades between protesters and counterprotesters. PPD, including its counterterrorism unit, monitored activity on College Green — a change from its limited activity in the earlier days of the protest.

However, City Solicitor Renee Garcia told Cooper the same morning that the University's letter requesting assistance did not "contain sufficient details" for the city to "discern the type of assistance being sought from the Philadelphia Police Department." Garcia requested an addendum with additional information after a call between Cooper and city representatives.

“To be clear, as requested in the letter, should escalation occur resulting in violence or other criminal activity, the PPD will provide assistance,” Garcia wrote.

Cooper promptly sent the requested addendum to Parker’s chief of staff that evening, formally requesting PPD assistance with “removing individuals from the encampment who are creating an unsafe environment and trespassing on our campus.” 

The addendum revealed plans consistent with the encampment sweep that would happen a week later. It said that Penn Police would provide an initial notice to protesters within the encampment to vacate peacefully before arresting and citing those “who do not disperse voluntarily.” It then requested several "resources" from PPD in the case of arrests, including PPD assistance in forming an inner and outer perimeter around the encampment, controlling vehicular traffic around the encampment, and committing arrests “if the operation exceeds the capabilities" of Penn Police.

---

---

By dusk on May 10, a six-foot fence was erected around a vacated College Green, preventing significant foot traffic for weeks. But the University was far from reaching that resolution when Jameson contacted Parker on May 2.

Parker’s rebuttal of Penn

At 11:53 p.m. on May 2, after a day that saw greater police activity than any other day of the encampment to that point, Parker responded with a letter rebuffing Penn’s requests and claims.

Earlier in the day, Parker said she met with the PPD, the city's Office of Public Safety, District Attorney Larry Krasner, City Council President Kenyatta Johnson, City Councilmember Jamie Gauthier, and other individuals to discuss Penn’s request. 

"[W]e are united in our position that a peaceful resolution is the best solution," she wrote.

And while Parker stressed that she would “take all necessary actions to protect the residents of this City and support the University to the best of our ability,” she said that PPD had not observed "any evidence of disruptive, criminal, or violent behavior.” 

“[I]t is in the best interest for all parties to continue to engage in dialogue to avoid escalation” Parker wrote, specifically referencing agreements reached between administrators and demonstrators at Rutgers, Brown, and Northwestern Universities.

Parker also praised "dialogue" about world events as "essential to our democracy" while opposing "unlawful behavior," referencing a speech by President Joe Biden earlier in the day in which he stated that the “right to free speech and for people to peacefully assemble” and “the rule of law” needed to be upheld amid the protests.

The mayor concluded her letter by sharing that the PPD would provide Penn Police officers with civil disorder training beginning on May 6 or May 7 — after which she requested that Penn provide a 48-hour notice period before “any planned enforcement action(s) that would reasonably agitate the protestors.”

The next day, Cooper sent Parker's chief of staff more information requested by the mayor. This included a list of student and faculty contacts within the encampment, documentation of written negotiations between the demonstrators and University administrators, and the encampment’s demands.

While Penn did not publicly comment on the status of its negotiations with the encampment, organizers provided occasional updates, broadly alleging that negotiations had stalled and that Penn was not meeting their demands.

On May 1, PAO addressed a meeting it attended with Jameson and Jackson and announced that it would not enter negotiations until administrators agreed to six stipulations — including the withdrawal of disciplinary letters against protesters, no police presence in the encampment, and no threats of eviction.

Then, during a May 5 rally, encampment organizers shared that Jameson said that he would enter negotiations only after half the tents at the encampment came down. At the time, a source familiar with the matter told the DP that the encampment organizers would not take down the tents because the encampment was serving as leverage for student organizers.

‘The pressure for action is intensifying’

---

---

Despite the city's resistance to mounting police action, the University was persistent in preparing for a response. 

The morning of May 5, Jameson penned another letter to Parker taking a stronger tone against the encampment. He listed more than 20 incidents of alleged “disruptive, criminal, or violent behavior” — including one which occurred the same morning as the letter — and stated that “despite our best efforts to deescalate, the pressure for action is intensifying.”

“Conditions on our campus are escalating,” Jameson wrote. “A large segment of our community feels unsafe, and we cannot continue to have a risk to public health and safety.”

While Jameson said that the encampment “has been described as a peaceful demonstration,” he expressed disappointment that demonstrators did not participate in a listening session he held which occurred at the same time as the protest began on April 25. 

“Instead, they chose a path in direct violation of University policies designed to promote safety and open expression,” he wrote.

By the time the listening session was scheduled, encampments were already beginning across the country.

While Jameson acknowledged that “[i]t is possible that the encampment started out peacefully and attracted participants and followers based on those goals and ideals,” a week and a half later, he said, “that is not what the encampment is about, or what it represents.”

“The encampment now represents a collection of people from the Penn community and people from outside the Penn community who are harassing and threatening those around them, defacing Penn property, and fostering counter protests and other conditions that can escalate into dangerous physical confrontation,” he wrote. “Therefore, if we are to have any negotiations, they would need to focus on removing the dangers off the campus in a way that does not increase those dangers and result in injury.”

Jameson claimed that while he and Jackson offered the demonstrators multiple opportunities to meet and engage in negotiations, the protesters declined to meet until student disciplinary charges were immediately withdrawn.

The next day, on May 6, Jameson broke his silence — sending his first message to the University community since the encampment’s second day. He wrote that Penn was working with city officials and law enforcement, who had recommended that Penn work to de-escalate tensions. He added that the encampment was making campus “less safe” and suggested organizers were more interested in "confrontation" and escalation than negotiating an end to their demonstration.

On May 7, encampment organizers said in a press conference that the most recent round of negotiations that morning “felt in good faith.” A day later, encampment organizers held another meeting with administrators — after which PAO posted on Instagram that administrators “refus[ed] to meet a single demand.” As a result, the encampment expanded to the other side of College Green. 

A resolution at dawn

The expansion of the encampment on May 8, doubling in size, was the straw that broke the camel's back for University officials increasingly desperate to bring an end to the demonstration with Commencement looming.

On the morning of May 9, Vice President for Public Safety Kathleen Shields Anderson emailed Philadelphia Police Commissioner Kevin Bethel to formally request PPD assistance with removing the encampment and securing the area to “prevent recurrence,” citing the May 2 addendum. An hour later, she wrote that Penn Police intended to charge all those arrested with summary defiant trespass, “barring any other criminal actions.”

At around 6 a.m. on May 10, Penn and Philadelphia Police officers disbanded the encampment and arrested 33 protesters. Those arrested — including at least nine students — were processed at the PPD’s 19th District station and released shortly thereafter. Six-foot barricades were erected on all sides of College Green, many of which remained present for the duration of the summer.

After the arrests, Parker and several city officials released a statement acknowledging the PPD and Mayor's Office's role in clearing the encampment. The release added that starting from May 1, the Parker administration had made clear that Penn should "explore every option to resolve this matter peacefully."

“I’m writing to express my immense pride in all of you for the outstanding work you displayed … during this morning’s resolution of the protest encampment on UPenn’s campus,” Bethel wrote in an email addressed to PPD officers after the arrests. “The short notice you received posed a challenge, but as always, you rose to the occasion with professionalism and dedication.”

“I am incredibly proud of each and every one of you,” he added. “Your actions exemplify the very best of what it means to be a Philadelphia Police officer.”