Conn Forgets Turbulent Past

Some Conn students associate the name Pfizer with New London’s woes. The first time I heard of the pharmaceutical giant mentioned in the context of New London, I was told that a dwindling trend in New London’s Jewish population could be partially attributed to Pfizer’s departure from the city.

I noticed more mentions of Pfizer while investigating a Connecticut College students’ protest in 2012 over the selection of former investment banker and United States ambassador to the United Kingdom Louis Susman as commencement speaker. Students degraded Susman’s character based on his daughter’s position as a Pfizer vice president.

Concurrently, I discovered a New York Times article from the early 2000s that reported on the resignation of Connecticut College President Claire Gaudiani and made several prominent mentions of campus backlash due to her involvement with the New London Development Corporation and Pfizer in New London’s redeveloping Fort Trumbull neighborhood.

The subject of Pfizer came up again during an interview with Stephen Hallquist, a well-known mailroom staff member. Hallquist pointed out that we must understand not just how we perceive New London but also how New London perceives us. With that, we launched into a discussion about the College’s involvement in bringing Pfizer to New London.

For a more detailed account of how Pfizer came to New London, I would highly recommend reading Jeff Benedict’s book Little Pink House, which is incredibly detailed and well-researched. It is currently being adapted into a movie, though I anticipate that this somewhat fictionalized adaptation that will likely leave out the College’s involvement.

The story goes something like this. In 1997, then Republican governor of Connecticut John Rowland decided to develop New London’s waterfront with the hopes of attracting a Fortune 500 company. As part of this push, his administration recruited Connecticut College President Claire Gaudiani to head a quasi-public development agency, the New London Development Corporation (NLDC), which would use state money to implement their plan.

Gaudiani, who had connections to Pfizer through her husband and the College’s Board of Trustees, was aware that Pfizer had aims to house a new research and development facility and began floating the possibility of Pfizer coming to New London. To her credit, she was able to convince the company to select the New London site against almost impossible odds.

As a result, the company demanded many concessions that would require the NLDC to acquire almost all of the property in the Fort Trumbull neighborhood, demolish all the buildings there and turn over some of that empty land to Pfizer, while developing most of the remaining land.

This would eventually result in a massive fight over the NLDC’s use of eminent domain, the much despised and highly controversial power of government to force people to sell their land so that it can be used for the public good. The most prominent opposition figure was Susette Kelo, a resident of Fort Trumbull who led  the neighborhood in the fight against the NLDC to determine whether the organization could take their houses. Kelo also received assistance from members of the New London community, including Hallquist and Professor of History Fred Paxton who, despite pressure from Gaudiani, became a prominent member of the College in opposition to the NLDC.

Kelo’s name rose to prominence through the lawsuit Kelo v. City of New London, which ended with a decision by the Supreme Court in 2005 in favor of the City. The case focused mainly on whether the City had the right to transfer possesion of private land to Pfizer. In a dissent to the rooting, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor summed up the opposition: “Nothing is to prevent the state from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton.”

Kelo v. City of New London has been cited as one of the most unpopular Supreme Court rulings from this century, with around 80% of Americans disagreeing with it and over 40 states passing laws that would safeguard against similar proceedings Notably, Connecticut did not pass such laws.

While Pfizer was able to build their facility long before the case was decided, in an “I told you so” moment for Kelo and her supporters, they closed it in 2009, a mere eight years after opening. Additionally, Gaudiani was forced to resign from her position 2000 after it was revealed that the school was facing a huge budget shortfall, causing a massive number of students and faculty to demand her departure.

Personally, I would be very surprised if any Conn students knew about these events. Although the proceedings received a sizable amount of media attention when they occurred, current students were too young to be aware of them. Considering that the final verdict of the case was handed down ten years ago, most seniors here would not have been older than 13 when it was ruled.

While it is probable that many faculty and staff members know about the case, those who arrived at the College after the ruling likely have little to no awareness of Conn’s role. However, the residents of a city, unlike those of a college, do not constantly change. Although the students who opposed Gaudiani and the NLDC are long gone, there are still plenty of people in New London who remember the Kelo case and Claire Gaudiani’s involvement with the NLDC. The case quietly slipped into the history books much more quickly here at Conn than in New London.

This chapter in Conn’s history reflects a basic problem in our campus culture: our lack of institutional memory. From conversations and from reading Benedict’s book, I came to the understanding that this was a scary time to be at Connecticut College, especially for faculty. It was difficult to be in opposition to Gaudiani, who was very set on getting her way no matter what. In some ways, the problems our college has faced recently are very similar to the ones that we faced 15 years ago. In both cases, people have been afraid of speaking out because of the possibility of backlash.

“History repeats itself,” as the adage goes, but one way for us to ensure a better future for our institution is to learn about and remember our previous mistakes. What do we really know about the history of Connecticut College beyond the fact that it was founded as a women’s college in 1911 after Wesleyan stopped admitting women? I could tell you more about what UC Berkeley was like in the 1960s than Conn during that same era, when our College became co-ed.

The truth is that there are certain structural problems that need to be addressed here, but they will not be addressed until we start paying attention to where Conn came from. Every person with a relationship to this institution influences it in at least some small way. All of us are influenced by Caroline Black, the first chair of the Botany department, who established the garden in her name in 1928, by Mike Shinault, the first Men’s Basketball Coach who came up with our camel mascot and, indeed, by Claire Gaudiani.

Whether by many degrees of separation or few, we are linked to these people, and it is ultimately our charge to determine their legacies and whether or not we want to carry on in their ways. We must not forget our college’s past, for if we do, we will continue to make the same mistakes and fail to truly appreciate what we are, what we are not, and what we can and should become. •