Newest articles on The Sacramento Press tagged as "community garden"

Two new community gardens in the works

2012-12-03T17:26:29Z

After raising over $5,000 to help rebuild the Mckinley Park play structure, East Sac Give Back has identified its next community goal, the construction of two new community gardens in the Sacramento area. It costs the City of Sacramento about $200,000 to pay for plans for the projects. staff time, prevailing wages for contractors, inspections etc. according to Community Garden laison Bill Maynard. This would be for a community garden established in a public park.

Because East Sac Give Back directs funds and resources both within the East Sacramento neighborhood proper, and to commmunities outside of itself, the organization has set a fund raising goal of $400,000. This will allow another Sacramento community (to be determined) to also receive the multiple benefits of community gardening. Those interested in learning more about the project can conact me at (916) 402-3261, visit the East Sac Give Back website at www.esgb.org, or find us on Facebook (we have a Page and a Group).

-Michael Saeltzer

CEO, East Sac Give Back

Disclosure: I am the CEO of East Sac Give Back

AmeriCorps Works: VISTA Members Tell Their Story Pt.3

2012-03-14T17:21:50Z

AmeriCorps Week is March 10th-18th this year. We honor the hard work of service Corps members in our communities. I asked local AmeriCorps Volunteers in Services to America (VISTA) members to write about their experience doing a year of service building capacity and fighting poverty at local non-profit agencies. Below Jamie Ports shares her story of service as AmeriCorps VISTA at UC Davis Communities and Health Practitioners Together. For more information about AmeriCorp programs go to http://www.americorps.gov or check out my SacPress article from March 9th titled "AmeriCorps Works".

Prior to my AmeriCorps service, I was working as a Peace Corps Health Volunteer in Malawi, Africa from 2009-2011. Just before embarking on my return home from Malawi, I began preparing for my upcoming life transitions. Knowing that I wanted to attend graduate school in my near future and that I would have at least a year’s worth of free time on my hands, I weighed my options for what to do with my free time: find a job that gives me experience in my future career, find a job that is fun, travel the world, and/or volunteer some more. Eventually, some of my fellow volunteers suggested AmeriCorps.

With my current AmeriCorps VISTA position, I get to have a combination of most of the options weighed above. I am gaining both career experience and having fun. In a way I am still volunteering, but my living income is supplemented. The only option that wasn’t fulfilled is the traveling the world, but I will keep dreaming : ) I currently work for Communities & Health Professionals Together (CHPT) which is a unique partnership between three UC Davis Residency Programs - Family Medicine, Internal Medicine and Pediatrics - and several grassroots, community based organizations, that draws upon the assets of communities and physicians-in-training to improve health and support communities in making positive changes. Employing the principles of Asset-Based Community Development, CHPT teaches resident physicians how to identify community assets and resources, build partnerships with community organizations, and leverage these partnerships to enhance the capacity of the community to improve local health. I help to facilitate this program by working as a CHPT coordinator at one of UCD’s community partner sites, Harmony Health Family Resource Center.

Community service provides immeasurable values. The provider/volunteer will inherently grow as a person, expanding their ideologies and abilities to provide empathy and sympathy to others in need. Hopefully they will feel rewarded in their process of serving; I know that I do. The community is on the receiving end, and not only gains a beneficial service, but also becomes empowered and feels important and cared for. Community service helps to strengthen individuals, strengthen community relationships and ultimately strengthen communities as a whole.

AmeriCorps has enriched my life in so many ways. It has humbled me and opened my eyes to poverty in America. It has helped me to appreciate things I may have overlooked in the past, such as: a college education, access to healthcare, a loving family, a driver’s license, a warm bed and food when I am hungry. It has also given me work experience, leadership skills, and knowledge on how to write grants and work on professional teams. This experience shines on my resume and it has been a talking point during my interviews for graduate schools. AmeriCorps helps to build well-rounded individuals and gives them knowledge and skills that are transferrable into their working lives.

If I were not here working as an AmeriCorps VISTA, I would probably be working as a medical assistant in a doctor’s office or just trying to pay my bills with any service job. Luckily AmeriCorps allows me to have a position in which my life is enhanced in many ways, probably something most regular jobs would not be able to provide.

Disclosure: Rachel Marine is VISTA Leader for AmeriCorps VISTAs serving at 9 organizations in the greater Sacramento area.

AmeriCorps Works: VISTA Members Tell Their Story

2012-03-13T16:10:33Z

AmeriCorps Week is March 10th-18th this year. We honor the hard work of service Corps members in our communities. I asked local AmeriCorps Volunteers in Services to America (VISTA) members to write about their experience doing a year of service building capacity and fighting poverty at local non-profit agencies. Below Courtney Jallo shares her story of service as AmeriCorps VISTA at Sacramento Food Bank & Family Services. For more information about AmeriCorp programs go to http://www.americorps.gov or check out my SacPress article from March 9th titled "AmeriCorps Works".

My name is Courtney; I am a twenty-something female VISTA working at Sacramento Food Bank and Family Services. Fueled by wanderlust, I deserted my native Arizonan home some years ago to travel and work around the world—more recently I returned to the states and relocated to Sacramento. In only a few months I have fallen in love with my new home- the people, beautiful surroundings, and sense of community were an unexpected treat, and I am thrilled to have taken this incredible opportunity.

I learned about Americorps during my service in the Peace Corps (Albania 2008-10), with an understanding that the program is “like a domestic Peace Corps”. It is not! There is an entirely different set of challenges, goals, support network, and lifestyle involved here, which is fantastic because it allows me to learn a new set of skills and gain an even greater variety of beneficial experiences. I chose to apply for Americorps because I have an ingrained sense of community action and activism- I believe we can create a better world for ourselves and it is through the process of making these efforts that we are rewarded.

The project I am working on is with Sacramento Food Bank and Family Services, of which I am helping in the creation of the new Demonstration Garden, where families and individuals will learn how to harvest and prepare the vegetables they cultivate. Along with the physical creation of the garden, I am helping to develop gardening and cooking classes that will serve as a resource and teaching tool for the entire community. This will not only help local participants take action to improve their own lives and health, but will further spread healthy habits to their family and friends who witness and become inspired by these changes, like water droplets rippling throughout the community, and even nation. As a passionate advocate of the urban farming movement, I am pleased to be taking an active role in the cultivation of this program, all the while building upon skills that I will apply toward my continuing studies in the field of sustainable agriculture.

My life motto is the pedestrian “be the change you wish to see in the world”. Every action we take has consequences, anywhere from a small impact in someone’s day (like smiling at a stranger) or a global revolution (think Mohamed Bouazizi and the Arab Spring). As humans we are social creatures adapted to help each other survive, and, especially as Americans, we are fortunate to have the resources to seek personal growth for a fulfilling life—and if not, we can think of ways to work together and create them. To me, the verbiage of public and community service is sort of a misnomer of its value; instead of one-side altruism I see it rather as an act of sharing between several people, with advantages and growth for everyone involved.

Disclosure: Rachel Marine is VISTA Leader for AmeriCorps VISTAs serving at 9 organizations in the greater Sacramento area.

AmeriCorps Works: VISTA Members tell their story

2012-03-12T16:51:24Z

AmeriCorps Week is March 10th-18th this year. We honor the hard work of service Corps members in our communities. I asked local AmeriCorps Volunteers in Services to America (VISTA) members to write about their experience doing a year of service building capacity and fighting poverty at local non-profit agencies. Below Deborah Elliot shares her story of service as AmeriCorps VISTA at The GreenHouse. For more information about AmeriCorp programs go to http://www.americorps.gov or check out my SacPress article from March 9th titled "AmeriCorps Works".

Deborah's Story:

I am a middle child of seven children. Because I grew up in a large family, I didn’t grow up with a lot of things. We didn’t have expensive toys or new clothes, but boy, was my childhood great! I honestly think that this bonded my family. I consider my siblings to be my best friends. We all get along (for the most part). Growing up poor has made my experience with AmeriCorps a little easier than I thought. There was no drastic change in my bank account when I started working at AmeriCorps. I have always lived off very little. This can be stressful at times but it also teaches you self-control and the difference between a want and a need that I don’t feel like you learn unless you absolutely realize that there is no way you can afford everything that you desire. I grew up in Salinas, California and lived there until I was accepted to Sacramento State. I have been living in Sacramento for three years now.

To be honest, I did not know what AmeriCorps was or how it worked when I got hired at my site (The GreenHouse) in June of last year. I had heard about the GreenHouse and that there was a job opening. I got the job, but I had to sign up through AmeriCorps. I had graduated from Sacramento State with my degree in Social work so I knew that I wanted to pursue a life serving along side people or communities that are under-resourced. I want to empower communities to be able to see the change that they can do in their own environment. I do not want to be a stranger coming into a community, telling them what they need to change. It is so important to empower the people to be passionate about a vision they want to see for their own community. AmeriCorps works for me because I can strive to help communities. I am working 40 hrs a week and am able to have a lot of experience working with other cultures and the poor. AmeriCorps also promotes higher education. At this point, I have my bachelors degree and the possibility of going back to school for my masters is tempting. I can earn money for continuing school without having to save it.

The GreenHouse is a non-profit organization that works in a low income apartment complex. The organization provides family events in the community, an after school program for 1st through 12 grade, youth groups during the week, and summer programs. I am the community liaison at The GreenHouse. I am in charge of volunteer recruiting and training. I make sure they have all their paper work and have been fingerprinted. I am also in charge of volunteer recognition and I write in a volunteer blog every week. When special events are about to happen, I am in charge of volunteering and getting everything together. Another project that I am a part of is program evaluation. I keep track of all the attendance, points log, and progress reports for the youth that attend the after school program. This information will help The GreenHouse see if their programs are successful or if they need to find more effective ways to help this community. I am also in charge of Parent Action Team (PAT) meetings. We meet bi weekly on Thursday for an hour. Here, we are able to get the parents from the neighborhood to discuss what they want to see change in their community. We have also brought workshops to the parents. For one workshop we had a local librarian come in and talk about all the exciting resources the library can help them with. That was a particular highlight for me because the parents were very excited about getting books to read and getting their children library cards.

Life in The GreenHouse is always changing. Every day is different. I have to be flexible. I like that. I like doing different things at my job. For instance, last week, we had a Sacramento Waldorf School partner with our community to help beautify certain areas of the community that the youth wanted to fix. That week, we spent most of our time outside working in a garden and building a fence. This isn’t something that happens every day (thank goodness) but still a great experience that bonded the community.

I have enjoyed my work as an AmeriCorps. It is hard sometimes. Working with kids can be tiring but there are way more good things about working here than bad things. It has been a great experience so far and I’m sure it will continue to teach me new lessons and give me new experiences.

Disclosure: Rachel Marine is VISTA Leader for AmeriCorps VISTAs serving at 9 organizations in the greater Sacramento area.

Teaching with dirt: City Farm project starts at city college

2011-09-14T02:07:28Z

Sacramento City College students, faculty and staff gathered on campus Tuesday afternoon to celebrate the kickoff of the City Farm pilot project, an experiential curriculum-based community garden that will serve as an alternative teaching mechanism for multiple disciplines throughout the next school year.

The project was developed over the spring semester by a group of students and administrators led by the school’s faculty garden coordinator and graphic communications professor, Robyn Waxman.

“We had been thinking about how to get all these other disciplines to learn from the dirt,” Waxman said, adding that future students will be able to use it for hands-on learning. “It signifies a really big change in how we teach, deal with the budget crisis and how we build community on our campus,” she said.

The garden, located between Lillard Hall and the staff parking lot on the southeast side of campus, is composed of four 12-foot-by-4-foot raised beds, each complete with a drip irrigation system, and was completed over the summer with a $1000 grant from the college foundation. All other materials are donated from advocates such as Soil Born Farms and other small organic farms in Davis.

The kickoff event was met with much support from the college’s students and staff. A group of about 30 audience members, including children and teachers from the school’s child development center, looked on as guest speakers said a few welcoming words over four large, empty raised garden beds.

“We left this space empty so everyone can imagine what could be grown here,” Waxman said.

The garden doesn’t necessarily result in something people have to eat in the end, Waxman explained, “It has a tangible medium to make abstract concepts learned in a four-walled classroom more meaningful - a way of having a classroom that doesn’t need to be in a building.”

Each bed will be implemented into a class curriculum and passed along at the end of each semester. For the fall semester, one bed will be used for a plant biology class, which will grow California native plants, and another for the Child Development Center.

A third bed will be given to the City Farm Club, a student/faculty alliance that will act as the driving force behind the community garden, caring for its own garden bed and helping the children take care of their bed as well.

“We will be the overseers of all the beds; the force behind the scenes,”said Ryan Thalken, president of the City Farm Club.

The club is currently taking new members and is discussing a weekly meeting time for the group. Thalken said he hopes to begin planting for the winter season soon. For more information on the City Farm Club or how to get involved, click here.

Kathryn Jeffery, president of the college, described her enthusiasm for the project as reluctant at first, but added that she sees promise in the small scale project.

“It’s an opportunity to take a concept or an idea, put action behind it and see it grow over time,” Jeffery said.

Jeffery, who explained her father worked as a farmer, said the pilot project will give students at the college and children at the Child Development Center a chance to become more personally involved and more engaged in their learning environment.

Loretta Bruce, lead teacher at the Child Development Center, said she has already discussed with the children vegetables they would like to grow, which include tomatoes, broccoli, lettuce and cauliflower. The center still needs children’s hand tools and watering cans, she said.

“I think the earlier the kids realize they can grow this food, it’ll help them grow into a healthier lifestyle,” Bruce added.

The opening ceremony was not completed without Jeffery’s well-wishes: “Go forth and dig!” - That was followed by a ceremonial turning of the soil by the children of the center themselves.

“In honor of all those who till the soil, we do this today,” Jeffery concluded.

At the end of each semester, the beds will be passed onto the next semester’s classes to build upon and grow successively.

“It’s hard to imagine that a garden will be used as a place for anything other than growing food, but it can,” Waxman said, adding that it’s going to take a little time for people to see the abstract use of the garden, though other Los Rios colleges are already interested.

Administrators will look back on the project near the end of the school year to make further decisions on whether or not the project will continue or expand.

For more information on how to get involved with the City Farm pilot project, or the multiple disciplines it will serve, click here.

19th and Q streets neighborhood park gets community's input

2011-06-17T03:33:27Z

It’s back to the drawing board for designers from the Department of Parks and Recreation and City Councilman Steven Cohn. Plans for a new park in Midtown need to be refined after a community meeting Wednesday that revealed concerns about the future park’s amenities.

Community members gave their input Wednesday about the proposed neighborhood park site at 19th and Q streets, which sits on contaminated land.

Located across the light rail tracks from Safeway along T and S streets, the 0.9-acre plot of land was acquired by the city of Sacramento in 2008-2009 for approximately $2 million and the property remains gated off according to Mary Debeauvier, a principal planner with the Parks and Recreation Department..

“This particular neighborhood has been identified as needing a park for some time,” Debeauvier said. “We’re able with this site to provide a need in terms of providing an urban plaza in a developed neighborhood.”

According to Morgan Johnson, a Project Manager and consultant of ENGEO, a geotechnical and environmental consulting firm based in Rocklin, the future park site is classified as a “Brownfield,” a term used to describe inner city property contaminated because of past industrial usage.

Deemed a “Brownfield” for the level of contamination in the soil, the parks department was awarded a Brownfield grant from the Environmental Protection Agency in the amount of $200,000 to address soil remediation, according Johnson. Soil remediation is the process of handling contamination in soil so that land can be used for redevelopment.

Johnson told a crowd of approximately 30 that soil sample tests revealed there are elevated levels of arsenic and lead and somewhat lower concentrations of chromium and petroleum hydrocarbons that exceed regulatory thresholds of safety. The soil can be dangerous to human health if directly ingested or inhaled. Arsenic and lead are known carcinogens.

“We’re going to virtually remove the 1 foot (of soil) across the whole site.” Johnson said.

The 200 cubic yards of contaminated soil will be trucked to a class 1 landfill,designated for hazardous material, he explained.

The less-contaminated soil beneath the removed soil will be consolidated under a concrete hardscape so people will not be exposed to contaminants. Johnson said it unknown how thick the hardscape will be but ENGEO is working with Sacramento County Environmental Management, the State Regional Water Quality and the Department of Toxic Substances Control to determine the safety conditions of the future park site.

The parks department has only secured funds to deal with contaminated soil, according to Debeauvier. The cost for the design and the implementation of the park will not be covered by the EPA Brownfield grant.

“Despite how bad the state and local budgets are on operating, year to year, there are still bond funds and grants that are still available,” Cohn said. “The point is we don’t know where the money is coming from, but we don’t think it’s pie in the sky. It is within the realm of possibility to fund this in the next few years.”

Associate landscape architect from the Department of Parks and Recreation Tin-Wah Wong presented community members with two possible park concepts.

The first concept includes a formal plaza-style park with a walkway leading to a central water feature, temporary rotating pads to display permanent or temporary art, play structures for children, an oversize chessboard and a community garden with approximately 15 plots.

The second concept takes a more organic and nature-inspired theme. Colored concrete lily pads and a ribbon of blue paint representing water could be implemented on the plaza. The plan calls for interactive water misters with bird and heron figures misting water, native plants and interpretive signage for those plants could be included, a turf area for children’s play and a community garden.

“People just want a little bit of dirt. Even if it’s a small area, it could be the size of a banquet table. It’s just something (the community members) really want,” said resident Delphine Cathcart of her desire to see the site include a community garden.

The top concerns among community members was the lack of shade in the designs and other community members spoke of the lack of dog parks in Midtown.

According to Wong, the parks department did not implement the idea of a dog park in their initial designs because Sacramento County requires dog parks must be at least two acres.

Community members will have another opportunity to give further input on refined park plans at the historic City Hall hearing room Thursday, Aug. 4 at 7 p.m.

City Council discusses Sacramento community gardens

2011-04-06T05:34:05Z

Four City Council members discussed ways of increasing community gardens in Sacramento on private and public property during the Law and Legislation Committee meeting Tuesday.

According to Joy Patterson, the principle planner for the city, the proposed ordinance will lay out how community members can use vacant properties for the development of community gardens where people can come together for the purpose of growing food and personal use.

“Several city departments have looked at the issues surrounding community gardens on public property and private property and have prepared a draft ordinance for community gardens on private property for the review and discussion by the Law and Legislation Committee,” Patterson said.

City Council members Jay Schenirer, Sandy Sheedy, Darrell Fong and Steve Cohn voted to revisit the proposed ordinance at the Law and Legislation meeting on May 17 in a unanimous decision Tuesday.

Councilman Steve Cohn said he is in favor of the project and that it is one of the less costly projects.

Cohn had worked previously on several gardens with Bill Maynard, the city’s community gardening director.

“I think it’s something we need to push forward with,” Cohn said. “It needs to be on the list.”

Councilman Darrell Fong said that his staff will be planting a community garden in a Valley Hi park.

“We’ve had very little dialogue and I want to talk to some staff because I haven’t had a long time to (talk) to staff about this ordinance,” Fong said. “I’d like to have some further comment.”

The two components that they will be looking at are the rules regulating the use of private property and the public property for community gardens, Councilman Schenirer said.

“I think we would want a generic set of guidelines, rules and regulations on developing public land as a private community garden,” Schenirer said. “I also have concerns about the city’s involvement in some of these gardens and the costs that are generally associated with that and where’s the bang for the buck on this.”

Councilwoman Sheedy said she is also in favor of implementing the gardens, but wants everyone on the same page so they are not rushing to get the project done. Sheedy said she wants to avoid going back and doing the process all over again.

“I want to do it the right way,” Sheedy said.

At the meeting, several community members voiced why community gardens are important.

Paula Lomazzi, a Sacramento resident and gardener at J. Neely Johnson Park, said she has a strong concern for reducing our carbon footprint and gardens help provide her with food.

“This is a great step forward to make us more sustainable,” Lomazzi said.

Dan Frankfield and Laura Lough are on the garden advisory board of the community garden at J. Neely Johnson Park.

Frankfield said that many years ago they had to convince the neighbors around the garden that it would reduce crime around the park and that it would not add to the negative issues.

“I think that it’s generally a good idea as long as there’s checks and balances for homeowners and gardeners alike,” Frankfield said. “I hope to see it come through.”

Maynard said he wants people to be aware of the costs.

“I think it’s a great step forward,” Maynard said. “It has to be affordable for people to do this.”

Rhonda Lake, superintendent of the Department of General Services Facilities/Property Management-Real Estate Services for the city said she will be looking at the issue because one of the complicating factors is that the staff is working with Coldwell Banker to identify surplus assets of the city’s needs so that (they) may be sold, leased, or put to another beneficial use.

“It would probably take us the next 30 days to look at it,” Lake said.

Kathy Les, vice president of Slow Food Sacramento, a branch of the Slow Food international organization that aims to promote good, clean and fair food, was surprised that the proposed ordinance was on the agenda.

“It’s great that it’s on the agenda so soon and is moving along,” Les said. “They [community gardens] are a great way to feed people and to localize community spirit.”

Paul Towers, the state director of the Pesticide Watch Education Fund said he is disappointed that the discussion about the gardens is moving so slow.

“We clearly need to act now to increase the amount of healthy, fresh and local food in our communities,” Towers said.

The item will be revisited at the Law and Legislation meeting on May 17. The meeting will be held at 3 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 915 I Street.

Only YOU can prevent local mysteries

2011-02-07T19:53:39Z

How? By contributing to local history!

While researching my recent article on the Capitol Area Plan and the Ron Mandella Community Garden, I noticed how widely the facts varied from source to source, and how many facts were just plain missing. And even though this is a story that is relatively recent in living memory, the most frequent answer given in every interview I conducted was: “I don’t remember.”

If you have any information about any version of the Capitol Area Plan, the relationship between the Capitol Area Plan and the West End redevelopment project, the history of the Ron Mandella Community Garden (also known as the Terra Firma Garden and the adjacent garden known until the mid-1980s as the Southside Garden) or any aspect of the block bordered by 14th, 15th, P and Q streets and the use of eminent domain, please consider sharing it in a comment to my article, or donating it to the Ron Mandella Community Garden archives at CSUS.

PART 2 - This Land is Your Land, This Land is My Land: Looking Back at 50 Years of the Capitol Area Plan

2011-01-31T23:13:54Z

(Read Part 1 here, or click on the green Storyline tab)

When CADA issued a Request for Proposals to private developers in 2000, the subsequent fight between RMCG advocates and CADA ended in 2004 with the RMCG’s destruction and two new gardens, one built as part of Fremont Mews and one built near Southside Park. A full account of the final protracted battle—especially regarding the lawsuits, the soil remediation issue, and the garden advocates’ organizing strategies—is still lacking, but the contested details of those years are not covered here. Instead, two of CADA’s tactics during this period are reconsidered in light of the evidence presented thus far: one, their presentation of the block’s 1997 housing designation as historically consistent and absolutely immutable, and two, their slippery use of the term “public.”

Not long after issuing the RFP, CADA disseminated a brochure entitled “Striking a Balance: CADA and the Mandella Gardens,” which stated:

“For a quarter century the State of California has owned Site 13…the land has been designated on the Capitol Area land use plan for residential use. CADA is proposing that the site be developed consistent with this long-established Plan…urban open space will be retained and housing and potential mixed use development can occur just as always intended.”

The CAP is perfectly capable of shifting buildings and uses from one site to another—and it has done so countless times. The 1997 introduction explicitly stated, “variances in these designations have continuously occurred throughout the plan implementation.” And the planned uses for block 286 have morphed almost as often as the gardens were threatened. The 1960 CAP created the true blight in the first place by razing the existing housing in order to give state workers a view of Fremont Park on their lunch break. Various configurations of parking, office buildings, ownership housing, rental housing, and retail (remember the grocery store proposal?) have been revised multiple times over the past fifty years. In Traci Sinclair’s 2000 Sacramento News & Review article about the RMCG, CADA Development Director Tom Kigar stated, “This site has always been seen as a residential site.” Besides being ironic, since the block was obviously seen as residential before the state destroyed the homes, this statement is also not true, as evidenced by five decades of assorted proposed uses.

The frequent redesignations could be seen as evidence of the CAP’s agility in meeting changing conditions, and indeed, the 1977 and 1997 CAPs boast endlessly about their flexibility. But all that shifting also shows that nothing prohibited the CAP from reclassifying any block—what never shifted was the designation of a mere half-block to permanent garden space. Why? Mark Francis’s article quoted several CADA officials as saying, “‘I do not see state authorities going for permanent gardens; it is a highly valuable piece of property’…‘the moment can still happen when the space will have to be developed’ as a result of rising real estate values.” The white-hot real estate market of the early 2000s was the tipping point for the RMCG’s demise, though at the time, CADA rarely mentioned housing demand, instead emphasizing downtown’s need for affordable housing. Of course no one is opposed to affordable housing, but it is not mutually exclusive with a half-block of affordable food.

CADA also used the term public disingenuously in different ways. In “Striking a Balance,” CADA claimed that it was “as good stewards of public land that we pursue the responsible intended use of this land.” Such a claim omits how the state forced the block to become public land in the first place. And as shown, by definition the agency would not pursue anything but housing development—it does not exist to provide holistic stewardship of all possible public land uses. Moreover, pro-development arguments at the time painted the gardeners as selfishly clinging to taxpayers’ land for the sake of a private playground. Yet CADA’s solution to the problem of a group supposedly claiming exclusive rights to public land, as a “good steward” of that public land, was to sell the site to a private developer so it could be turned into private housing.

“Striking a Balance” also claimed that CADA was requiring “nearly one-half acre of public open space be a component” of the RFP responses, and CADA has made much of the so-called replacement gardens that are now managed by the city. It is true that many people prefer the new gardens, and many more people have no opinion at all. But the Fremont Community Garden and the new Southside Community Garden do not actually replace the RMCG, nor are they truly public. Obviously, the OSCG has never been replaced (except by parking, until the CAP once again shifted its use), and the RMCG’s scores of fruit trees have never been replaced. Most significantly, the RMCG was genuinely public. The fence was unlocked from dawn until dusk seven days a week, there were ample community beds, and there were community events and celebrations regularly.

Neither the Fremont Community Garden nor the new Southside Community Garden is open to the public. Anyone may apply to rent a plot, but that is equivalent to other membership-based private buildings (e.g., fitness centers), not equivalent to public institutions (e.g., libraries). If community gardens are defined as strictly places where plants are grown, than the RMCG has been replaced, square foot for square foot. But if community gardens are defined as by-the-public-for-the-public communities, then the loss is unquantifiable. It can be rebuilt, but not replaced.

The impossibility of replacement raises a difficult question. Each version of the CAP has claimed its flexibility permitted responsiveness to changing conditions. Soon after the Fremont Mews was built, conditions did in fact change: the housing market tanked, and green chic and the recession have raised community gardens’ cachet again. But those particular community gardens on that particular block, those gardens that were on our land and were open to all of us, are gone forever. Was it worth it? It’s a question to keep in mind for all future development projects, especially in view of the CAP’s legacy for downtown.

The 1960 CAP’s authors did not care that its implementation would destroy the community on block 286, because they did not see a community worthy of continued existence—they only saw a chunk of real estate that could be captured, renamed and rebuilt to serve the state’s purposes and the city’s image. The community then challenged the state’s imposition of its will on the neighborhood by salvaging the wreckage of their “monumental seat of government” and developing it into productive green space for everybody.

The 1977 CAP positioned itself as righting the wrongs of the 1960 CAP—although it certainly was not planning to give the original residents their homes back—but both versions never questioned their legitimacy in imposing the state’s vision, however virtuous, without the community’s consent or approval. The 1977 CAP declared, “There must be a ‘Capitol Community’ espirit which grows out of the physical environment,” but refused to acknowledge the community which had organically grown out of, and in spirited response to, the state’s annihilation of the physical environment.

The 1997 CAP continued the legacy of ignoring the community-created development and presenting the state’s capricious whims—allegedly validated by selectively solicited public opinion and urban planning trends—as the only way to develop a vibrant, viable downtown. Shielded by the threadbare histories of Capitol Area redevelopment, CADA obscured the issue of public space to justify state-led development.

Ultimately, the state has always justified the CAP through its self-defined mandate. The 1977 CAP author argued “the plan couldn’t fulfill its mandate without using [block 286] for housing.” CADA repeatedly cited its legislative mandate in their quest to destroy the gardens. The CAP’s legacy is the state’s unwavering indifference to the community it purported to develop, all the while insisting that it was dutifully pursuing the public good. The people constitute the public, however, not the state. For the past fifty years, the people’s mandate has yet to be fulfilled in any version of the CAP.

If you have more information about block 286’s history since 1950, please consider sharing it in the comments or donating it to the Ron Mandella Community Garden Archives at CSUS.

Thanks to Judge Lloyd Connelly, Mark Francis, Tom Kigar, Bill Maynard, Judy Michalowski, Evan Tucker, and Barry Wasserman for their assistance with researching this article.

Special thanks to the staff and volunteers at: The Center for Sacramento History, the State Library, the State Archives, and the Sacramento Special Collections and University Archives at CSUS.

Dedicated to my mom, Nancy Fish (7/13/1950-1/18/2011).

1966 Meeting Minutes of the State Public Works Board

California State Archives: DOF - Exec. Office Records - Deputy Director (1965-1966) R157.40

Jordon Condemnation

California State Archives: State Land Deeds 62-759

Bozaich Condemnation

California State Archives: State Land Deeds 62-179

"Striking a Balance" Brochure

CADA brochure, CADA Public Relations 2000-2003, Box 4, MSS 2005/06, Ron Mandella Community Garden records, Department of Special Collections and University Archives, The Library, California State University, Sacramento.

PART 1 - This Land is Your Land, This Land is My Land: Looking Back at 50 Years of the Capitol Area Plan

2011-01-31T23:12:09Z

Fifty years ago last month, the California State Legislature adopted the first version of the Capitol Area Plan (CAP). Revised in 1977 and again in 1997, this document’s incarnations have ordered the acquisition and arrangement of the state’s central city properties in the Capitol Area, a state-defined zone encompassing a sizeable swath of downtown.

The story of Sacramento’s downtown development is convoluted, but the CAP is a key thread throughout that story. To mark its golden anniversary, this retrospective focuses on how the plan affected a specific block: the one enclosed by 14th, 15th, P and Q streets. Once the site of the Ron Mandella and Southside Community Gardens, identified as block 286 in the original plan and known as site 13 during its most notorious period, its contentious history is as misunderstood as the CAP itself.

The first CAP’s local context was the staggering number of Capitol-centric studies and proposals floated throughout the 1940s and 1950s. Like most U.S. urban cores during the 1950s, downtown Sacramento had a tax base seeping out to the suburbs and a residential population that didn’t match televised examples of desirable neighborhoods. Even though the full story of U.S. postwar development is much more complex, for the purpose of putting the CAP in national context, the most important part to know is that massive federal funding incentivized local projects claiming to solve so-called blight. As historian Rebecca Solnit put it, “Blight was the magical word of the era of urban renewal, a word whose invocation justified the destruction of housing, communities and neighborhoods in many American cities.” In the subsidy-soaked wake of the 1945 California Redevelopment Act and the 1949 Federal Housing Act, the Sacramento City Council declared a sixty-block slice of downtown blighted in 1950.

The blight designation galvanized the West End redevelopment, a city-spearheaded project that displaced of thousands of people. The Public Administration Service’s summary of the project, published the year demolition began, gave the principal reason for the human displacement and physical destruction: “the improvements wrought by downtown redevelopment will make the entrance from the West one befitting a city that has a major place among the capital cities of the nation.” (The above photo of Taylor’s Drugstore, taken on the first day of demolishment, is one example of the community’s reaction to the improvements).

The West End was only one facet of the city’s makeover, though, because the state had a stake in downtown’s image too. In 1959 the State Legislature formed a commission charged with producing a master plan for developing “future State buildings in the Capitol area of the City of Sacramento.” The Commission assembled consultants in July of 1960, and they published the California State Capitol Plan (the CAP’s initial title) on December 12, 1960.

The proposed Beaux-Arts state worker supercampus hewed to the vision of Pat Brown’s grandiose California Master Plan. In order to replace the low-income (and multi-ethnic) neighborhoods bordering Capitol Park with interlocking satellite campuses and superblocks, the CAP recommended that the State buy 42 blighted blocks south and east of the Capitol and demolish the existing buildings. The document candidly laid out the state’s intent to leverage both the federal subsidies and the political support for redevelopment, not to improve slum conditions, but to install a postcard-perfect setting for Capitol Park.

The CAP went beyond merely organizing or consolidating existing state property. Instead, it mandated total visual consistency in the Capitol’s environs: “The principal purpose of the plan is to give California a noble and monumental seat of government. This aim cannot be accomplished unless Sacramento becomes a great capital city. Therefore, the plan looks beyond the confines of the Capitol complex, to its approaches and to the surrounding areas.” Within the blighted area, the CAP demarcated and named a second area, in effect doubly damning those neighborhoods. Targeted by both city and state for architectural sanitization, “Capitol Area” residents were left with little recourse.

The CAP recommended the State Legislature act quickly: “Because almost all of the properties now are occupied by relatively low value improvements, the land should be purchased before new development greatly increases its cost. Properties not needed for building sites, parks and plazas by 1980 are to be used for parking lots on an interim basis.” Meaning, the plan’s authors fully expected some blocks to remain vacant for up to twenty years.

Despite its inclusion in the 1950 blight decree, block 286 was still intact ten years later, comprising mostly homes built between 1880 and 1920. The 1960 CAP slated them for replacement with a cafeteria and three office buildings.

Two years after the Plan’s adoption, however, a Capitol Building and Planning Commission’s report showed that land acquisition was not proceeding as planned, and called for more aggressive methods. Under the heading “Emergency Purchases,” the report outlined the barriers to state purchase and the solution:

“Since the adoption of the Capitol plan there have been several proposals by private property owners to place expensive improvements on land which is included in the plan…Several persons have experienced difficulty in selling because of a feeling of uncertainty on the part of potential buyers once they know the property is included in the Capitol plan. The recommended solution to this problem is outright acquisition by the State through a revolving fund established for this purpose. This should be accomplished at the earliest possible date.”

The minutes of the State Public Works Board’s meetings between 1964 and 1967 prove the Board authorized and deployed eminent domain in order to seize the properties on block 286 (a simple definition of eminent domain is when the government compels the sale of private property, in order to build projects ostensibly for public benefit, such as a freeway). With the threat of eminent domain looming, most property owners sold their homes and left. A few property owners remained defiant and held on to their homes until a court issued condemnation orders in 1970, giving the parcels to the state. (The homes pictured above were among the seized properties, and were on a section of the block where the original Southside Community Garden [OSCG] later overlapped with the Ron Mandella Community Garden [RMCG]. The Center for Sacramento History has photographs of nearly every home on the block’s Q street side that the RMCG occupied).

After Reagan became governor, he cut the funding for the building phase of the CAP and leased state office space from the private sector. Both the 1977 and 1997 CAPs claim the leasing program caused the geographic dispersion of state offices. This is not true, since legislators had been complaining about scattered state facilities for decades prior and the 1960 CAP failed to make significant progress on that front. But even if the leasing program had caused state building sprawl, there’s a more salient point: several parcels on block 286 were acquired, some by eminent domain, after Reagan took office in 1967. If his administration didn’t intend to fund development, why did they continue to seize and demolish homes? Neither the 1977 nor 1997 CAPs’ summaries of the 1960 CAP mention eminent domain at all. Nor do they explain why seizure and demolition of residences continued for years after the 1960 CAP’s goals were abandoned and defunded.

Roughly around the same time, a loosely affiliated mix of local residents, college students, and state workers began cultivating the freshly bulldozed block. Various sources trace the earliest garden activity as beginning anywhere from the mid-1960s to 1975. The RMCG’s archived internal documents cite 1971. The Sacramento Bee has published a few different start dates in different articles. The EPA’s Brownfields website says the garden began in the mid-1960s, and the Fremont Community Garden’s webpage says the late 1960s. Judge Lloyd Connelly, who assisted the RMCG when he was on the Sacramento City Council and again during his California Assembly tenure, told me he could not remember when the garden started. The sparse documentation of this chapter of the gardens’ story underscores the importance of rigorous local history.

At the very least, the above photo of unidentified gardeners is dated circa 1973. It seems likely the first lease was brokered between the long-since-defunct Ecology Action Center and the Department of General Services (DGS) in 1974, formalizing the “Terrafirma Garden.” (I was unable to verify whether the OSCG splintered off from Terrafirma, or if it was always separately managed). In an arrangement typical of most 1970s-era community gardens that were started in response to the failure of urban renewal, the lease with DGS was short-term, renewable, and $1 per year.

Both community gardens had been cultivated for at least four years when the 1977 CAP was published, after DGS recommended a complete review in 1973 and Jerry Brown ordered an update in 1975. The revised CAP still focused on state building development, but with the younger Brown’s small-is-beautiful spin. Former State Architect Barry Wasserman, one of the 1977 CAP’s primary authors, described the plan as a “demonstration project” that showed how to “rebuild a part of the city that needed rebuilding in a compassionate, holistic way.”

Despite several paragraphs rhapsodizing about open space, including the possibility that “sites may offer community gardening with plots available to residents and members of the community who want to grow food and flowers,” the 1977 map divvied block 286 into three-quarters housing and one-quarter parking. Though Brown later founded a nonprofit that touted community gardening, during the time he was overhauling his father’s CAP (and living one block away from the gardens), he did not take the opportunity to permanently dedicate the block to community gardening.

I asked Wasserman how the State Architect’s office perceived the Terrafirma Garden, since it preceded the CAP’s revision. He described the garden as a “purely temporary example of what could be” (he also described the planned office buildings as “demonstration buildings,” and noted a separate “demonstration garden” was built nearby, which closed after a few years). When I asked why block 286 was designated as housing, pointing out that the plan did call for community gardens, he replied that housing “was a way to use the land in a way that most supported the principles of the plan.”

Yet the housing designation can only be seen as a subjective decision, since using the block as garden space surely supported the plan’s principles of conservation, diversity and open space (the design of the latter, the plan admonished, “should always be done with people in mind”). Furthermore, disregarding the community-developed site use in favor of state-planned parking and housing—even as a genuinely well-intentioned attempt to restore the block to its pre-1960 CAP use—violated the plan’s principle of community development.
The redesignation notwithstanding, the gardens were still thriving in 1978 when two events transferred the lease to new parties. Ron Mandella, a state worker and founding garden member (pictured here in the Center for Sacramento History image archives), was killed while defending a neighbor from an attacker, and became the namesake for the newly-formed non-profit that took over the garden’s management from the Ecology Action Center.

1978 was also the year the State Legislature created the city-state joint powers agency Capitol Area Development Authority (CADA), to take over implementation of the CAP’s residential projects from DGS. DGS was, by all accounts, as inept at property management as it was at urban design (as Judge Connelly put it, “General Services just dumps all over the city of Sacramento with their architectural standards and projects”). Wasserman summed up the new agency’s dual purpose as “designed to get the state out of the housing business and form a partnership between the state and the city to make the city whole again.” CADA’s primary role has always been to realize the CAP’s housing and retail goals.

From its inception, CADA sought to build over the gardens. When UC Davis professor Mark Francis published his 1987 “Landscape Journal” article comparing how community members and CADA officials perceived the gardens and Fremont Park, many stabs at development had already been made: “The permanency of the two gardens has remained a critical issue for the gardeners…the gardens were referred to by one official as a ‘loose bar of soap,’ since control of the site has been an ongoing issue for the development authority.” CADA succeeded in paving over the OSCG in 1987 for a parking lot, but community organizing efforts thwarted the agency’s continual attempts throughout the 1980s and 1990s to destroy the RMCG. (These attempts were not always for the sake of housing either—Prof. Francis’s article stated, “According to CADA, the site is not a prime location for a new state office building within the next five years, but could be developed for parking or other office-related uses”).

By the time the CAP was revised again in 1997, the RMCG was the oldest and largest local community garden. It had grown from being a community-developed institution to a community in its own right. In addition to long-term partnerships with dozens of community groups, the garden benefited the whole city as downtown’s second-highest oxygen producer. But even while meeting many of the 1997 CAP’s objectives, block 286 was classified as “vacant and underutilized,” and the RMCG was indirectly referred to as an “interim use.” The 1997 CAP slated the block for low density housing (which the plan defined as “less than 35 units per net acre”) and described the site as an “opportunity…to facilitate ownership housing.” The Fremont Mews apartment complex has 119 units on 2.2 acres, and none of them have ever been for sale.

Continued in Part 2.

Dig This! Tahoe Park Community Garden Opens

2010-04-12T03:19:38Z

Tahoe Park residents braved wind and cloudy skies Saturday to attend the grand opening of the Tahoe Park Community Garden. Wielding golden scissors, a team including Congresswoman Doris Matsui and Sacramento City Councilmember Kevin McCarty cut the ceremonial red ribbon.

"This will only enhance your neighborhood," Matsui said, "this gives you a gathering place." She went on to say that community gardens reduce crime and vandalism "because everyone now has a stake in the community."

The garden, which is on the campus of Tahoe Park Elementary, was created as a means to fight obesity and promote healthy lifestyle choices and eating habits. "Young people sometimes think food comes from McDonald's, and not from the dirt" said McCarty.

Added Matsui, "It teaches self-reliance. You don't have to rely on supermarkets."

McCarty explained that the $20,000 for the garden came from cell towers. "There is a city fee on all cell phone towers," he said. "We used the proceeds (for the creation of the garden)."

Home Depot donated the flowers that community members planted at the opening and the vegetables were donated by Bill Maynard of the Community Coalition. Maynard also designed the garden.

After brief opening remarks the festivities began. Matsui and McCarty shook hands and answered questions as residents roamed the garden and visited vendor booths. Balloons and a bounce house kept the kids happy.

"This really brings the community together for a place to garden," McCarty said. "Partnering with schools and kids, teaching children about health and nutrition, is so important."

Heather Hutcheson of the Tahoe Colonial Collaborative summed up the neighborhood: "In Tahoe Park there are no strangers, just people we have not met yet."

Plots will be sold individually at the Tahoe Park Community Gardens. For more information, call the Department of Parks and Recreation, 916-808-4943.

Back to Eden.

2009-06-02T00:23:56Z

There is so much to be learned from planting, working and harvesting a garden. I’m excited to be a part of a new community garden at 58th & 2nd Ave, and can’t wait to see all our seeds grow. It’s amazing to me the growing number of community gardens in our Sacramento area. One such garden is on the high school campus of Rio Americano.

A few years ago when I worked there full time in the Autism program, the teacher felt the need for his students to work with their hands out in a garden, and went about making it happen. The lessons ranged from building boxes, life cycles and cooking to the simplicity of knowing colors and what herbs are used for. While subbing in my old class this past week I was so proud to see the garden thriving, and the students an integral part of it’s success.The fruits, vegetables and herbs are able to be used in a number of capacities, one of which is full-circle cooking lessons with the special education program there. The pictures are of their little piece of Eden.

Interested in getting involved in a community garden effort? There are SO many! This site has links and information to a bunch, but they're sprouting up all over as Sacramentans take pride in the land they have and giving back to the community.

http://www.cityofsacramento.org/ParksandRecreation/parks/community_garden.htm

For information on starting your own community garden effort? Check out this site for regulations, contact info and meeting times:

http://www.cityofsacramento.org/planning/policies-and-programs/community-gardens.cfm

-Juniper*James

www.juniperjames.wordpress.com

twitter: @JuniperJames

Southside Park's community garden

2008-11-20T21:10:21Z

Tucked away at the outskirts of Southside Park just before the freeway tangle of 80, 5 and 99, there is a little oasis: the Southside Park Community Garden.

The garden is bordered by an iron fence and located on the corner of 5th and W Streets. In that garden you can find a series of plots that gardeners rent out for their own private use. Some grow flowers, many grow food, and all share in the numerous gifts of the garden.

I met up with the Master Gardener, Bill Maynard, who is the Community Gardens Coordinator for the 5 community gardens in the greater Sacramento area.

I arrived at the garden just as Maynard and 20 volunteers had finished working on several large planters. I peaked around a bit while he finished loading tools into his truck, and then we sat down to talk about the garden; what it is used for, how it is managed, and where its headed in the future.

When I asked what purpose or function the garden serves for the community, Maynard replied, "It's about building community, it's about making sure people have access to food, supplementing their food budgets, making sure they eat healthily. It's family bonding with kids, it's a good healthy activity, it's educational, just everything."

The Southside Park garden was the first of the community gardens developed by the city. People rent out a plot which can be either 8 by 16 feet or 16 by 16 feet and cost only $25 and $50 per year respectively.

Particularly within the downtown area, demand for communities gardens is high. The high-level of shade and the limited outdoor space that characterize downtown living coupled with the affordability of renting plots makes community garden plots a sought-after commodity.

In fact, the Southside Park garden has a waiting list of about 20 people, and with a low turnover rate, that list translates into a 5-10 year wait, according to Maynard.

For the lucky people who do have a plot, it is theirs to do with as they please. There are, of course, some ground rules.

All of the community gardens are completely organic, so people cannot use chemical pesticides or herbicides on their plots. Also, Maynard encourages users to compost in the garden's compost bin, but people must abide by the composting rules so as to not contaminate the batch.

This works to clear out green waste while also providing rich, organic fertilizer for use in the garden. Water conservation and plot maintenance are also important parts of being a gardener at the community garden.

The Southside Park garden has some exciting plans in the works. First of all, the garden was awarded a grant from Organic Gardening Magazine which will be used to purchase a 550 gallon cistern that will be used to collect rainwater. But wait, there's more.

City Councilmember Rob Fong also got an art grant for the garden. They held a contest and now Larry Meeks is working on some functional art that will consist of 16 foot tall stainless steel flowers that will catch the rain water and funnel it into the cistern as it runs down the stems. The cistern itself will be concealed by a ladybug shell.

Other plans for the future include adding a windmill and perhaps a greenhouse. The iron fence will be replaced with a new one and the garden will be made more accessible for disabled community members in accordance with ADA regulations.

In response to popular demand, the city is planning on starting a few more gardens so that more people can enjoy community gardening.

Would you want to rent out a plot if it were available? Are there any community gardeners out there who want to share their experience? What do you get out of gardening in a community setting? Would you recommend it to a friend?