mandatory downsizing of community garden plots

[mary573]

I am posting a link concerning the decision of Mayor Mike McGinn, Council Members Bagshaw, Colin and Licata for mandatory downsizing of community p-patch plots. This is a petition with more information concerning this issue. If this issue is important to you, please read the petition and sign, if you are so inclined.

http://www.change.org/petitions/mayor-mcginn-council-members-bagshaw-conlin-and-licata-save-seattle-gardens-stop-the-mandatory-downsizing-of-community-garden-plots

Share This

[EdSane]

Not enough information provided in the petition for me to make an informed decision.

Share This

[JoB]

I did sign.

the intent of our p-patch garden spaces is to produce food, not pretty patches of growing things.

the current size of P-patch allotments is not large enough to produce food for more than one household. cutting the size of each patch only ensures that no gardener can adequately produce food for their family.

It is true that there is a waiting list for gardeners.. but it is also true that there is plenty of vacant city land that could be better utilized by creating more gardens.

if nothing else they could be filled with the same kind of water saving gardening containers that are currently used at Nickelsville.

We need more P-Patches, not less space for each gardener.

Share This

[WSB]

Just so you guys know – somebody sent this to me earlier this week. I checked it out with the Dept. of Neighborhoods. None of the affected plots are in West Seattle, so I have not written a story. Lois Maag from DON explained:

“To give you some background on this issue, in December of last year, the guidelines and the expansion of P-Patch gardens were officially announced. I have attached the Guideline Fact Sheet and an FAQ that was provided to P-Patch gardeners. In essence, the guidelines were developed to provide a fair and equitable process for gardeners and to provide more opportunities for people interested in gardening.

“I am also attaching the response we are hoping that will get to the signers of the petition which will be helpful for you too. There are points in the petition that are incorrect. Out of the more than 2800 P-Patch plots, this guideline affects 47 plots in 13 P-Patch gardens. Most of these gardeners were disappointed, but understood the need to provide additional space. However, there are just a few (6-8) who are unhappy including a gardener who has 2200 square feet of space! Most plot sizes are 400 sf and under.

“None of the 13 gardens affected are located in West Seattle. The subject was presented to the Parks and Neighborhoods Committee last year as an FYI; the guideline did not need Council action.”

I don’t have time right now to upload the documents she mentions but if I can get through a couple more stories I have to write in the next hour or two, I will, and will add them here.

TR

Share This

[JoB]

WSB..

i see the email i got from a friend didn’t tell the whole story :(

Share This

[scbutow@yahoo.com]

Hello and thanks for your interest in Save Seattle Gardens Petition.

Rest assured that our claims are accurate! I have much documentation that I could forward if anyone requests it.

Here is our reply to the Dept of Neighborhood’s response to our petition. Please read on and contact me if you would like more information.

Please do not be distracted by the claim that it is only a few gardeners that are upset or by the statement that one of the gardeners has 2,200 square feet. The untold part of that story is that the said gardener pays for the plots, works almost everyday in the summer and then donates the majority of the produce to the local food banks.

Our rebuttal:

In her response to the Change.org petition listed under the Sustainable Food Category and called Save Seattle Gardens, Ms. Matsuno sent emails denying that 105 Community Gardeners will have their garden plots downsized–many against their will. She states it will only affect 45. Hmmm…

In the D.O.N. document Plot Sizing Guideline—Methodology, Implementation and Communication, it unequivocally states: “Gardeners who exceed the maximum must relinquish the extra space.� The document continues:

“Phase 1–December 2013. P-Patches that have no immigrant and refugee populations…will comply with the plot sizing guideline. 45 gardeners in 13 P-Patches will be affected.”

“Phase 2– December 2014. P-Patches with immigrant and refugee populations will comply with the plot sizing guideline. It will affect about 60 additional gardeners.”

Furthermore, in the April 2013 edition of the P-Patch Post, Rich Macdonald, P-Patch Program Supervisor wrote:

“…By the end of 2014, the standard will be applied to previously grandfathered immigrant and refugee gardeners with limited English proficiency. Approximately sixty additional gardeners will be affected.�

Surprise! 45+60=105. Fact or fiction? You get to decide!

Secondly, Ms. Matsuno must think that D.O.N. staff announcing their behind closed doors decision, and then refusing to entertain other reasonable solutions, is the same as opening up a topic for discussion as opposed to issuing the ultimatum: “The decision has been made. It’s a done deal.� (May 7, 2013 Picardo Site Council Meeting with D.O.N. Staff)

Thirdly, if as Ms. Matsuno claims, the “the most important word in our name is ‘community’”, then why on earth not involve the community in the decision? Making unilateral and destructive decisions, usually does not result in the affected community feeling respected, valued, and appreciated.

Ms. Matsuno would have you believe that robbing Peter to pay Paul, is a carefully considered method to “provide more gardening opportunities”. Why not bring everyone to the table and make room for both Peter, and Paul, and anyone else who wants to garden?

Finally, the D.O.N., claims that forcing 105 people to relinquish up to half their garden space, which will leave many with 100-200 square feet to feed their families, will not harm their food security or the amount of produce that will be donated to the food banks. Wow! I’m familiar with square foot gardening but D.O.N’s thinking on this seems, well, a tad optimistic.

None of us are opposed to welcoming new gardeners! It is a pleasure to watch people tending their new gardens and carefully watching for their seeds to sprout! We simply want a solution that allows this to happen without tossing us in the compost, especially given the thousands of hours of service that we have given the program.

If you are still unconvinced, then ask yourself this question. If a bus is routinely overcrowded, which of these is the more ethical, humane, and community building policy?

Policy One: “Ok all you people sitting down, you need to shove over. We’ve decided the same seats you are sitting on are now big enough for four more people so either lose weight or sit on top of each other and by the way, you get to pay us for this service.”

Policy Two: “Ok folks, we have more people that want to ride the bus than we have seats. How can we make this happen without throwing people off the bus.”

Or for those of you who are parents or work with children, which of the following is likely to be the most successful? One child is playing nicely with a ball and then three more kids want to play with the ball.

Do you take the ball from the first child, chop it in pieces and then give it back to all the kids and tell them to make do?

Or

Do you get the kids together and say, all of you want to play with the ball, let’s find a way that we can solve this so that everyone leaves feeling listened to and respected?

If you believe that the public should be allowed a voice in decisions that have dramatic consequences, then please pass this info on to others. We also welcome your help be it an hour, or a day, so do let us know!

All the best,

Stephanie Butow, MSW

Picardo Orchard Steward and Food Bank Gardener.

Share This

[waterworld]

I am not sure I can align myself with either the Department of Neighborhoods (DON) or with the petitioners, so I dug up some additional documents. Here are links to DON publications: an overview of the plot-sizing changes, an FAQ about the plot-size changes, a 2012 P-Patch Fact Sheet:

evolvingsweetie.typepad.com/files/plot-sizing-guildeline-5-6-13a.pdf

evolvingsweetie.typepad.com/files/plot-sizing-guideline-faq-1.pdf

http://www.seattle.gov/neighborhoods/ppatch/documents/FactSheetnewcombinedversion2012.pdf

I don’t find Ms. Butow’s analogies particularly apt here, not that it matters. I tend to see this as one of those situations where there may be relatively few viable options to address a genuine issue (long waiting times for plots), and none of the options are ideal. But maybe there are options I haven’t heard about.

Personally, I was relieved when the DON decided not to impose term-limits on gardeners. It is disappointing, though, that there seems to be reluctance to enforce rules that would ensure that gardens that aren’t being maintained turn over to new families more quickly. Designating more vacant land for p-patches sounds so sensible and obvious, but the process is not merely lengthy, it requires that residents in an area actively join together and do the work to make it happen — everything from finding vacant land and determining if it is suitable, to building up a financial and volunteer base to design and build the p-patch. (See this page on starting a new p-patch: http://www.seattle.gov/neighborhoods/ppatch/start.htm.) The DON will supply coaching and staff support, but this is not a program where the City just razes a plot for the locals to garden. If the people in the local area don’t make it happen, it doesn’t happen.

I readily admit that I don’t know all the issues involved here. While I appreciate that many of the larger p-patch plots are assigned to immigrants and refugees so that they can, as one of our former presidents would say, “put food on their families,” that is not the only function of the p-patch program. At the same time, at the end of 2012, over 1150 people were waiting for space in just 50 p-patches.

The petition, as I read it, has one core demand, which is to halt the downsizing process. What I would really be interested to know is whether the proponents of the petition have alternative proposals to allow more families to participate in p-patch gardening?

Share This

[scbutow@yahoo.com]

Hello Waterworld,

Yes we do have alternatives! :) A group of us met with several P Patch Trust Board Members in early spring and came up with the following suggestions. I would also like to correct a few pieces of info in your post.

There are actually 78 P Patches City Wide with 9 additional under construction.

The wait list sounds horrible however it is important to note that per the D.O.N.’s documentation, over 700 plots turned over at the end of 2012 which means more than 700 people could’ve been or were moved off that wait list.

In 2011, per the D.O.N., more than 500 plots turned over. No one wants to be on a wait list, however, it is good to know that it is not as horrendous as it first appears.

People can decline a plot if it is not the best timing for them or if they prefer a different plot than the one available. In this case, even though they were offered a garden and declined, they still stay on the wait list.

There are two rules for keeping one’s plot:

1. Maintain it

2. Contribute 8 hours a year of volunteer service to the P Patch

The above rules have not been consistently enforced which drives current gardeners and those on the wait list bonkers as it is a huge waste.

Here were the ideas that were brainstormed:

1. Enforce the above rules to open up additional plots.

2. Take people off the wait list and pair them with gardeners who are having trouble keeping up due to illness, hardship, etc. They can help each other and share the produce!

3. Take people from the wait list and have them garden in communal areas of the P Patch until a plot opens up eg the orchards, the food bank gardens.

4. Many P Patches have a site council. Have them come up with solutions that work for their particular patch.

5. Re examine underutilized areas of each P Patch and carve new plots out of them.

6. Use levy money, grants, and fundraising to build additional gardens. Many of us would be more than willing to help with the labor.

7. Establish partnerships with places of worship and with schools and colleges that have land. P Patchers could build the gardens and be able to garden there and in return the organizations on whose land the P Patch exists could also garden there and get hands on training on how to grow, harvest, process, and donate.

8. Schools love gardens for their students but no one is there over the summer to tend them–enter P Patchers! In return for being able to have their own plots, the P Patchers could educate the students, help them build their own gardens and take care of the student gardens (as well as their own) over the summer when the kids are not there.

9. Create P Patches on street ends, covered reservoirs, and unused sections of parks.

10. Downsize people’s plots (if it really must be done) when they leave the P Patch.

11. Require that those with larger plots do proportionately more volunteer service than those with smaller plots–some of these hours could even be spent building new gardens along with those on the wait list.

I am sure there are more options than the one’s above but these are solid starting points. The problem is that the D.O.N. has not included us in the problem solving process, (hopefully that will change) and every time we have tried to offer alternatives, we have been told that the decision has been made, and there is no negotiation.

Please let us know if you have further questions,

Stephanie

Share This

[Author]

Posts