OVERVIEW:
On November 4, 14 people (plus several Quadricentennial Commission Steering Committee members) participated in the Manhattan listening workshop. The group included stakeholding interests representing a variety of agencies and nonprofit organizations, mostly from New York City (especially the 125th Street area). Participants noted that the audience was not fully representative of the region’s ethnic, racial, age or professional diversity. In particular, the group encouraged future representation from: organizations and enterprises whose focus is river-based activity (e.g. workboat operators, commercial shippers, water quality engineers, Port Authority, etc.); academic institutions and young people (including their advocates); labor unions; transportation advocates and agencies (e.g. MTA).

DISCUSSION:
The discussion focused on the need to create a new awareness and consciousness among residents in Manhattan neighborhoods to engage more directly with the Hudson River itself, not only with riverfront parks and park-related amenities, but actually getting out onto the water. In this way, residents would develop a sense of personal responsibility (i.e. “stewardship”) for the well-being of the river and recreational amenities along the water’s edge. A significant portion of the conversation dealt with the need to find ways to serve those people for whom the river may not even be considered a resource with personal value. It was noted that many organizations are involved with river-based activities and advocacy, but they are not necessarily collaborating effectively and their collective impact on the population is more limited than it should be.

PRIORITY THEMES:
22 ideas were generated by the group to address the concerns raised in their discussion. The participants then selected those ideas they felt to be most promising. Priority themes that emerged included:

• Implementing recreational, educational and job-program initiatives for New York City youth in order to get young people onto the water, and to involve them directly in caring for the river and riverfront parks.
• Exploring ways to provide river-related programs and services to a more diverse population, and to diversify advocacy efforts to include more people as champions for the river
• Improving access to the waterfront through more parks at the water’s edge, public transit to the water, and diversified housing development near the river.

OVERVIEW:
On November 5, 24 people participated in the Yonkers listening workshop. The group included stakeholding interests representing a variety of agencies and nonprofit organizations, as well as several small businesses. Participants noted that the audience was not fully representative of the region’s demography or organizational/civic composition. In particular, the group encouraged future representation from: the private business sector (esp. financial services, agriculture and river-based businesses); students; infrastructure-related agencies (e.g. railroads, utilities); County and municipal government; and land preservation groups.

DISCUSSION:
The discussion focused on the need to create a new awareness and consciousness among residents about a more “human” scale for living in the Valley. In this context, people would seek out alternatives to a consumption oriented, hustle bustle lifestyle, especially in terms of supporting smaller scale local retail establishments; pedestrian travel (walking, biking); living “green”; and paying more attention to the sustainable access and use of the region’s natural landscapes (in terms of beauty/aesthetics, natural habitats, agricultural production, etc.). One extended thread of conversation focused on a new consumer awareness and appreciation of product “value” and “lastingness”, as well as a willingness to live a “sufficiency” lifestyle (not needing to accumulate beyond one’s needs, being satisfied with less, seeking ways to minimize environmental impacts, etc.).

PRIORITY THEMES:
33 ideas were generated by the group to address the concerns raised in their discussion. The participants then selected those ideas they felt to be most promising. Priority themes that emerged included:

• More responsible policymaking and legislation to create and enforce guidelines for sustainable access and use of the river.
• A focused and proactive campaign to promote “green business” development in the region.
• Recreational and educational programming to bring people to the river’s edge and onto the water.
• More attention to the agricultural resources of the region as a source of food and good nutrition for the region’s population.

OVERVIEW:
On October 22, 16 people participated in the Newburgh-New Windsor listening workshop. The group included stakeholding interests representing a variety of regional and county agencies and nonprofit organizations (planning, tourism, environmental, cultural/heritage, land use, higher education, recreation, etc.). Participants noted that the audience was not fully representative of the region’s ethnic, racial, age or professional diversity. In particular, the group encouraged future representation from: the private business sector (esp. agriculture and river-based businesses); students; infrastructure-related agencies (e.g. railroads, utilities); etc.

DISCUSSION:
The discussion focused on the need to create a new awareness and consciousness for the Hudson River Valley in which environmental sensitivity and social justice and equity would be woven into issues of economic and technology development. Even though people want to remove the fears and risks associated with our times (e.g. pollution, public safety, environmental deterioration, etc.), they are better able to think globally and live locally — to integrate larger issues and experiences into their near-in daily lives (e.g. they have become “loca-vores” – consumers of products produced nearby). The Valley has many spectacular resources that can serve as a foundation for future strategies, but past policies, forms of governance, patterns of ownership, and the regulatory environment hinder more sustainable and inclusive strategic directions.

PRIORITY THEMES:
28 ideas were generated by the group to address the concerns raised in their discussion. The participants then selected those ideas they felt to be most promising. Priority Themes that emerged include:

• Engaging in more environmentally and socially appropriate planning and development;
• Focusing on tourism development and regional marketing;
• Promoting “green awareness” and action;
• Establishing educational programs that connect the river resources and issues with youth;
• Increasing access to the River; and
• Strengthening agricultural resources.

OVERVIEW:
On October 21, 17 people participated in the Troy listening workshop. The group included stakeholding interests representing a number of state and regional agencies and nonprofit organizations involved with strategic action and policies relating primarily to environmental and heritage/cultural issues and concerns for the Valley. Participants noted that the audience was not representative of the region’s ethnic, racial, age or professional diversity. In particular, the group encouraged future representation from: the agricultural sector; higher education; hospitality, tourism and marketing organizations; cultural groups; emerging technology development companies; and recreational sports activists.

DISCUSSION:
The discussion focused on the need to create a new generation of stakeholders and activist leaders for the Hudson River Valley who can deal authentically with the issues and concerns that the current generation of leadership has been addressing for the past 20 years: treating the region as a whole system; addressing demographic inclusion and diversity; narrowing the gulf between the “haves” and “have-nots”; connecting the natural with the built environment; addressing issues relating to river access, use, and development, etc. There is a yearning for “new urbanism” (walkable municipal centers that contain a range of housing and job types, with connections to public transit, and protection of regional open space); and for recreational experiences that encompass multiple activities and opportunities (e.g. visiting a historic site and kayaking). It’s time for “climate leadership” (green jobs, forward technology, preparing the region for change).

PRIORITY THEMES:
27 ideas were generated by the group to address a “new agenda” for action. The participants then selected those ideas they felt to be most promising. Priority Themes that emerged include:

• Forwarding legislative action through more aggressive and effective regional advocacy efforts;
• Continuing the emphasis and refining strategic direction for regional development;
• Encouraging greater organizational cooperation and collaboration at the regional level;
• Focusing on tourism development and regional marketing;
• Promoting “green consciousness”
• Improving river access, and linking river access points more effectively; and
• Encouraging “green” transportation systems.

OVERVIEW:
On September 17, 23 people participated in the Hudson listening workshop. The group included stakeholding interests representing: historic sites; state, county, and local government/public agencies; civic leadership; environmental activists; small business; and outdoor recreation advocates. Participants noted that the audience was not fully representative of the region’s ethnic, racial, age or professional diversity. In particular, the group encouraged future representation from: the public and private education systems; major businesses; health professions; African American, Muslim, and Bengali communities; and youth.

DISCUSSION:
The discussion focused on the need to create a “new agenda.” for the Hudson River Valley. “An experience of place” was proposed as a context in which people have the financial wherewithal (“good job”, “bread on the table”) to enjoy a “rich and healthy life”, while working in partnership with others in the region to proudly “own” (use and care for) those special and distinguishing characteristics that make the Hudson River Valley a particularly attractive place in which to live, work, learn, visit, play, and stay well. The group generally agreed that a new economic context of development is needed.

PRIORITY THEMES:
30 ideas were generated by the group to address this “new agenda” for action. The participants then selected those ideas they felt to be most promising. Those ideas that focused on the area around the community of Hudson were extrapolated to potential regional (Valley-wide) possibilities. Priority Themes that emerged included:

• Enhancing the Valley’s character and identity;
• Encouraging greater access and use of the river for recreation and commercial purposes;
• Creating new regional and sub-regional organizational and planning mechanisms to effect policies and projects across traditional jurisdictional lines;
• Developing a more effective and efficient flow of people, goods and traffic through and across the region;
• Funding schools through alternative public revenue sources; and
• Elevating the significance of the farming system (land, people, business, markets, etc.). to economic development and regional identity.

OVERVIEW:
On September 21, 20 people participated in the Kingston listening workshop. The group included a number of senior staff from public agencies and major nonprofit organizations concerned with environmental sustainability, historic sites, and urban planning, as well as small businesses and regional publications. Participants noted that the audience was not fully representative of the region’s ethnic, racial, age or professional diversity. In particular, the group encouraged future representation from: youth and education; Native Americans; Spanish-speaking peoples; religious institutions and major funding agencies; as well as tourism development organizations, and agencies who work on behalf of underserved and underrepresented populations.

DISCUSSION:
The discussion focused on a new desire to integrate previously competing interests, for example: “economic development” vs ”natural resource protection”; “earning a living” vs “personal enrichment”; “market driven growth” vs “values driven growth”. The group noted that: (a) “nature”, “culture”, and “economy” are all interdependent; (b) the marketplace is becoming an expression of public will; and (c) commercial interests are taking greater responsibility for resources and sustainability. They felt that public officials have generally not yet caught up with this new reality. Participants suggested that the new definition of “wealth” should encompass such qualities as “economic sobriety and frugality”, “health and fitness”, and “community.” The group noted that the region has many enduring qualities that could support a values-driven vision of economic development, including: the river; a rich history; impressive vistas and beauty; “diversity” (economic; social; cultural; racial; biological); a passion for place; creativity (artistic, commercial, scientific); and a number of nonprofit and public sector initiatives (e.g. the Greenway process and framework). At the same time, participants pointed out that: many in the region still fear change; can be parochial in their thinking; maintain a top-down style of decision-making; and have a problematic relationship with New York City.

PRIORITY THEMES:
35 ideas were generated by the group to address a more holistic approach toward growth and development. The participants then selected those ideas they felt to be most promising. Priority Themes that emerged included:

• Creating a more sustainable “live and work” environment (bringing together “livability” and “economic development”);
• Promoting a clearer expression of public will through citizen awareness and public advocacy;
• Developing curricular and life-long learning educational programs using the region’s regional assets and resources;
• Establishing a region-wide youth development and support program.

Here will be all the information on the listening tour.

Organizing for America is launching a series of Listening Tours throughout the country to reconnect with supporters and begin to build on the incredible grassroots organization that was created during the campaign.

We have one goal with these meetings — to listen.

Your ideas will be used to help write state-specific plans for Organizing for America in 2009 and beyond.

In my last posting, I suggested that people should pay greater attention to food labels, focusing on the product’s origin. While I believe such observance and conscious is important in understanding the structure of our food system, it alone is inadequate in the broad attempt to localize our production and consumption. The fact remains that consumer options to buy local and fresh produce often remain limited within chain supermarkets, as it is in these companies interest to buy from few agribusinesses and in large volume in order to maximize profit. It is for this reason that residents must seek “alternative sources” for local organic produce.

For a couple of decades now, an initiative known as Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) has taken root and grown momentum in many towns across the United States, yet much of the population still knows little as to what it is or how it works. A CSA is composed of a community of individuals who pledge to support a farm’s operation. Members of a CSA are often referred to as “share-holders,” as they share both the risks and benefits of operating the farm. Members typically pay a fee in advance (often at the beginning of a season), which collectively covers the farms anticipated operating costs. In return, members receive portions of the harvest throughout the growing season. Since members also share the risks, in the event of poor weather, pests or other unfavorable conditions, each participant as a result will earn a smaller share.

The majority of CSAs offer an array of fruits, vegetables and herbs, but can also include a variety of animal products such as eggs, milk, cheese and meat among others. There is no standard mold for a CSA, as they range in size, varieties of produce, fees, and membership involvement.

The following quote was written by Trauger M. Groh and Steven S.H. McFadden in their book Farms of Tomorrow. Community Supported Farms, Farm Supported Communities (1990.)

“Since our existence is primarily dependent on farming, we cannot entrust this essential activity solely to the farming population–just 2% of Americans. As farming becomes more and more remote from the life of the average person, it becomes less and less able to provide us with clean, healthy, lifegiving food or a clean, healthy, lifegiving environment. A small minority of farmers, laden with debt and overburdened with responsibility, cannot possibly meet the needs of all the people. More and more people are coming to recognize this, and they are becoming ready to share agricultural responsibilities with the active farmers.”

Before judging whether or not joining a CSA would be convenient, cost-efficient or beneficial, I urge you to contact one of your local CSA farms and learn more about the details of their program and their individual fee. If it does not sound right for you, visit a local farmer’s market, food coop or farm stand. Independent small farms are a huge resource, use them!

I am proud to say that OurHudson has two new members who have CSA programs of their own, the Denison Farm and Kilpatrick farm!

For more information on the benefits of CSAs and to locate the one nearest you please visit:
http://www.localharvest.org/csa/

Posted by Davide Gill-Austern