The first comment comes from Jean Henry, the former owner of Ann Arbor’s Jefferson Market, who, at present, leads environmental sustainability initiatives at Zingerman’s.

On a very basic level I love (the idea of a year-round, food-centric facility on Water Street). My understanding, right now, is that we are maxed out on farmer’s markets, though. There simply aren’t enough farmers to supply any more markets. They are spread too thin. Farmers can’t farm and simultaneously be at 5 markets a week. To do so would mean that they would need to hire someone to tend the stand, and then everyone would complain about the increased price of the food being sold. That said, from what I understand, farmers like the big markets. So, if this one were to intentionally take the place of existing Ypsi markets, and maybe house a food hub, so that distribution could be done on-site as well, then it could work. I suppose a feasibility study would bring all this to light. I think, in general, proposing something grand and inspiring and forward thinking, and then asking the question “Do we need it?” in a non-anecdotal way, via a feasibility study, will bring you the solution that you seek. I’m pretty sure you don’t need a dollar store. Those giant businesses have a high-margin model where mistakes can be afforded. (i.e. They can open and close and the brand keeps on going.) Food does not. Almost anything you would want on Water Street does not. And so it will be hard to pull off. It will also be very hard to fund. But the chances of it sticking around and working for the good of Ypsi for the long haul are much greater. Even if you didn’t pull it off, the process of the City (by which I mean its citizens) visioning what it wants, determining what it needs, and trying to pull it off, would be really useful for Ypsi. At minimum you would all learn a lot. The future of Ypsi is really up to the citizens. If you all could get something bigger scale started, maybe the City, and groups like Eastern Leaders, could follow (rather than trying to lead) and assist. Then you’d really be on your way to having the City you all deserve. Water Street is a really great piece of property. Despite the troubles, it has incredible potential. As does all of downtown Ypsi.

And, a little while later, Jean added the following.

Waiting for offers (as was the case with Family Dollar) is almost always a bad idea. Maybe Ypsi just needs to try a little harder on its own behalf. I don’t mean just the government, I mean all of you. Funding IS possible. It would just require a lot of work. A public/private partnership, all stakeholders engaged, outside investors… even tax breaks in the short term for a larger tax base in the long term. There are lots of progressive redevelopment models out there, but none are easy, and local models are almost non-existent. The major stakeholders and an active citizenry need to be on board. And to get to that you need a great vision – which I think Mark has begun here. Rather than assume what is and isn’t possible (which I also did in my earlier comment, admittedly), I think it would be great if people could start to weigh in on what they CAN do. What alliances can be formed? What funding mechanisms exist? What are Ypsi’s strengths rather than its limitations? You actually have tremendous capacity in terms of an engaged (if somewhat cynical) citizenry, progressive thinkers, people that understand city planning and hybrid corporate structures, a major university, a predominantly thriving (by MI standards) county, AND a really beautiful piece of property on a riverfront downtown with an Olmsted-designed park corridor, within a mile of a major freeway and rail lines. I don’t know if you all realize what an unusual municipal asset that is. There are so many people at the universities, in county government and in economic development in the wider metro area who could help you all realize a great vision. But first you all need to stand tall and say, “We have something of value and we want to work hard collectively to make the most of it.”

A great model for sustainable development (and the hurdles one faces – the path has not been at all easy, and the formerly giant project has scaled down considerably) is the North Charleston Noisette project (in North Charleston, South Carolina). I spoke to the developer, John Knott, a few years ago about Water Street and he was interested in talking to someone in Ypsi about it. (I don’t think that ever happened.) I think the scale of it was appealing to him, relative to the behemoth that he took on. Also, I know at one point Eastern Leaders was looking at the whole corridor behind Water Street to 1-94 for economic development, so there really is a bigger potential package than just Water Street. There are people out there who know how to do this work. And they can tell you what is possible. Your sense of constriction originates, at least in part, in a tiny tax base. The city lines are simply drawn too tightly around downtown. I really believe to overcome that sense of constriction you need to look to the surrounding area for help and be prepared to believe and demonstrate that you are worthy of investment. You will also need to be very clear about what you want. Ypsi’s potential is so obvious to me. I really hope you guys take another stab at the Water Street windmill.

And, this comment comes from Amanda Edmonds, the director of Growing Hope, the organization that, among other things, runs Ypsi’s existing Downtown Farmers Market.

A few comments on both farmers’ markets – and saturation points – and a public market on Water Street. I’ve spent considerable time thinking and working on both!

So, as for farmers’ markets, my view is that we are at a saturation point for small neighborhood or small-community markets in Washtenaw County, particularly in places where food access and transportation aren’t big barriers for people. I wouldn’t say we’re at a saturation point nation-wide – there are many communities where there’s no good access to a market, or other fresh, healthy, local food options – and I’m really pleased with where we are in Michigan overall, mostly because we are a leader in the country when it comes to markets that accept EBT/SNAP. I’m proud that our Downtown Ypsilanti Farmers’ Market (DYFM) was the third in Michigan to accept EBT (back in 2006 when we started – and props to the Ypsi Food Co-op for helping provide the capacity to make that happen), and that this year 103 markets across the state accepted EBT. Many of the markets across the state doing EBT spent the day together last Monday in Turkeysville, MI reflecting and figuring out what’s next – all thanks to the amazing leadership of MIFMA (the Michigan Farmers’ Market Association) which is a lean organization that deserves much of the credit for our markets rocking out in Michigan. The total season EBT sales for markets across the state may top $1 million this year– which is only a small percentage of overall EBT sales, but it’s growing at an amazing rate. The DYFM topped $18,000 in EBT sales alone in 2012 – and that’s just during a four hour block on Tuesday afternoons in downtown Ypsi from May through October… So, the fact that more markets are being supported in areas where food access is difficult, is amazing. And it’s great that communities are creating markets as central squares and community gathering spaces.

The challenge is in what it takes to sustain a market. It costs us a lot of money, and we fundraise for to make our market what it is. Markets are not financially self-sustaining, particularly when they, like the DYFM, offer EBT and other programs/incentives that support food access, healthy eating education, support for small business development, et al. We’re going to see – and already are, in some ways – a boom and bust in markets who don’t have the capacity – or the ability to raise the funds to build capacity – to keep afloat. A lot of market managers are volunteers, and that becomes challenging when you’re basically running a bank on the back end (via token systems), and as a result you have a lot of turnover, which makes it hard to provide consistency to the many small businesses (farms, bakers, et al) who are relying on you for their income, and to the customers who are relying on you for their food. So, one thing I think we need, and are going to start seeing, is some consolidation of markets so that we can have well-run farmers’ markets with the efficiencies that come from that. Not one mammoth market monopoly, but just thinking about how to clump some markets under single entities that can provide shared marketing, vendor coordination, etc… There are also opportunities for winter markets. We go inside the Corner Brewery in November and December, and have a long waiting list of vendors who would like to be in this smaller space. As more growers are doing season extension, and there are more cottage food vendors, etc, we need opportunities for more permanent market space and indoor opportunities for all, or part, of the winter.

And, that leads me to Water Street… Since some of us were at the International Public Markets Conference (put on by Project for Public Spaces) in Cleveland in September, I’ve started thinking more about a public market on Water Street. While I’ve dreamed for years of the vacant Smith Furniture building being such a space (something like North Market in Columbus, Ohio), that seems like it’s not going to happen any time soon, and, well, Water Street is available… and a public market adjacent to the proposed Recreation Center would be a nice, complimentary use. The Royal Oak market is a pretty simple structure – a giant pole barn, really. It doesn’t have to be as fancy as the Grand Rapids market, but it could be built out in stages. We could, for instance, develop our local kitchen incubator (which still in the works) in a smaller phase-1 site, and then eventually move it over. We could host our farmers’ markets there as well as have permanent stalls… And, it can be events space.

I’ve been working through how and when to facilitate community visioning around this and other food-system-based economic development in Ypsi – if people want to be involved they can get in touch with me… Look also for an open house info session for people interested in being involved in an Ypsi Kitchen Incubator that Growing Hope will be hosting in December on behalf of Washtenaw County Community & Economic Development…

And, later, Amanda added the following stream-of-consciousness addendum.

When I refer to a public market, I’m not talking about open air market, but a year-round space that can accommodate farmers’ markets, as well as permanent stalls… Royal Oak has a fairly simple version. North Market in Columbus, Ohio is one of my inspirations. A shared use or incubator kitchen could also be a part of it. A community event and/or performance space could be accommodated as well… I’ve visited many of these types of markets, at a variety of scales, in communities of different sizes. I think it’s the next step for us. I think it – the property/building – should be privately or community-owned, and then we should have a nonprofit and community partners as users/tenants/etc… Or, we could have an entity like a CDC as an owner…

[note: During Tuesday's City Council session, it was decided, after a 4 to 1 vote, to move forward with the proposal from Family Dollar. This would not, however, preclude us from considering other parcels on the site for such a public market.]

Let me start by saying that I know that it’s not a fair comparison. I know that Grand Rapids has the good fortune of having a few extraordinarily wealthy patrons, thanks primarily to the success of the international network marketing firm Amway, that are dedicated to making sure that their city is well-positioned for the future, whereas our only fantastically wealthy potential benefactor, after losing a bitter fight to legally enshrine gay discrimination in Ypsilanti, chose to move to the swamps of Florida, and build a new, ultra-conservative city in accordance with his far right religious beliefs. And I know that things are possible in a city of 190,000 that just aren’t possible in a city of 20,000, especially when those 190,000 individuals are, on average, a lot better off financially than their Ypsilanti counterparts. Furthermore, I also seem to recall having heard Heartwell say that Grand Rapids was number two in the nation when it came to per-capita charitable giving, which certainly helps.

As someone who hasn’t spent much time there, I can’t say definitively, but I get the sense that folks in Grand Rapids, in spite of their religious conservatism, actually believe in the concept of the greater good. For instance, they’re not just talking about sustainability, but they’re actually addressing carbon emissions, rapidly expanding bike paths, and implementing ‘pay as you throw’ garbage collection. And, as I mentioned above, they’re presently building an incredible year-round market facility which will not only serve to support regional growers, but also provide the infrastructure necessary to nurture a generation of budding food entrepreneurs. The following comes by way of the New York Times.

Next year… Grand Rapids is scheduled to open the $30 million, 130,000-square-foot Downtown Market, a destination that is expected to attract 500,000 visitors a year. The three-story brick and glass building, under construction in a neighborhood of vacant turn-of-the-20th century warehouses, is intended by its developers to be a state-of-the art center of commerce for the culinary arts and fresh local foods.

It is also seen as having the potential to accomplish much more.

“This project fills a variety of needs,” said David Frey, chairman of the Frey Foundation and co-chairman of Grand Action, a nonprofit group of local business leaders that joined the city’s Downtown Development Authority to raise money for the market and to build it. “It creates a lot of synergy for the development that’s been happening in Grand Rapids for some time now.”

The Downtown Market, in effect, is the newest piece of civic equipment built here since the mid-1990s to leverage the same urban economic trends of the 21st century — higher education, hospitals and health care, housing, entertainment, transit, and cleaner air and water — that are reviving most large American cities….

The design plan for the Downtown Market includes space for food production and processing, a commercial kitchen to provide an incubator for new businesses and another to educate students in food preparation and healthful eating. A greenhouse will occupy the roof and two restaurants are planned. Enough space is available indoors and out for banquets, civic events and more than 60 vendors. The market was built with nontoxic materials, and has advanced systems for energy efficiency, natural lighting, waste management, recycling and water conservation.

A feasibility study, completed in March 2010 by Market Ventures of Portland, Me., found ample reason for Grand Rapids to pursue the project. Some 12,220 farms in the 11-county agricultural region that surrounds Grand Rapids bring in a total of $2 billion in annual revenue. Many of the growers produce fruits and vegetables, including specialty crops, for sale at a public market.

The study forecast that the Downtown Market, which occupies a 3.5-acre site close to highway exits and the Grand River, would achieve gross annual sales around $25 million, and generate more than 600 jobs. A small staff could manage the market, and its annual income is expected to total $2 million, with expenses reaching $1.5 million…

Is it impossible to think that something like this would work in Ypsilanti? Probably. I would argue, however, that there are a lot of possibilities along the continuum which has, at one end, a $30 million downtown market facility, and, at the other, a Family Dollar store.

And, yes, I know that we’re talking about apples and oranges, here. But I’m not trying to make the case that we should have an indoor market on Water Street. I’m only saying that, when assessing projects, we should keep in mind that some will move us in the direction of sustainability, growth, and self-sufficiency, while others will move us away from those shared objectives. And I’d put Family Dollar in the latter category.

I know that some of you believe that Family Dollar is “our only hope,” as someone expressed in the comments sections today. I would argue, however, that Family Dollar actually represents the ceding of hope.

And, here, now that I’ve got that off my chest, are some sketches showing what the Downtown Market will look like.

FIRST FLOOR:

SECOND FLOOR:

This is what the future looks like, folks.

Not realizing that this was the weekend of the Chicago Marathon, Linette and I decided to pack up the family and head to the Windy City for the weekend. The top photo was taken inside the Evolving Planet exhibition at the Field Museum. The second photo is of a vehicle promoting a new menu item at Wendy’s called the Baconator. Taken together, I think they probably make an extremely profound statement. Sadly, however, I don’t feel as though I’m intellectually up to the task of articulating it at the moment, given the fact that, over the past hour, I’ve absorbed my entire monthly wine ration. I will say, though, that it’s more than just a little sobering to see the word “today” written right next to the phrase “mass extinction.”

OK, I know that I said I wasn’t going to offer any analysis, but, really, how better to sum up the dire situation we find ourselves in today than with a photo of a fossil fuel-guzzling tractor trailer currently criss-crossing the nation, evangelizing on behalf of the factory-farmed fast food monstrosity known as the Baconator? It’s not exactly the model of sustainability, is it?

And, here, for those of you who are interested in such things, is a little background on this Sixth Extinction which we’re currently living through, taken from the website of UC Berkley Professor David Ulansey.

…”It’s the next annihilation of vast numbers of species. It is happening now, and we, the human race, are its cause,” explains Dr. Richard Leakey, the world’s most famous paleoanthropologist. Every year, between 17,000 and 100,000 species vanish from our planet, he says. “For the sake of argument, let’s assume the number is 50,000 a year. Whatever way you look at it, we’re destroying the Earth at a rate comparable with the impact of a giant asteroid slamming into the planet, or even a shower of vast heavenly bodies.” The statistics (Leakey) has assembled are staggering. Fifty percent of the Earth’s species will have vanished inside the next 100 years; mankind is using almost half the energy available to sustain life on the planet, and this figure will only grow as our population leaps from 5.7 billion to 10 billion inside the next half-century. Such a dramatic and overwhelming mass extinction threatens the entire complex fabric of life on Earth, including the species responsible for it: Homo sapiens…

I hope that doesn’t ruin your appetite for the new Baconator.

Perhaps, to start, it would make sense to ask how your team became engaged in this project to begin with. Who reached out to you, and how did they present the task?

Our involvement was initiated when Robert Marans, Washtenaw County Parks Commission President and Emeritus Professor of Architecture & Urban Planning at the University of Michigan, contacted the Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning regarding the project. He was specifically interested in approaching faculty who were engaged in collaborative practice between architecture and urban planning and who were interested in including students in the work. Craig Borum pursued this initial inquiry and invited Maria Arquero and Jen Maigret to join in a collaboration to bring together his expertise in architecture and construction systems with Maria and Jen’s expertise in sustainable urban practices. Our student team comprised of a mixture of architecture and urban planning graduate students from the University of Michigan.

Can you tell us a little about yourselves, your backgrounds, the student team that you worked with, etc?

The design team, led by Professor of Architecture Craig Borum, includes Assistant Professor of Architecture Jen Maigret, and Assistant Professor of Architecture and Urban and Regional Planning Maria Arquero. This team brings together expertise in the integration and synthesis of knowledge through professional practice experience and scholarly research. The collaboration of the three faculty members extends through teaching, practice and research over the last few years. Professors Borum, Maigret and Arquero have co-taught courses at the graduate level, and are currently collaborating in a series of research projects in the region.

Professor Borum’s design research has garnered considerable accolades for digital fabrication, material practice and, most recently, research that engages climate and atmosphere related to glass construction practices. Borum has focused his research and creative practice at the scale of construction practices and material logics as they challenge predominant modes of architectural practice. His work has, and continues to explore the intersection of geometry and materiality with the scope of both research efforts and commissioned projects. His specific contribution to the discipline of architecture stems from the integration of technical advancements in the description and materialization of building geometries –made possible by computational processes- into built work.

His research is lodged in both investigative and traditional logics of materials, construction techniques, and systems of architectural enclosure (walls, doors, and window systems). His creative practice has substantially contributed to a broader understanding of implications of sustainable thinking on architectural design by offering an alternative to the discursive monoculture of LEED Certification and other formulaic top-down approaches. His approach builds upon recent theoretical speculation on atmospheric effects in a manner that goes beyond their phenomenological and technical implications of material assemblies through an understanding and positioning of the iconography and ideology of materials and tectonics within the architectural discipline.

Assistant Professors Arquero’s and Maigret’s body of research and practice lies at the intersection of urban and regional design, landscape architecture and architecture. Arquero and Maigret are concurrently developing techniques in the representation of regional and metropolitan systems, the analysis of interconnected, geospatial networks, and material practices that prioritize environmental performance and cultural tradition within expanded disciplinary territories. To date, their work has developed a particular expertise in the Great Lakes Region, surrounding links between regionalism and innovative urban stormwater management techniques, and revealing the unique cultural and material heritage around water in the identity of the region. Pursuing an interest to cross-register temporal and physical scales and engage the rich cultural identity of the region, Arquero and Maigret are currently engaged in a series of research initiatives towards the development of more sustainable patterns of urbanization in the city of Detroit. Their most recent research involves place-based design initiatives that prioritize the potential of interconnections between open public space, community capacity building and environmental stewardship.

The student team involved with this project includes:

Catherine Baldwin, MArch, 2012
Leigh Davis, MUP, 2013
Kathryn Dreitzler, MArch, 2014
Chaerin Jin, MUP, 2013
Kayla Lim, B.S.Arch 2010 (U-M), current student at Harvard University, MArch, 2014
Caileigh MacKellar, MArch 2012 McGill University
Amy McNamara, MArch, 2007
Geoffrey Salvatore, MArch, 2013
Alex Timmer, B.S.Arch 2009 (U-M), current student at Harvard University MArch, 2015
Catherine Truong, MArch, 2013

You can access all of our cv’s on the Taubman College website.

Also, you can find more information at the websites of our firms: PLY Architecture and MAde studio.

What can you tell us about your process? I’m assuming, for instance, that, before you started, you walked the site, visited other recreation centers, interviewed people in the community, etc., right?

The design process started in May, and has undergone different phases. We started with the compilation and analysis of the information on site conditions. Throughout that time, and since then, we have visited the site frequently to document the current conditions, and to better understand the relationship and transitions between the river and the downtown. We have used photography to capture particular aspects of the natural and constructed environments that are important in our approach to site. This site, in particular, is very rich and layered due to its industrial history, urban adjacency and greenway river corridor. On two occasions, the Washtenaw County Parks and Recreation coordinated walks on the site and on other occasions, although anecdotal, we learned about the importance of the river as an active destination from the individuals we encountered. It is also evident that the site is currently challenging to access and that improved connectivity with Riverside and Waterworks Park are desired. Furthermore, due to the potential to connect indoor activities with outdoor activities and because of the importance of the trees in the river landscape, the site is unusual and exceptional, as compared with other recreation center sites that we visited. Working with the still recent memory of the industrial past of the site provides a poetic opportunity to reclaim the site for public use.

As part of our program research, we toured several regional recreation centers as a way to better understand how each recreation center served the specific needs of its community members. We provided information at the recent Heritage Festival during which time the Washtenaw County Parks and Recreation Department distributed a program survey to gain additional feedback from community members about what makes Ypsilanti’s needs unique and how its recreation center can best serve those needs.

We visited a series of recreational centers in the region, interviewed programming, business and facilities managers to hear about the strengths and challenges of the recreation centers they knew well. We were also able to obtain several floor plans of other recreation centers, which enabled us to study program sizes, distribution and general approaches to the organization of circulation and activities. Throughout the entire project, we are greatly indebted to the generosity of Cathy Duchon, director of the Ann Arbor YMCA, who attended the recreation center site visits and design project meetings and whose feedback has been invaluable in the development of the design schemes.

Before we talk about your designs, perhaps you could share your thoughts concerning Ypsi’s existing urban form, the natural features that we have to work with, and how both of those things guided your thinking.

This is an interesting question for us because the context of the site has been one of the main drivers in both of the designs. Urban form is one important component of that, but there is also a rich set of narratives that enliven city spaces and in the case of Ypsilanti, these arise out of a number of interesting sources, including a historic plan, designed by the Olmstead Brothers, for an “emerald necklace” of parks and public spaces along the Huron River. These drawings are on display at Ypsilanti’s City Hall and played a part in reminding us of the longstanding commitment that the City of Ypsilanti has had towards a vision of an integrated, sustainable urbanism.

Someone recently pointed out to me that the term “Rec Center,” could mean a lot of different things. What are the specific needs you’re looking to serve with this project? And how have those particular needs affected what’s gone into the design concepts that you’re proposing? Also, I’m curious as to what you’ve chosen to leave out.

We started with a very inclusive definition of “user”, as the recreational center is located in the very core of Ypsilanti. The idea that this cosmopolitan civic facility has the potential to attract a wide range of residents is one of the most fascinating aspects of the proposal. In this sense, this facility will cater to professionals and families and offer programming for all ages. This wide range of users demands a flexible programming of the space, both inside and out, under the promise to serve as a new civic anchor for the community. The primary program presented in both recreation center design schemes includes two pools (one lap Swimming pool with a cooler temperature, and a second, open water, warmer temperature pool), cardio and weight-lifting areas, a gym (comprised of half courts that can be separated for multiple, simultaneous activities), a multi-lane banked track, multipurpose rooms (including space for workout group classes and yoga), and a child-watch area.

Beyond active programs, the recreational center aims to bring people together and create a sense of community. In this particular case, the Rec Center is also responsible to foster imagination and trigger future development in Water Street. Given its unique location, the Center will grant public access and continuity to both the Municipal Historical Park System and the regional Huron Valley green network. The Recreational Center has a tactical location that serves as a transition from the historical downtown to the rich riverine landscape, and sets grounds for future development of a former industrial site in the heart of the city.

What did you perceive to be the most significant challenges? Clearly you’ve got things to contend with, in a geographic sense, like the river, the flood plain, the access from Michigan Avenue, but you’ve also got to consider the fact that you might well be setting the tone for the next 100 years in this City, right?

This project is challenging in a number of ways, and the decisions made about approaches to an environmentally sensitive site that has an important economic, urban and cultural role in Ypsilanti are critical to setting a tone for the kind of development that can be fostered within the Water Street site. Economic desires are sometimes seen to be at odds with environmental sensitivity, however, in the case of the recreation center, the challenge of working along the river and within a portion of a flood plain represents an opportunity to create a building that is a model of sustainable urbanism.

This is even more challenging and important given the public nature of the recreation center and the activities it hosts both within the building as well as on the grounds of its site. In this way, one of the most exciting spatial challenges of the project is to link access from the Border-to-Border trail along the river with access from vehicular parking and from pedestrian, bike and bus traffic along Michigan Avenue. In both schemes, we accomplished this kind of connectivity and ensured that the entry to the recreation center would be urban, accessible and visually tied to the river while ensuring that only a single check in desk would be necessary to maintain security and customer service.

Speaking of the flood plain, the first design for this development, some 12 years ago, when it was in the hands of a private developer, called for a great deal of soil to be trucked in, altering the natural topography of the site. The reasoning, I suspect, was that more land above the 100 year flood plane meant more buildable lots, which, in turn, translated into to more money for the developer. Given our earlier conversations, it sounds as though you’ve rejected this idea. Why?

We strongly believe that it is a mistake to build on this site without taking the responsibility of water management seriously. Many of our current water infrastructure challenges, including frequent over-capacity of combined sewer systems, is due to the accumulated effects of short-sighted approaches to flood plains and urban materiality. In many cases, the short term economic “bump” from more buildable lots results in an overall infrastructural expense that far exceeds the gain. If the expenses of dams, combined sewer overflows and wastewater treatment plants were taken into account, our approaches to urban construction would change significantly in its approach to water. In this way, it is critical that on sites, such as Water Street, the approach to building does not displace water, but rather accommodates rain water as a resource rather than “waste.” Anything other than this approach risks the integrity of the larger river system rather than taking advantage of this challenge to construct a forward- looking truly sustainable example of a twenty-first century public building.

You have two primary designs. Can you tell us about each of them, what their individual advantages are, and how they differ from one another?

Our approach to this project has been to develop two schemes, each of which prioritizes a different set of opportunities emerging from the intersection of the Huron River greenway system and Michigan Avenue.

“The Canopy” presents a recreation center that is an architectural extension of the canopy of trees on the riverfront site. The ground of this scheme forms a constructed landscape that generously accommodates the program of the building while the floating canopy roof above defines and connects the spaces underneath. The organization of this scheme centralizes the program of the recreation center and allows for views of and between the pools, check-in and gym activities, as well as to the river and park beyond. The elevated track allows one to travel through the depth of the canopy roof structure above, moving through the gym and entry spaces with constantly changing views between inside activities below and elevated views of nature outside. Glass, with white, fritted patterns of trees, forms the enclosure of the recreation center. The elevation facing Michigan Avenue integrates a generous sidewalk that allows pedestrians along Michigan Avenue to move under the roof canopy and see through the upper portion of the gym and track thereby participating in the visual life of the center. The elevation that faces the river is civic in scale while functioning like a porch for visitors to gather together. It brings a portion of the Border-to-Border trail under the canopy roof and past an entry point before returning back to the portion of the trail that follows the River. In all of these ways, “The Canopy” Recreation Center is an extension of the park system that serves as a welcoming gateway between the city and the park. “The Canopy” Recreation Center promotes social interactivity, transparency to the city, and a connection to the Border to Border trail.

“The Storefront” presents a recreation center that is an extension of the scale and visual patterns of the urban fabric of Michigan Avenue. This scheme takes inspiration from both the meandering Huron River and the historical character of nearby storefronts. “The Storefront” Recreation Center stretches out along the length of the River, touching down at the northern end of the site along Michigan Avenue and elevating above of the ground towards the southern end of the site, providing a sheltered exterior gathering space below. The entry area is organized around a public plaza that links Michigan Avenue and the Border-to-Border trail under the northern corner of the building. This is a project that fosters dispersed social spaces that provide a sense of discovery as one travels through the separated spaces. Additionally, two exterior rooftop “lily pads” allow for small exercise classes and events to spill out onto the second floor green roof. The track in this project starts at the climbing wall, circles the gym and has continuous glimpses through the skin of the building out to the River, the rest of the Water Street site and into a rainwater courtyard. The elevation facing Michigan Avenue touches down to the west and allows for pedestrians to move under an upper level of workout spaces towards the entry doors. Long portions of the elevation that face the Huron River are clear glass in order to connect views from inside to outside. The activity spaces along the riverfront side include the pool, cardio spaces and the gym. The façade borrows directly from the patterns and rhythms of Ypsilanti’s downtown storefronts and uses contemporary, double-skin construction systems that maximize natural daylight while providing energy efficiency. The façade honors both history and the present while balancing transparency with privacy.

The City is primarily on a grid system, with the Huron River curling through it. How did the related urban form, in particular the City’s substantial historic district, walkable downtown, and nearby neighborhoods, inform the design of the site and building?

Both schemes mediate the transition between the gridded urban system, along Michigan Avenue, and the gently meandering natural systems along the Huron River. Across the entire Water Street site, the urban grid scheme continues the existing urban block scale of Ypsilanti while using a variety of building typologies and siting strategies to accommodate differences between interior, urban blocks and the perimeter river blocks. In contrast, the ribbon urban scheme recognizes Michigan Avenue and the Huron River as the two distinct resources of the site. It therefore uses the strategy of historic ribbon farms to establish blocks that have access to both river and urban entities. Both urban schemes propose strategies for public spaces and complete streets that integrate sustainable stormwater management techniques, generous street tree plantings and active recreation pocket parks. The resulting scale and organization of streets and public spaces foster walkability, encourage connectivity with the river and recognize that the Water Street’s site most important asset is its citizens and the quality of life that can emerge from a contemporary, sustainable approach to urbanism.

When you were approached to do this project, you were told, as I understand it, that you had 12 acres to work with, on the westernmost side of the parcel. (The entire parcel is 38 acres.) As you may know, there’s been a bit of push-back from some in the community, who feel as though this development, as it’s not going to generate tax revenue for the City directly, should be relegated to a “less desirable” part of the parcel, further away from downtown, and further off Michigan Avenue. While I know that this isn’t ultimately your decision, I was curious if you could tell me, in your opinion, why it might make sense to put the rec center on the end of the parcel closest to the heart of downtown.

The parcel designated for the recreation center is the most appropriate site within the Water Street redevelopment area for two primary reasons. The first is that at the heart of every great city lies a commitment and vision for civic, public space that fosters connections between its people and the natural systems of a place. Ypsilanti has already shown its commitment to establishing an outstanding greenway system along the Huron River that has the potential to link these public, natural spaces with the cultural activities of its downtown. Siting a recreation center at the intersection between the Huron River Greenway system and the Michigan Avenue corridor reinforces a commitment to community and offers the possibility of augmenting indoor recreation activities with outdoor recreational spaces. The second reason that this site is more appropriate for a recreation center than other forms of development is that the site itself is not the most valuable parcel in the Water Street redevelopment area (as determined by independent real estate consultants hired by the City of Ypsilanti) due to its difficult topography, the existence of a flooplain area and the difficulty, if not impossibility of establishing an appropriate curb cut for vehicular traffic. The recreation center schemes deal with these challenges both by concentrating the buildable area in a portion smaller than 12 acres and by bringing vehicular access through the curb cuts and streets to be constructed to support the rest of the development.

Unless I’m mistaken, while you were primarily engaged to consider what the rec center might look like, you also spent a good deal of time thinking about the master plan for the entire parcel. I’m curious as to the assumptions you started with. For instance, as you know, the City, given how much we’ve invested, needs to make a certain amount of money back in the way of taxes for this development to make fiscal sense, and I’m wondering to what extent that influenced your work. In other words, I’m curious to what extent you might have worked backwards from that tax revenue dollar amount to determine things like density, and the mix of residential and retail on the site.

One of the exercises we did with the students was a financial analysis to better understand the existing market conditions that will factor into the future Water Street development. For this study, we used available data on land value, site preparation cost estimates, and other real estate indicators. We also studied some of the previous plans for the site to better understand the aspirations of the city and the business community prior to the 2008 crisis. All of the work done, by others, in previous analyses was tremendously useful to establish some basic assumptions that guided some basic attributes of our urban design schemes.

We developed two different scenarios, each with slightly different compositions of residential unit numbers and commercial square footage. Each of the two urban schemes also propose different approaches to public space and access to urban amenities in order to better gain feedback surrounding what would be most valued by the community. From these initial numbers, we decided to “build out” the model that was predicted to be the most profitable. To give you a sense of what these numbers guided, we designed massing strategies (for both the grid and ribbon schemes) to accommodate roughly 400 housing units (ranging from 1 to 3 bedrooms), and a series of commercial components including retail, office and a hotel.

The financial proforma looks at a ten-year period to understand profitability, and gives some ideas of how to create manageable units of development, distribute densities, and capitalize on the frontage to the river (on the south end of the site, as we mentioned earlier, the east edge is a difficult development site) and Michigan Avenue. We assimilated these elements to craft an approach to site that builds on mixed use strategies to ensure a diversity of uses across the site, interspersed with public parks and recreation activity spaces. In these ways, the financial information guided our approach towards the careful design of the public realm to ensure a balance between optimum economic, social and environmental performance.

The site we’re talking about, as you know, is sandwiched in between the very popular Riverside Park and the very underused Waterworks Park. How much time have you spent looking at the way people use those parks (or how they could use those parks), and how has that affected your thinking about the rec center building and the site?

While we did not spend a great deal of time studying Riverside Park and Waterworks Park in particular, both urban approaches recognize the importance of extending the River Street corridor in an urban, pedestrian friendly way in order to allow for the activities north of the site to spill through the site and across the Huron River. In the grid approach, this is accomplished through a proposed boulevard and plaza space along the River’s edge that opens up and constructs a visual connection with Waterworks park. In the ribbon scheme, this is accomplished with a ribbon of trees that extend through the entire site and link with a new bridge crossing and plaza space for the Border to Border Trail.

As for the rec center itself, how big is it, what have you included, and how does it stack up when compared to other rec centers in the area?

Both of the recreation center schemes are approximately 65,000 square feet. Compared with other recreation centers that provide gym and cardio spaces, a track and two pools, it is modest in its size. For comparison’s sake, it is smaller than the Detroit YMCA (100,000 sf), the Spartan Stores YMCA (86,000 sf) and the Ann Arbor YMCA (71,000 sf) while it is larger than the Meri Lou Murray Recreation Center (56,000 sf).

There are, as you know, other design firms that just design and build recreation centers. From what I can tell, they’re typically just dropped into greenfields, like the new Washtenaw Community College Recreation Center, and don’t integrate well with their surroundings, but one would imagine they’re relatively inexpensive, and not terribly risky. Why, in your opinion, is it important, in this instance, to go with something that’s not just “off the shelf”?

The Eastside Recreation Center project deserves a site-specific approach that catalyzes the unique opportunities that it represents. The site requires an specific approach that recognizes the need for a transition between historic and new development and urban and natural systems. A generic approach cannot accomplish this nor can it bring innovative thinking to the level of specificity required of integrated, sustainable design. Furthermore, a generic approach would not necessarily be either less expensive nor less risky due to the amount of site work that would be required to produce a “neutral” tabula rasa and the consequences of constructing a recreation center surrounded by parking and asphalt on such an environmentally sensitive site. Overall, we believe that good architecture, and therefore good urbanism must instead show an appreciation for the complexity of existing conditions along Michigan Avenue and be of this place rather than of “no” place.

Could you tell us how the Border to Border bike trail factored into your design?

In both schemes that we are presenting, incorporating the Border to Border trail has been a prominent design goal. The trail is integrated into the exterior circulation and even weaves under the physical overhang of the building. Both Rec center schemes are conceived of as part of the Border to Border trail, versus remaining autonomous from the recreation center development. Our design proposals enhance the desirability of the trail by serving as attractive destination spots with outdoor activities and outdoor park spaces to gather and enjoy the river setting. We hope that as the site is beautified with parks and civic spaces, that more people will use the trail.

As I understand it, you’ll be holding two public meetings later this week, during which you’ll show these designs, and answering questions… When and where will these meetings be taking place?

The information about the two schemes and the urban approaches will be on display at the SPARK East Business Incubator at 215 W. Michigan Avenue, Ypsilanti between September 26-28, 2012. We will be available for questions and conversation between 3pm and 8pm on Thursday, September 27 and will be giving two presentations, the first at 4pm and a second at 7pm.

What happens next? Who ultimately signs off of the designs? And, assuming they do, then what happens?

This question would be best asked of the Washtenaw County Parks Department, who will be present at the SPARK presentation to address questions that we cannot.

Southeast Michigan doesn’t have much in the way of what you might call cutting edge contemporary architecture. Assuming one of your designs gets built, do you think it’s likely that it could be a cultural draw in perpetuity, as well as being a useful counterpoint to the design tone of the rest of the city?

We truly believe that this building bears a great responsibility of setting the tone for the future development within the Water Street Redevelopment Area and for establishing an expectation for the quality of materials and spaces that contemporary civic life merits.

One last thing… What kinds of materials will you be suggesting?

The projects have developed approaches towards materiality such as relative levels of transparency and layering. The materials that we have represented in the concept designs include glass, steel, brick, powder coated metal panels (sometimes perforated) and landscape materials to construct low maintenance, water-absorbing public plaza spaces.

MARK: First, I’d like to say that I don’t envy the position you’re in. You’ve been Superintendent of the Washtenaw Intermediate School District for little over a year now, and, in that time, you’ve had to deal with a steadily shrinking budget, ballooning legacy costs, a number of issues resulting from aging infrastructure, a significant perception problem, a decreasing enrollment, and a host of political issues that your predecessors never could have imagined. Presently, you’re trying to fend off bankruptcy, and the appointment of Emergency Manager by the State, by further consolidating across the district. The most recent plan, which calls for the merger of Ypsilanti and Willow Run schools, will be on the November ballot. Let’s start there. Why is it imperative, in your opinion, that this merger be approved? And, what are our options if it doesn’t?

SCOTT: Before responding to the question relating to why the merger is imperative, I’d like to clarify a few things relating to your opening comments. The Washtenaw Intermediate School District (WISD) is one of Michigan’s 57 regional educational service agencies created by law in 1962 to help local school districts educate students by making the best use of district resources.

We operate cooperative programs and deliver services that focus on teaching and learning for students in Ann Arbor, Chelsea, Dexter, Lincoln, Manchester, Milan, Saline, Whitmore Lake, Willow Run, Ypsilanti and Washtenaw County Public School Academies.

Our mission is to promote the continuous improvement of achievement for every student while providing high-quality service to our customers through leadership, innovation, and collaboration.

The challenges you outlined above are reflective of the challenges of the Ypsilanti and Willow Run School Districts (which we serve) but are not reflective of the WISD budget situation — we are not on the verge of bankruptcy, we are not suffering from declining enrollment, and we are not in jeopardy of having an Emergency Manager appointed to take over the ISD. Each of the ten public districts in Washtenaw County is an independent entity governed by a Board of Education. WISD does not have any direct authority over the local districts. We exist to provide services and support to them. In June of 2011 WISD was approached by the board presidents and superintendents of the Ypsilanti and Willow Run School Districts and asked to help facilitate a conversation regarding how the districts could do more together.

Turning to your question of why the merger is imperative, let me begin by outlining the two primary challenges faced by both districts that underscore the need to pursue the creation of a new, unified district.

Financial: Both districts have operational deficits. The deficit in the Ypsilanti Public School District is approaching $10 million dollars and the deficit in Willow Run is approximately $2.4 million. Ypsilanti became a deficit district at the end of the 2008-09 school year and Willow Run began running a deficit at the end of the 2005-06 school year. The deficit status of each district requires significant cuts to the budget (In the case of Ypsilanti, for example, the district would be required to reduce its expenditures by more than 25% in order to eliminate the deficit in the next two years and return to a structurally balanced budget. Since more than 85% of the district’s budget is spent on staff salaries and benefits, this means significant layoffs and/or other concessions from the employees). The draconian nature of the cuts that are required to achieve a structurally balanced budget will have a direct and negative impact on the second area of concern:

Student Achievement: Both high schools have been identified as “persistently low achieving” (PLA) which means they are in the bottom 5% of all high schools in Michigan with respect to academic achievement. Each high school is in the process of implementing a redesign plan. Many of the buildings in each district are in the bottom 15% of the State and are at-risk of being labeled persistently low achieving. The academic trends over time indicate that far too many students in the district are not successful academically.

The creation of a new unified school district (by consolidation) presents a unique opportunity to tackle these two fundamental challenges. Many people have asked how combining two failing districts (academically and financially) can result in anything but a larger failing district. Our response has been that this isn’t a simple merger, but rather it represents an opportunity to create something new that will be designed to ensure the students of the newly formed district will be “college and career ready” when they graduate and that the district will be designed in such a way to meet the needs of children from birth through post-secondary education.

In order to create a successful new district, it is necessary to have relief on the time allotted for repaying the accumulated deficit. This is something that has been discussed with the State Superintendent and it is within his statutory authority to grant extensions based on meeting certain criteria. He has made it clear (including in a written communication that was shared with both boards of education in April) that he supports this effort and is willing to work with the districts as they walk down this path. Additionally, the creation of a new district creates an opportunity to ensure efficient use of assets (buildings) and appropriate staffing levels based on current enrollment.

What happens if the merger isn’t approved? The financial crisis is significant. In fact, each district is currently facing the very real prospect of having insufficient funds to meet payroll obligations at some point during the upcoming school year. Because of their financial condition, they are unlikely to be able to borrow funds in order to cover the shortfall. If that were to happen, it would automatically trigger a financial review, which is the first step in the process of appointing an emergency manager (EM) to assume control of the finances of the district. An EM is granted significant authority (including the ability to abrogate collective bargaining agreements, close and sell buildings, layoff or terminate staff, etc.) with the singular objective of returning the district to a structural balance financially. The type of cuts that would be implemented by the EM would most certainly result in the loss of quality instructional staff and continued departure of students from the district, further exacerbating the financial crisis. Local control would be lost.

At the same time, the State has established the Educational Achievement Authority (EAA) which is being given responsibility for operating schools on the persistently low achieving list. The first schools assigned to the EAA were in Detroit, but it is designed to assume control of buildings across the state of Michigan. Each high school is at-risk of being taken over by the EAA (which means that the per-student funding would go to the EAA and the local district wouldn’t have any control of the programs operating in the high school).

In both cases, the appointment of an Emergency Manager or an Education Achievement Authority take over of buildings on the PLA list, local control is lost.

At the end of the day, the key question to ask is whether it is possible for Ypsilanti and Willow Run to remain independent school districts. Given the current trajectory (declining enrollment, increasing deficits, poor academic achievement), the answer to that question is no. The cuts required to balance the budget will result in driving more students from the district and compromising any effort to improve achievement. This is a death spiral. The only viable option going forward is to pursue consolidation of the districts and work diligently to create a new district that is both financially viable and designed to raise the level of achievement by implementing a 21st century, world-class education.

MARK: Thank you for the clarification… I should have been more clear. It’s not the entire Washtenaw Intermediate School District that is failing, just the poorer, predominantly non-white schools for which you are responsible… With that in mind, I’m curious as to why a decision was made to just merge these two failing school systems, and not all of the schools within the WISD. Wouldn’t it stand to reason that if all of our schools were consolidated under one authority that it might better help to offset the challenges faced by Ypsilanti and Willow Run, which clearly don’t have the tax base necessary to be successful? I realize such a move would be unlikely, given that these individual districts would have to vote to make it so, but I’m curious as to whether it’s even been considered, as we have so many relatively well-funded, successful districts within the WISD portfolio.

SCOTT: The decision to pursue consolidation with these two districts is a product of the combined financial and academic challenges resulting from decisions (internal and external) that have been made during the course of the past decade. You are correct when you point out a consolidation of all the districts would require a vote of support in each community. I would also agree that it would be unlikely given that most of the other districts are not operating a deficit budget and are achieving at higher levels. All ten districts have engaged in conversations about shared services where economies of scale can be achieved to free up more funding to support direct educational programs, and many shared services are currently being implemented. The situation in Ypsilanti and Willow Run has progressed to the point where shared services alone do not produce the kind of savings necessary to restore each district to financial viability. Years ago, in my opinion, the trajectory could have been changed with more immediate action on both the financial and achievement front.

MARK: How exactly would the education of our children be improved by consolidation? I realize that there are economies of scale to be had, which make such an arrangement more attractive from a business perspective, but how, exactly, does it benefit our children? In what ways, specifically, can we expect to see the educational experiences of our children improve?

SCOTT: It is important to move away from a traditional concept of school as we envision a new school district. Typically when we think of school we think of kindergarten through twelfth grade. What we know based on solid research is that early childhood experiences have a significant impact on the likelihood of academic success during the traditional school years. We cannot ignore what happens to children and families from birth through kindergarten entry, so the new school system will be designed to create meaningful supports for young children and their families. While we have quality pre-school programs for children from low income families available in the area (Head Start and the Great Start Readiness Program, for example), much more needs to be done to ensure each child enters kindergarten ready to succeed.

There is a substantial body of research available with respect to what works in schools. There are many districts across the country that are similar to Ypsilanti/Willow Run demographically, but where the students are achieving at a much higher level. Implementing these research-based strategies will help ensure we break the cycle of low expectations and low achievement.

One of the most significant challenges is the outdated structure of schooling. We operate on an agrarian calendar, even though most students are not needed on the farms in the summer any longer. We know that learning loss (regression) is significant during the summer break (particularly for children in low-income families) and yet students are only required to attend school for about 168 days in these two districts and then they are given an extended break when we know it compromises their ability to succeed in school.

Another problem is the way in which students are moved through the system based on age and having completed another year of school. In some cases students are retained and required to repeat another year (research shows this is not a successful strategy), and in other cases, students are simply moved forward without having mastered the core academic requirements. Our system is one where time is the constant and learning is the variable. What we need is a system where learning is the constant and time is the variable. Some students can move through the curriculum more quickly and they shouldn’t be required to meet seat-time expectations if they can demonstrate mastery; others require more time to learn the material.

The new school system can be designed to be responsive to the different learning styles and rates of learning represented by a diverse student population. High expectations for all students should never be compromised because we are trying to put too much into a 168-day school year. There has to be a fundamental restructuring of how school is delivered.

Another thing we know is that learning isn’t confined to the hours of 7:30-2:30 (typical high school schedule) or 9-4 (elementary) and it isn’t confined to what happens within the four walls of a school building. In a new system, flexibility can be built into the schedule and students can be encouraged to participate in project-based and/or place-based learning opportunities that take advantage of the many resources in the larger community.

MARK: Will finances allow for a year-round system, which keeps students in school for a significantly longer period of time, like that which you’ve described?

SCOTT: The new school district will likely have a revenue line of $70 million (based on current enrollment figures and funding from both the State and Federal Government). I believe it is possible to implement a year-round system and maintain a viable budget, but it does require revisiting other ways in which resources have been used in the past.

MARK: I recently wrote a piece critical of the WISD for what I saw as poor marketing job when it came to selling the merger to Ypsilanti families. My criticism, in a nutshell, was that you missed the opportunity to position this as an real opportunity for our schools to break new ground, and do something truly visionary, instead focusing primarily on the ballot initiative and why it was crucial that we support it, in order to fend off a State takeover and preserve local control. My fear, as I expressed in the article, was that, while you might be successful in passing the merger, I didn’t think that you’d sufficiently laid the groundwork to bring people back to the district. I concluded with, “The folks in charge needed to look at the big picture, and not just the immediate threat.” I’m assuming you have a different take on this.

SCOTT: I believe that your comments were made without truly understanding the process we are currently engaged in with respect to developing a vision for a new unified school system. We have held six visioning sessions (with more than 100 citizens representing a cross-sector of the Ypsilanti and Willow Run communities who have participated). These sessions were designed to gather input on what people value in the community and to articulate their aspirations with respect to a new, unified system. We have encouraged as many people as possible to participate in these sessions and if you had been able to attend one of the sessions, you would have noticed that we indeed have discussed the importance of moving beyond a merger “in order to fend off a State take-over and preserve local control” toward a clear and compelling vision of a new system that captures the hopes and aspirations of the community for the creation of something that is truly exceptional.

Some have argued that we are moving too quickly, but the nature of the crisis doesn’t allow for a more drawn out process. The window for action in order to avoid an imposed solution (EM or EAA) is very narrow indeed. The initial design work represents the broad parameters of what the new district will look like. An analogy that helps illustrate this is when a district decides to pursue approval for constructing a new facility. At the beginning, many community conversations are held to ascertain what people want to see in the new building. The architects develop a schematic design that captures the general features and characteristics of the building. Then the question is put before the voters. Subsequent to the vote, the architects begin the work of developing detailed design drawings that are converted into the actual blueprint and construction documents. The cost involved in developing detailed design prior to receiving voter approval is cost-prohibitive and extraordinarily time-consuming. The focus at the outset of this process is to gather enough input in order to articulate the broad parameters of what the new district will look like. If the vote is approved, work will begin immediately on the specific details that are consistent with the broad parameters that were outlined in the conversations with the community.

MARK: As I’m sure you are aware, the Emergency Manager of Muskegon Heights recently announced that they would be transitioning immediately to an “all-charter” system. What do you say to parents who look at that and draw the
conclusion that this is what lies ahead for all of us? As I know that you’re dependent upon the State for your funding, I don’t expect you to come out, on the record, and say that the endgame of Republicans in Lansing is to eliminate public education as we know it, replacing it with a system of for-profit education companies, but I know that you must hear from parents, “Why should I put my kids in public school, when the trajectory is clear?” What do you tell those people?

SCOTT: I think it is important to look at Muskegon Heights as an example of what could happen to Ypsilanti and Willow Run if the consolidation doesn’t take place. There aren’t many options available with districts whose deficits are as large as the ones faced by these two districts. Muskegon Heights is at a point of no return and so the
solution being proposed is one that could be replicated in other parts of the state.

I had an opportunity to speak with the superintendent of the Muskegon ISD and he spoke very directly about doing whatever we could to avoid the Muskegon Heights scenario. For our community, it isn’t too late. We can avoid the fate of a Muskegon Heights if we take advantage of the opportunity to create a new school system.

MARK: Just so I’m clear, while we’re talking about Ypsi and Willow Run, as they’re the furthest along on this continuum, isn’t it true that the other districts in the County are also moving in this direction? What I mean to say is, there’s an underlying structural issue here that’s bigger than just these two districts, right? I understand the desire to address the immediate problem, but I’m curious as to what is being done at the level above that. While we’re attempting to keep things afloat in the short term, are we also fighting the State for increased funding, and substantial health care reform, which could significantly drive down the costs associated with our retirees?

SCOTT: There are significant structural funding issues at the State level. The current conversation related to retirement reform is one key area. Effective July 1st, school districts are paying 27.37% of every payroll dollar to support the retirement system (it was 24.46% last year). This increase results in an additional $200 per student for each district in Washtenaw County that is not available to support education programs and services. There have been attempts in both the House and Senate to reform the system, but as of now we still don’t have an agreement. There is one session day scheduled this month (Wednesday the 18th) and according to my sources, legislators are working diligently to identify a compromise that will be acceptable to members of the House, Senate and administration. I would point out that local school boards don’t have discretion over the rate that is paid… it is set by the State. We
desperately need the system to be reformed.

The Governor pledged to study the way in which schools are funded and is in the process of convening a group to study and propose a significant re-write of the School Aid Act. While we can point to the ways in which the State has disinvested in education during the past decade, fundamental reform needs to ensure that we have a model in place the maximizes the use of each taxpayer dollar and results in improved academic outcomes.

MARK: As much as I’d like to blame everything on the State, and their insistence upon cutting taxes, and defuding public education, I think you’d agree that some of the blame lies with us, right? Can you speak a bit about the non-funding-related issues that need to be addressed, specifically in our high schools?

SCOTT: As you know, both high schools are on the “persistently low achieving” list which means they are in the bottom 5% of all high schools in the State. Each high school is in the process of implementing a redesign plan with the aim of improving student achievement. They are in the initial phases of implementation and so it is too early to determine the likelihood of success, although there have been some positive indicators initially. The real challenge, in my estimation, is to create an educational culture and environment where students feel and are safe, where they are challenged with high expectations, and where the educational programming is relevant.

MARK: Instead of formal consolidation, have you considered the possibility of just allowing Willow Run schools to close and encouraging their students to attend Ypsi schools, which would add a great deal of money to our coffers? Perhaps I’m missing something, but, by doing it this way, wouldn’t you not only avoid the necessity of a costly ballot initiative, but also not have to worry about negotiating a new per-pupil reimbursement rate with the State (given that the Ypsi rate is currently about $600 more per student than in Willow Run)? At least, I believe, as it currently stands, Willow Run students, if they transfer to Ypsi, are reimbursed at the higher rate. Is that correct?

SCOTT: The question is more complicated than you’ve stated here. First, it is important to correct misinformation that has been circulated in the community. The per-pupil amount each district receives from the state is as follows: Ypsilanti: $7513 and Willow Run: $7309. The difference is $204 more per student in Ypsilanti than in Willow Run. Given that the enrollment in Willow Run is just above 1600 students, this represents additional funding of a little more than $325,000 if the students were funded at the Ypsilanti rate. While not insignificant, it doesn’t represent a solution to the much greater financial challenges faced by both districts. The mechanism the state has in
place would result in a blended foundation amount designed to ensure the new district received funding equivalent to what each district received individually. This disincentive has been discussed with key policymakers in Lansing and they understand the importance of removing this barrier to consolidation.

Secondly, by placing the question on the ballot in November the districts avoid a “costly ballot initiative” because it is at a time when an election has already been scheduled. Finally, if students from Willow Run enroll in Ypsilanti through schools of choice, Ypsilanti only receives the Willow Run foundation grant. The way school of choice funding works is that students coming from another district generate a foundation grant that is the lower of their resident district foundation grant or that of the new district. If a student who resides in Ann Arbor enrolls in Ypsilanti, the district does not receive the Ann Arbor foundation grant (which is higher than Ypsilanti’s) but rather they receive the
Ypsilanti grant.

MARK: While I know that good things are happening within our high schools, and while I hate to draw conclusions based upon isolated events, I have to tell you that I was incredibly troubled last year by the near-fatal stabbing of a 17 year old Ypsi High student. It wasn’t so much that fact that she was stabbed repeatedly on school property, by a fellow student, who had apparently been told that he’d gotten her pregnant, but the fact that she later, according to reports, had to change schools due to the harassment of fellow students. It would seem that they were angry that she’d “snitched” on her assailant, a popular 17 year old by the name of Cortae Diaz Kelly. I can accept that there are random acts of violence that happen in the world, and that occasionally there are bad people who do monstrous things, but it really bothered me to hear that, after surviving this horrific attack, this young woman was subjected to ridicule by her classmates. That indicates to me there’s something really wrong at a fundamental level. Again, I know that this isn’t reflective of the entire high school, and that it happened well over a year ago, but I’d like to hear what specifically is being done to address the culture within our high schools, and what new methods have been implemented to deal with discipline issues, etc.

SCOTT:The issue of school culture and climate is absolutely paramount when talking about what needs to change in order to increase student achievement. I would suggest that a more specific response with respect to what is being done currently be provided by the administrators in the Ypsilanti School District since they are the ones working directly on this challenge (remember, WISD is facilitating the conversation about creating a new, unified school system).

MARK: You’ve taken some heat recently for contracting with an out-of-state consulting firm, Lead and Learn, which is owned by the textbook company Houghton Mifflin, to draft a new curriculum for the merged district? Some are arguing that the $40,000 price tag is excessive, and that we would have been better served to work with educators knowledgeable about our community. How do you respond?

SCOTT: I appreciate the opportunity to set the record straight on this topic. First, although Lead and Learn is owned by Houghton Mifflin, they are not primarily textbook authors. They are leaders in education reform and implementing research-based practices that result in higher levels of achievement, especially for students in poverty and in communities with demographics similar to ours. To assert we are hiring a textbook company to develop curriculum is to fundamentally misunderstand the nature of the consulting agreement and why we selected Lead and Learn. They will be facilitating the design process and bringing knowledge of strategies that have worked in other communities across the country. Their engagement is designed to ensure we don’t get mired in thinking only about possibilities that have been experienced locally and to challenge us to really examine research that works.

We recognize the value and importance of working with other knowledgeable experts in the area and fully intend to work with them as the detail design work is completed and we move toward implementation. Many times, having an outside company facilitate a conversation allows those experts to be fully engaged participants in the process and we’ve invited many of them to participate in next week’s two-day session.

The price tag for the consulting work is $34,100 and we have secured funds from United Way of Washtenaw County, Eastern Leaders Group, and the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation-Ypsilanti Area Community Fund, along with Eastern Michigan, to help underwrite the cost.

MARK: In a recent article on my site, an Ypsi parent by the name of Maria Cotera outlined a wish list of things that she would like to see going forward. If I could, I’d like to ask for your thoughts on each item.

SCOTT: I will provide brief responses below, but want to say that in general, these are the kinds of things we envision will be included in a new unified school district.

MARK: Small high school environments (no more than 500).

SCOTT: We have already started implementing this through the secondary options programs including: New Tech at Ardis and the New Tech at Willow Run; Washtenaw International High School, the Early College Alliance at EMU. The redesign work at Ypsilanti High School also recognized this as an important component.

MARK: Small middle school environments (no more than 500).

SCOTT: This is also something that is being addressed currently in Ypsilanti with the STEMTech middle school model. I would suggest that we shouldn’t assume that the redesign has to only have traditional middle school options. Many places have gone to a K-8 structure with tremendous success and I believe it is important to be open to these ideas.

MARK: Small Elementary school environments (no more than 300).

SCOTT: This can be cost-prohibitive and I would suggest looking at the research to determine whether the 300 number is arbitrary. In many cases, it isn’t about the size of the school, but rather about the culture, and structure of the programming.

MARK: Project-based learning opportunities.

SCOTT: This is important and is currently being done in some areas, but could become more robust and engage the community in more specific ways.

MARK: Much greater, and more coordinated involvement of U of M and EMU across the District.

SCOTT: It would be a missed opportunity if we didn’t take advantage of our university partners, and I would also include WCC in the mix.

MARK: Civic/Community Engagement as a CORE VALUE (Children should have structured opportunities to contribute to their school community and the broader community). These might include volunteer programs, beautification opportunities, community blogging, etc). Their intellectual work should be tied to transforming our community.

SCOTT: Absolutely.

MARK: Sustainability as a CORE VALUE – this should be incorporated into curricular, civic engagement, and enrichments programs.

SCOTT: This is a timely and important topic.

MARK: All buildings should adopt a sustainability code.

SCOTT: When I was a local school district superintendent, we constructed a new High School that achieved Silver-level LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certification. I believe this is a worthwhile goal, although there are additional cost associated with reaching these standards.

MARK: All buildings should have community gardens, and connected curricular (math, science, social studies) and enrichment programs that teach students about stewardship, ecology, sustainable agriculture and food justice.

SCOTT: An urban agriculture program would be ideal. I think this is one option, but wouldn’t limit the ways to connect in this way only to urban agriculture. It is an area of growing interest and we have outstanding community resources to help implement this in our schools.

MARK: Social Justice curriculum beginning at the Middle School and continuing through High School. We need to instill the idea that knowledge can be a tool for social justice and not just something they must acquire through memorization and assessment regimes.

SCOTT: This suggestion, as well as several of the others, need to be part of the conversation relating to how/when/why they should be incorporated in the design of the new district. The key point is that these decisions need to be made in conversation with the community, but it really only makes sense to do this detailed design work once the
voters have authorized the merger.

MARK: An Enrichment Director who can coordinate enrichment programs and university partnerships across the District.

SCOTT: This can be structured in a number of ways, but reinforces the comment above related to connecting with our university partners and others in the community.

MARK: An Every Student College Bound program beginning at thee early grades (2nd?). I know that some say that not all students are destined for a college degree, but shouldn’t it be an option that they can think about from the time they start their structured learning? I often wonder how many of those students who are supposedly “not destined for college” just haven’t been exposed to the idea from a very young age?

SCOTT: The framing conversation for the new unified district is from birth through post-secondary, or cradle to career. We absolutely believe we should design a system that will enable all students to be successful in their post-secondary endeavors, not just college, but also the trades, military, etc.

MARK: Tiered mentorship programs (College students mentor high schoolers, high schoolers mentor junior high kids, junior high kids mentor elementary kids).

SCOTT: Good concepts.

MARK: Discipline – implement a restorative justice program (Student Court).

SCOTT: This is a critical component in creating the right kind of school culture and climate, but also
requires significant discussion so people understand what it really means.

MARK: We should create administrative structures at the High School level that include student voices and ideas.

SCOTT: Student voice is very important and should be included as a key component of the design of the new district.

MARK: Getting back to my earlier comment about how we might win this battle but lose the war, I’m curious as to your thoughts on the following comment, which was left on my site by a reader named Edward. “If I’m not mistaken, we lost more money as a result of the closing of Chapelle, due to the number of families that pulled their kids out of the district, than we saved from closing the school in the first place. That, to me, is a good analogy of where we are today. We make cut after cut, in hopes of balancing the budget, but all that we’re doing in actuality is digging our hole deeper. More kids leave the system, we lose the money that they would have brought along with them, the district gets poorer, and more kids drop out as a result.” Specifically, I’d like to know if you agree with this assessment concerning Chapelle. (I know that it’s difficult to prove a causal link between school closures and enrollment declines, but, given the dips in enrollment which we’ve experienced following school closures, there would seem, at least to me, to be some correlation.) Was the closing of the school, in retrospect, a mistake? Is it true that we lost more money, due to former Chapelle students being pulled from the district, that we saved from closing the school? And, if so, is that something you took into consideration before announcing the decision to close Willow Run High School?

SCOTT: I am not in a position to comment on Chapelle since I wasn’t in the community at the time the decision was made. In response to a previous question I commented on the “death spiral.” There is no question that many times the decisions that are made to meet budget targets have the effect of driving more students and parents out of the district leading to greater financial challenges. That is the essence of the problem here. Without hitting the reset button, the options available all have the impact of driving more people away. The opportunity we have now is to create
something new and sustainable.

MARK: Clearly the district would benefit from greater parental involvement. How do we make that happen?

SCOTT: There are a number of ways to do this, but I believe we have to start early (birth and early childhood) and continue to find ways to make parent participation easier. Scheduling opportunities when parents might not be working, creating friendly environments, valuing their voice in the process are just some ways we can accommodate and embrace parent involvement. I would take it a step further and suggest that what we really want is a partnership with parents as it relates to student success. There is a shared responsibility for successful outcomes when schools and families come together intentionally.

]]> http://markmaynard.com/2012/07/wisd-superintendent-scott-menzel-on-the-proposed-merger-of-the-ypsilanti-and-willow-run-school-districts/feed/ 10 http://markmaynard.com/2012/07/two-frenchies-on-what-they-love-about-detroits-do-it-ourselves-culture/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=two-frenchies-on-what-they-love-about-detroits-do-it-ourselves-culture http://markmaynard.com/2012/07/two-frenchies-on-what-they-love-about-detroits-do-it-ourselves-culture/#comments Fri, 13 Jul 2012 04:19:15 +0000 Mark http://markmaynard.com/?p=19990 A few months ago, I received a nice note from two French filmmakers, who, for some reason, had stumbled across my site and liked it. Their names were Nora Mandray and Hélène Bienvenu, and, as I’d come to learn over the course of subsequent emails, they had been living in the the area for some time, working on a documentary about the resiliency of the people of Detroit. I’d been wanting to interview them for quite a while about their work, but didn’t have an opportunity until just recently. You’ll find our exchange below, but, first, here’s a bit of background.

Nora and Hélène met while undergraduates at the Paris Institute of Political Studies, where they bonded over an interest in Poland. In 2009, the two shot their first “real” documentary together in a small Polish town near the Czech and German borders. Soon afterward, Nora left for the United States, to study filmmaking at UCLA, as a Fulbright scholar. Meanwhile, Hélène worked as a journalist, covering Central Europe. (She eventually settled down in Hungary, working as a foreign correspondent for the daily French newspaper La Croix.) While apart, however, the two continued to collaborate, planning their next film, which they thought would be a documentary on “urban utopias.” They sought money to get the project off the ground, and gained some traction with a grant from the City of Paris in 2009. Then, later that year, thanks to an Arthur K. Peters Memorial Travel Grant, Nora visited Detroit for the first time. It was there that the vision crystalized, and, in 2011, the two received a grant from the French Film Institute (Centre National de la Cinématographie) to create a documentary on the community-driven rebirth of Detroit. And, they’ve been working on it for the past year. The project goes by they name, Detroit je t’aime, and you can find out more at Kickstarter.

MARK: Would I be correct in assuming that you feel as though Detroit may serve, in some way, as a model for the rest of the world, as resources everywhere begin to constrict, communities re-localize, and government services become less dependable?

NORA: Detroit gives a clue as to where the Western civilization is going. Post-industrial societies are still looking for a model to follow. We believe that what some Detroiters have built in terms of self-reliant communities and DIY culture is an example for anybody else, anywhere else in the world. We’re thinking of urban farming, community-oriented bike shops, makerspaces, time banks, the crowdfunding “soups,” etc.

MARK: So, Detroit, in your eyes is a model for grass roots-driven, community-based, radical sustainability?

HELENE: We know a young French family who considered moving to Detroit with their kids after reading our blog… We’re aware that Detroit at large is facing many challenges, and everybody in the city isn’t necessarily trying to be “the change they want to see in the world.” But the efforts that are actually put into saving the city have constantly blown our minds. A place like Recycle Here, for example, offers many opportunities to practice a green lifestyle (while having lots of fun) — it’s a totally unique place where people from all walks of life come together. We’d love to see more places like that in other cities!

MARK: You are, of course, not the only foreign filmmakers who have taken an interest in Detroit. It seems that folks from all over the world are interested in coming to Michigan and capturing on film the parable of Detroit. Those of us in the area often refer to such work as “ruin porn,” which is a phrase I’m sure you’re familiar with.

NORA: Yes, we even wrote a blog post about it.

MARK: For those folks in the audience who aren’t likely to follow the link to your post, can you summarize your thoughts on the genre.

HELENE: For us, ruin porn is to the 21st century what Romantism was to the 19th century. If you look at Caspar David Friedrich’s painting, there’s an uncanny resemblance to “ruin porn” photography. The fact is, you can’t ignore the ruins in Detroit. Most of them are just really beautiful old buildings. They’re part of the landscape. For sure, the tourist who shows up at the Packard Plant with a camera on a Saturday morning will make ruin porn pics, that might look great on Flickr. The actual artist, who wants to capture a sign of our times, will come with the proper lens and will snap a shot at the right time of day. That’s what Romain Meffre and Yves Marchand did. We think that, in their own way, they paid tribute to Detroit’s history. When you look at their pictures, you can’t help but marvel about the past, and question today’s world.

NORA: We personally don’t want to focus on the ruins in Detroit because we want to tell another story about the city. As filmmakers, we use parables all the time to tell universal stories, be it in Detroit or anywhere else in the world. Detroit’s metaphor is what you want it to be. Some see the Motor City as a metaphor for hope, others as a metaphor for the failure of capitalism… For us it’s a metaphor for human ingenuity.

MARK: Would you agree that many in your profession are just interested in documenting the decline of America, as illustrated so clearly in Detroit, and not the heroic efforts being undertaken on the part of many to recreate the City? Do these discussions take place between filmmakers?

NORA: We can’t speak for other filmmakers. Ken Burns says that a great story is “1+1=3” because we just live in an irrational world. It happens that Detroit’s landscape is very irrational: you gotta admit that the decline of Detroit in itself is a “great story.” It requires little effort to come up with a narrative telling the Motor City’s rise and fall. However, finding a hero, meaning the right protagonist for your story, whom you’ll have to follow for a couple of months, if not a full year, is a different kind of commitment. But, at the end of the day, we believe that you have to judge the film, not the person who made it.

MARK: Your objective, as I understand it, when you first came to Detroit, was to create a film about “urban utopias,” with Detroit being one stop among many. Since then, however, it would appear as though your focus has narrowed a bit, with the entire film being about Detroit. Is that correct, and, if so, why? What did you find in Detroit that made you think that an entire documentary was called for?

HELENE: Urban utopias are a huge theme, and just sound very expensive when you work in a low-budget situation like we do. We needed a “point of view” to tell a universal story. During our research, we found that urban farming was often cited as the utopia of the 21st century — and Detroit has been at the “avant-garde” of that movement for many years now. Then, coming to Detroit, we realized that urban farming was part of a larger movement: the DIY, or rather the “DIO” (Do It Ourselves!). When we talk about urban utopia, we don’t think of something impossible, instead we mean the idea of a new society, built on new grounds in hopes of achieving harmony. We do still see this happening in Detroit. It’s definitely in the background of the stories we’ve chosen to tell. The bike shop Fender Bender, operated by women and LGBT people, for example, is one of the focuses of our film. They bring strong and rather revolutionary ideas to the “Motor City.”

MARK: Would I be correct to assume that there will be an English language version of your film, once it’s completed, as well as a French language version? And, if there are two versions, I’m curious as to whether the only difference between the two will be the language of narration. In other words, I’m curious to know if you think that American and French audiences want something different in a documentary about Detroit, and, if so, whether the film will have to be structurally different for those distinct audiences.

HELENE: Our blog itself has been 100% bilingual from the start. Today, half of our “fans” on Facebook are American, and half are French. Detroit definitely fascinates overseas! There’ll be French subtitles available, and maybe even other languages too, depending on the success of our project. The story will be the same for each side. We’ve met with Americans who knew less about Detroit than some French people who are passionate about the D! Again, what we’re trying to do here is to tell a universal story that can speak to anybody in the world who’s interested in DIY culture as well as urban renewal and sustainability.

MARK: How much time have you spent in Detroit? How much film have you shot in that time? And how many people have you spoken with?

NORA: Helene stayed for the first three months to assist with the research. I stayed on, from last August, and will be in Detroit until October 1st. And I’ve been filming since the beginning. The bulk of the production has been happening since this Spring, and will last until the end of September. Since the research period, we’ve spoken with a countless number of people… over 300, at least — but we don’t interview everybody! The dialogue keeps on going today through our blog.

MARK: Back to urban utopias… Now that you’ve been here for a while, do you think that Detroit qualifies as one? Has your opinion changed at all over time?

NORA: It definitely has elements of it… “pockets” of utopia. We like to say it’s a desert, and, if you look for them, you’ll find great oases.

MARK: You’ve just launched a Kickstarter campaign. How much are you looking to raise, and what will the money be used for?

HELENE: We had been financing our film ourselves for the past few months, but, in order to finish it in a professional fashion, we’re looking to raise $25,000 by July 30th. The money will help complete the film production (we need to hire a DP and a sound mixer for specific scenes), and will especially cover the post-production (we’ll have an editor come on board, and we’ll also hire a crew to build our interactive website). As of today, we’ve secured 26% of our goal through Kickstarter, which means that we still have a long way to go!

MARK: As I’m sure you are aware, there is, for some inexplicable reason, a bizarre anti-French sentiment shared by many on America’s far right…

NORA: (Laughs) Old story! We have a maybe stronger anti-American sentiment in France!

MARK: I’m curious as to what you make of it, and whether or not you’ve encountered any of it first-hand while in Michigan.

NORA: Well, I’m not sure what their argument is… Are we arrogant, or trying to rule the world? We never had to face such a reaction in Michigan. On the contrary. We’ve always been treated very well and respectfully. We love when Detroit activists question French policies! We also discovered there are a couple of Frenchies in Detroit and around. See what PRI has released recently. And Detroit was a French city after all… Not everybody knows about it, but those who do, did ask us how to pronounce the original street names, like Beaubien, Lafayette, etc.

MARK: Can you give us a few examples of Detroit’s so-called “collaborative economy” that you will be highlighting in the film?

NORA: Fender Bender is a huge one as they’re working to start a bike lending library – the first of its kind in Detroit. We’re also focusing on an urban farmer and a hacker, who’s building a free wi-fi network in his neighborhood.

MARK: I’ve heard you both describe this film as “interactive.” In fact, if I’m not mistaken, I believe I’ve read that the film will somehow incorporate a “DIY Toolbox,” which will assist viewers in launching their own projects in this newly evolving collaborative economy of ours. I like the idea, but I’m having a hard time envisioning what that might look like. What exactly do you have in mind?

HELENE It means that our audience will be able to make its own story. Interactive films mix traditional storytelling with video games and social networks. At anytime, a “DIY toolbox” will be available in the corner of the screen. The “DIY Toolbox” will adapt itself to the story: guidelines and tools will suggest you to start similar projects depending on the story that will be unraveling on the screen (be it a community garden, basic bike repairs, or an LED light project.)

MARK: In poking around the internet, I found the following quote from you, Nora. “At a time of economic crisis, there’s no other place to look than Detroit. Detroiters have this urge to build the society of tomorrow – based on social, racial, food, environmental and digital justice.” I’m not trying to be confrontational, but is there really no place but Detroit to look? Are there not lessons to be learned elsewhere?

NORA: There are, of course, many other examples to explore and follow! We chose to focus on Detroit for all the reasons we’ve already outlined. We’ve both lived in and traveled to several different cities around the world, but there’s nothing like Detroit. The city also works as a great place to tell stories largely because of the car industry and the music history: the D already exists in people’s imagination around the world. Now, Detroit is less known for its grassroots initiatives. This is what we want to show… We want Detroit je t’aime to be a platform where people will exchange ideas and tips on the theme of DIY, urban renewal and sustainability.

MARK: While I agree with you that Detroit is, in a sense… like it or not… the world’s incubator, and feel as though there’s much to be learned from what’s happening there now, I think it’s probably worth noting that there are still significant barriers still in place. To name just a few, we have huge problems in the areas of education, poverty, crime, corruption and murder. And, I’m afraid that many of the people who are doing great work in Detroit may, as a result of this, eventually burn out and leave. I’m curious as to whether you saw any signs of this as you traveled through the city, talking with people. How precarious, in your opinion, is this movement, if at all?

NORA: In the past few months, I’ve had a handgun pointed at my dog, my house was almost broken into, and I saw a guy running after another guy who had apparently just stolen his bike. I’ve heard gun shots in different areas of the city. I’ve heard and read many “horror stories.” I’m more than aware that there are still a lot of significant barriers here. If you look around you can see that the city is shrinking down no matter what. It was interesting to follow the debate around the emergency manager taking over the city… We met a lot of young Detroiters who just want to leave and explore other places, but we’ve also met a lot of Detroiters who “came back” or who wanted to “give back” to their city. Last November, a “truth and reconciliation committee” was elected to work on the issues of racism in the city… A lot of work is being done, and of course it will take time. The movement that’s happening now in terms of rebuilding the city might be temporary, but no matter what, we think it’s impacting change, at a micro-level, and it’s inspiring to each and every Detroiter. What we’re really wary of is to see grassroots initiatives being turned into larger, corporate models — it’s on the verge of happening with urban farming. That would be the end of it, probably.

MARK: What do you want the people of France, in particular, to know about Detroit?

HELENE: We want to inspire our French audience to start DIY (and green) projects similar to what’s happening in Detroit. We believe this is what creates community, bonds people together and moves society forward. Such initiatives exist in France, but they’re not necessarily connected with a reflection on the city like it is in Detroit. Here people question their role in the community and how they can effectively impact change in their city. This is a unique approach that doesn’t exist at the same level in Europe.

MARK: Are you aware of any other recent initiatives by the French in Detroit? I believe I heard some time ago, from friends in Hamtramck, that a European art school had purchased a few homes in the city, which the intention of turning them into design laboratories. I believe, in that instance, it was a university in Denmark, but I’m wondering if there might be French initiatives afoot.

HELENE: No, sorry, we’ve been in Hamtramck a couple of times, but we don’t know about that. By “the French” do you mean French people or French institutions? As said previously we do know Frenchies living in the D. We know musicians, photographers… mostly an artist crowd. But also some scientists who work at Wayne State University! All of them definitely have the same opinion on the city as we do.

MARK: While you’ve been in Detroit, you’ve also been writing about the City for French magazines such as Glamour Magazine, Usbek & Rica and Les Inrockuptibles. I’m curious as to what you wrote about, and how those article were received.

HELENE: For Usbek & Rica and Les Inrockuptibles it was very similar to the spirit of our documentary: we talked about Detroit as a laboratory of DIY culture. We interviewed Grace Lee Boggs for that article specifically, among others. For Les Inrocks we covered the fascinating issue of digital justice in view of the Allied Media conference that recently took place. In both places, we provided visual and written portraits of relevant Detroit makers. For Glamour, we wrote about the “generation Y”, the young doers who move to Detroit from other American cities in order to get involved in a community at a deeper level. After each article got published, we received dozens of email and comments of people who had read them and wanted to get in touch to learn more, and even, visit (or move!) to Detroit.

And, here is their Kickstarter video. If, after watching it, you’d like to make a contribution, just click here.

[note: All photos accompanying this piece were by Nora. They appear with her permission, and they can be found, along with many others, on the Detroit je t'aime Flickr site.]

]]> http://markmaynard.com/2012/07/two-frenchies-on-what-they-love-about-detroits-do-it-ourselves-culture/feed/ 21 http://markmaynard.com/2012/07/operation-foggy-monocle/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=operation-foggy-monocle http://markmaynard.com/2012/07/operation-foggy-monocle/#comments Mon, 09 Jul 2012 02:29:09 +0000 Mark http://markmaynard.com/?p=19931 In the wake of a global warming-related rant that I posted a few days ago, it occurred to me that nothing is likely to change, at least not in a substantive way, until the men at the top begin to feel the same oppressive, painfully searing heat that the rest of us have been feeling these past several days. So, with that in mind, I have a suggestion to make.

I don’t know how possible such undertaking would be, and I’m certainly not the man to see it through to fruition, but I thought that I’d offer the idea up, just in case someone out there had the knowledge, interest and network to pull it off.

I should conclude by saying that this, obviously, was just said in jest. I would never suggest that anyone damage private property, even if the future of the entire planet were at stake… I must say, though, that I really like the idea of thousands of people collaborating to ensure that the CEOs of the world’s largest corporations can never get cool, wherever they might go. I know it would be a massive undertaking, but it’s a beautiful idea, isn’t it?

]]> http://markmaynard.com/2012/07/operation-foggy-monocle/feed/ 10 http://markmaynard.com/2012/06/balle-founder-judy-wicks-on-the-origins-of-urban-outfitters-the-birth-of-the-localist-movement-and-the-necessity-of-local-ownership/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=balle-founder-judy-wicks-on-the-origins-of-urban-outfitters-the-birth-of-the-localist-movement-and-the-necessity-of-local-ownership http://markmaynard.com/2012/06/balle-founder-judy-wicks-on-the-origins-of-urban-outfitters-the-birth-of-the-localist-movement-and-the-necessity-of-local-ownership/#comments Sat, 23 Jun 2012 22:08:46 +0000 Mark http://markmaynard.com/?p=19752 Recently, while in Grand Rapids, I had the occasion to meet Judy Wicks, the founder of the White Dog Cafe in Philadelphia, and the woman who, ten years ago, brought the Business Alliance for Living Local Economies (BALLE) into being. Since the meeting, we’ve been chatting by way of email… Here’s the interview.

MARK: Having just returned from the BALLE conference, I wanted to ask you a few questions about the organization, how it got started, and where you see the localist movement headed. Before we talk about BALLE, though, I was wondering if you could tell me a bit about your restaurant in Philadelphia, White Dog Cafe, and why you decided to open it 1983. Did you open it with the intention of pushing the envelope with regard to sustainability and ethical business practices, or did those ideas just evolve naturally over time?

JUDY: When I opened the White Dog Cafe on the first floor of my house, in 1983, I had never heard of sustainability or even socially responsible business. I just wanted to have a warm gathering place serving simple American food, where people could gather for friendship and good conversation. My ideas about business developed over time. My business was my teacher and became my vehicle for bringing social change.

MARK: I’ve read that, prior to the launch of White Dog, you were a co-founder of the Free People’s Store, which later became Urban Outfitters. I’m curious to know if the trajectory of Urban Outfitters in any way influenced your views on business. Maybe I’m reading too much into it, but, having heard a few things about the culture, ethics and politics of Urban Outfitters, I’m wondering if what you did at White Dog, and later, through BALLE, was in any way in response to that experience.

JUDY: No, it was in no way a response. I started the Free People’s Store in 1970 with my first husband (Richard Hayne), my 5th grade boyfriend. We were 23 at the time and were very aligned politically as anti-war, anti-corporate progressives. The store was a sixties kind of place with progressive books, houseplants, new and used clothing, and hip house wares – a sort of department store for the under 30 crowd. We even campaigned for George McGovern out of the store. I left the marriage and the business in 1972 because I wanted to seek my own path for a number of reasons. As I continued my progressive views and learned to use my business to express those views through the educational programs at the restaurant as well as my business practices, I was unaware that my ex-husband had changed his views until about 10 years ago and that really had no effect on me whatsoever. We don’t talk politics or business when we do happen to run into each other.

MARK: White Dog was at the forefront of the local food movement, using local ingredients, nurturing relationships with farmers in the region, and encouraging other restaurants to do the same. If I’m not mistaken, you not only cultivated a network of local suppliers, but you shared your supplier list with your competitors. (My guess is that you wouldn’t refer to them as competitors, but you know what I mean.) Why did you think that this was important? Was it in reaction to the practices of factory farms, especially as they related to animal welfare? Or, was it more about taste and quality? Or, were you consciously trying, in your way, to hasten the reemergence of the small-scale “family” farm?

JUDY: My decision to share my farm suppliers with my competitors was a big turning point in my career, in my life really. I did it first of all because of my love for animals and my abhorrence of the factory farm system that is so inhumane to the animals that provide so much for humans. It is a moral issue for me. But also, the whole experience made me very conscious that it is not enough to have good business values and practices within our companies, but that we have to work together to build a whole economy with those values. There is no such thing as one sustainable business. We can only be a part of a sustainable system, and we must work cooperatively to build that system. Supporting local family farms by getting as many restaurants to buy from them as possible was something I could help do. Not only did I share my sources, but I used my own profits to start Fair Food and hire someone to provide free assistance to chefs in learning to buy from farmers. I also loaned $30,000 to the farmer bringing us pastured pork so that he could buy a truck to deliver to many restaurants. So, for me, it was not only about cooperating, but also sharing – two things we need to do in creating a sustainable world for all. Caring is at the base of it all.

MARK: I’ve read that you sold White Dog in 2009, but that you did so in such a way that local ownership was preserved, and the culture that you’d created would continue. Can you tell us how you were able to manage that?

JUDY: Yes, I kept ownership of the name White Dog Cafe and I now license the name to the new owners of the restaurant along with a social contract that requires them to maintain most all the sustainable practices I developed there, such as buying from local farmers, using only humanely raised meat, poultry and eggs, only sustainably caught seafood, fair trade chocolate, coffee, tea, vanilla and cinnamon, 100% renewable energy, solar hot water, composting, etc. They can start more White Dog Cafes, but only if 51% off the ownership lives within 50 miles – so no chains. They did start a second one in the suburbs near where the principle owner lives, and they are doing very well there – more business for local farmers, sustainable fisheries, etc. It’s turned out well.

MARK: Before we talk about your activities on the national stage, I was wondering if you could tell us a little about your neighborhood in Philadelphia, and how it changed with the existence of White Dog. Would I be correct in assuming that White Dog contributed toward making the neighborhood what it is today? Can you give us a few examples of things that happened, either directly, or indirectly, because of White Dog? Have employees, for instance, gone on to create businesses of their own? Have more families moved into the neighborhood?

JUDY: In 1972, when I moved to the block where the White Dog is today (the 3400 block of Sansom Street in Philadelphia), it was slated to be demolished to make way for a mall of chain stores and fast food restaurants. I was part of the community effort to stop the demolition. When we won, we were each given the right to buy our house. That was my first fight against corporate globalization. The White Dog became a hub for progressive activities in Philly with nationally known speakers such as Jim Hightower, Amy Goodman, Lester Brown, and Helen Caldicott, covering topics like ending the war on drugs, climate change, independent media – you name it! We took busses of customers to DC to protest the war or stand up for children. We also had community tours of farms, prisons, affordable housing, community gardens, etc, and international tours to places at odds with the US government – Cuba, Nicaragua, Vietnam, Soviet Union, to work on changing policy. We had a film series, storytelling, and community service days, and ran a mentoring program for inner city high school students. We changed many lives through these programs. A number of employees went onto to start their own restaurants as well as a bakery and a chocolate company.

MARK: At what point did you decide to expand your focus beyond Philadelphia, and get involved with the Social Venture Network, from which BALLE spun out ten years ago? What was the impetus behind that move?

JUDY: I was invited to join SVN by Ben Cohen of Ben & Jerry’s. Ben discovered me, and connected me to like minded business people. It was then that I realized I wasn’t working alone and that I wasn’t crazy. Other people, too, had unusual ideas about using business as a vehicle for social change. I learned many things at SVN, where we all inspired each other to do more in our efforts to make the world a better place. From my work in local economies in Philly, and also from the work I did with the Zapatistas in Chiapas, I understood that local self-reliance was crucial. I was greatly effected by the sale of Ben & Jerry’s (the sale was opposed by Jerry and Ben, by the way) and saw how even the socially responsible companies were using the old paradigm of continual growth to measure success – growing bigger and bigger, and then being bought out by multi-nationals: Odawalla Juice, Stoneyfield Farms, the Body Shop, Honest Tea, Tom’s of Maine – many of the icons of the movement. I saw that there needed to be a new movement – one that created an alternative economy that decentralized ownership where businesses were human scale and connected to place, protecting the local biosphere and supporting community life. I was the incoming chair of SVN and was thinking deeply about these issues. I suggested the SVN Local Network Initiative as a way to get support for this concept.

MARK: At the BALLE conference, I heard a few references to an historic meeting that took place in the “Wicky Wacky Woods.” Judging from the context, I’m guessing that’s where the idea for BALLE was hatched between you, Michale Shuman, Laurie Hammel, and others, to launch BALLE. Is that correct? And, if so, can you provide a little background?

JUDY: Yes, after I proposed the Local Network Initiative to the SVN board, it was decided that I would have a gathering of the SVN members interested in this. I invited them to my place in the Poconos that I call the Wicky Wacky Woods. There were about 20 of us from across the country from California to Chicago to Boston. We invited Michael Shuman to come because he had written the book “Going Local.” We developed some of the basic ideas at that retreat and decided that we would have speakers on localization at the fall SVN conference, encouraging more SVN members to come to our second meeting, at the end of the conference. It was then that we officially started a new organization, though still being incubated at SVN and not yet with the name BALLE. A number of us went home to our own communities and started local business networks – Laury in Boston, Jim Slama in Chicago, Ted Rouse in Baltimore, Guy Bazzanni in Grand Rapids, Joel Soloman in Vancouver, etc. Once we had some networks established we became an alliance of these networks – the Business Alliance for Local Living Economies (BALLE).

MARK: How would you categorize the growth of BALLE over the past ten years? Did you think that the organization would have grown to over over 22,000 member businesses in just a decade?

JUDY: I’m not surprised that we have that many. We had some ups and downs that stifled growth – the usual growing pains – or we would likely have more members. I feel we are positioned now to grow much faster, especially because we are opening up membership to individual businesses, investors, and community leaders, where before BALLE members were local networks. Now if there is not a local network in your community, you can still join BALLE. The interest in localization is growing fast, and I expect BALLE grow even faster.

MARK: What are your thoughts on the future of BALLE, now that you’ve grown a robust network of ethics-driven, intensely-local businesses committed to sustainability? Are there ways to leverage the members that you have so far, who span the continent? Specifically, I was thinking that there might be ways to coordinate activities and lobby for single-payer health care, for instance. I appreciate that some members may be disinclined to get too political, and thus alienate potential allies in the localist movement, but I’ve got to think there are some issues that the BALLE membership might get behind.

JUDY: I’m with you on that, but its tricky. BALLE does not have the manpower to get involved in public policy directly, but BALLE is a member of the American Sustainable Business Council (ASBC) and we support their efforts to be the voice of progressive business.

MARK: I’m curious to know your thoughts on something. I’d like to consider myself a big supporter of local business. I’ve organize buy-local campaigns, held conferences on local business, and do my best to patronize and promote those local businesses that are doing good work in my area. I acknowledge, however, that sometimes it gets complicated. For instance, as much as I like to patronize my locally owned coffee shops, and celebrate the fact that my small city’s downtown has remained Starbucks free, I realize that it’s not black and white. For instance, Starbucks offers insurance, when my favorite local coffee shops do not. They also pay better. Furthermore, they’ve been at the forefront nationally on issues like gay rights. I’m wondering what you would say to someone, who, like me, is sometimes conflicted. In the hierarchy of values, why should localism carry more weight than other considerations?

JUDY: I agree that its not black and white. Not all local companies do the right thing. Often times small local companies can not afford to give the same benefits to their employers that a national chain does, even though they want to. And they are not big enough to have a national impact on issues. But if you want to have economic justice, we need to have more owners to spread wealth more broadly and bring economic power back to our communities. If we want to have a strong democracy, we need to have many owners to spread politically power broadly. We have seen all the bad things that have come from business ownership concentrating into the hands of a few when it comes to equality and freedom. So much of our lives have been controlled by large corporations – the food we eat, the clothes we wear, the news we read and even our government. Localization – the decentralization of food systems, energy systems, media, manufacturing – is changing that. Ultimately, this movement is creating a stronger democracy. And I feel that when every community in the world has food, water and energy security we will have the foundation for world peace. I also feel that there is greater community in places where there are locally owned companies and the owners are involved in civic life. The butcher, baker and candlestick maker were once the backbone of communities. We are building stronger communities and that increases happiness.

MARK: If I’m not mistaken, you’re presently working on a book. If it wouldn’t be giving too much away, could you tell me what it’s about?

JUDY: It’s a memoir focusing on my business career and the path that took me to the localization movement – from growing up in a small town, living in an Eskimo village, running the White Dog, and starting BALLE. It’s called “Good Morning, Beautiful Business – the Unexpected Journey of an Activist Entrepreneur and Local Economy Pioneer.” Chelsea Green is the publisher and it will be out next spring, 2013.

]]> http://markmaynard.com/2012/06/balle-founder-judy-wicks-on-the-origins-of-urban-outfitters-the-birth-of-the-localist-movement-and-the-necessity-of-local-ownership/feed/ 10 http://markmaynard.com/2012/06/is-there-an-opportunity-for-the-community-to-take-control-over-the-impending-consolidation-of-ypsi-and-willow-run-public-schools-and-push-for-a-visionary-curriculum/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=is-there-an-opportunity-for-the-community-to-take-control-over-the-impending-consolidation-of-ypsi-and-willow-run-public-schools-and-push-for-a-visionary-curriculum http://markmaynard.com/2012/06/is-there-an-opportunity-for-the-community-to-take-control-over-the-impending-consolidation-of-ypsi-and-willow-run-public-schools-and-push-for-a-visionary-curriculum/#comments Thu, 21 Jun 2012 11:11:10 +0000 Mark http://markmaynard.com/?p=19739 If you’re a regular reader of this site, you know that my friend Maria Cotera has, over the past few years, been sharing reports with us on the status of Ypsilanti’s public schools. From the closing of Chapelle elementary to the the adoption of the recent deficit elimination plan, she’s established herself, at least in my eyes, as one of the few reliable sources of credible information that we have available to us. Well, tonight, we have a new chapter, concerning the impending consolidation of the Ypsilanti and Willow Run school districts. The following comes from an email that Maria just sent out (with a few minor edits from yours truly) to those aligned with the fledgling Ypsi Public Schools Alliance.

…The current situation is VERY challenging, but it MAY provide an opening to truly re-envision what our schools can, and should, be.

The first thing you need to know is that the Ypsilanti Public School District is getting pressured by the State Board of Education, and by the WISD (Washtenaw Intermediate School District), to consolidate with the Willow Run School District. Both districts have been meeting since last year to discuss this, and they have agreed to move forward with a plan to put the merger measure on this November’s ballot. (It has to be voted on by both districts, in a public election.) There was a public meeting about a month ago, but, really, it just seemed like anopportunity to vent (which is the typical approach of this district, as it concerns community engagement). Public sentiment on the issue of consolidation seems to be divided roughly in half, with Willow Run residents, on the whole, favoring the consolidation, while Ypsi residents are doubtful that it will be good for our kids.

One of the big issues we face is that both districts are struggling financially and academically, and the specter of an appointed Emergency Financial Manager looms. The State Board of Education has promised to kick us some (very minor) funds to aid on the logistical side of consolidation, and they have made VAGUE promises about giving us a few more years to pay down our debt, if we consolidate. They will not promise, however… and this is a BIG one for me… to hold our per-pupil funding to current levels. Currently, Willow Run kids get about a $700 less in per pupil in funding than Ypsilanti students ($7,500 vs. $6,800). The plan is to “equalize” the funding levels in a combined district to $7,250, which would mean that, while Willow Run kids get a boost, Ypsi kids would see a reduction of about $250 per pupil.

So what do I think of all this? Well, there has been a lot of empty cheerleading by the powers that be (administrators, board members, school district staff and legislative officials) about how this is an opportunity to show visionary leadership and create a combined “cutting-edge” district that could be a model for other districts. The problem with this logic is that, as far as I can tell, neither district has shown any “visionary leadership” thus far. Indeed, based on my experience with YPSD, I can pretty much predict that, at the end of this process, what we will have is a combined district that will fall back on the same old “visions” that got them into this mess in the first place. We can blame the State as much as we want (and they do deserve a considerable amount of blame for this mess), but the truth is that Ypsi is not just hurting because of budget cuts at the State level. There is also a fundamental lack of confidence in the direction of the district among its constituents, which has resulted in declining enrollment. The District can blame this on a “perception problem” till they are blue in the face, but these perceptions come from SOMEWHERE.

So what do we do now? Here’s how I see it:

I think consolidation CAN bring some good, but only if we have visionary leadership at the top. We don’t currently have that visionary leadership, which means that a combined district will be the same old same old, but in a much larger, more challenged, form.

The problem with lack of vision at the top is that these are the very people who are tasked with coming up with a “cutting edge” curriculum and structure, AND these are also the people who will be negotiating with the legislators over concessions to the District. My prediction is that we will get neither a visionary district nor a commitment from the State to help us create a first class district.

THEREFORE, I think we, and other stakeholders, should take greater control of this process, both in terms of deciding what the new district will look like (curriculum, structure, and special programs) AND putting pressure on the State to do more than make vague promises.

Remember, this must go up for a vote in both communities, and, if that vote fails, which it likely will if parents in either community decide to oppose it, we will be in the same boat, only worse. Our crushing debt will still be there, possibly made worse by the costs related to coming up with a consolidation plan. Our high school will still be “consistently low performing”, and we will be hemorrhaging parents even more quickly due to the negative publicity. We will then likely come under control of an EFM, and then, it’s anyone’s guess what will happen.

This all sounds very dire, but there is a bright spot. Essentially what the Administration DOESN’T want to acknowledge is that we have a tremendous amount of power in this scenario, and I think we should take advantage of it to do some “visioning” of our own. This visioning process should NOT be guided by an administration that pretends to listen, while never actually incorporating our talents and ideas into the process. For example, WISD is leading this process, and they have acquired the services of an outside consultant “Lead and Learn” who will help us come up with a “master plan” for consolidation (for $40,000). Lead and Learn is OWNED by Houghton Mifflin, a textbook corporation. YUCK. In their proposal, they kept referring to us as an “urban district” (that means “black” in “educational industrial complex speak”), but we are much more complex than their narrow optic for “institutional transformation” allows. I think this decision is an indicator of the kind of “leadership” that is directing this process. We need to take this process and make it our own.

We do have the power to force them to incorporate our ideas for a truly “visionary” consolidated district because they need us to make consolidation happen (we must vote for the plan). In the process, we can force some structural change in our own district that will hopefully be transformative even if the consolidation plan is voted down.

We also have the power to meet with legislators and demand real commitments, not vague promises, and those commitments should go beyond the baseline (extra time to balance the budget, equalizing per pupil funding levels). Indeed, if the State and WISD want us to become the “poster child” for small district consolidation, then they have to actually make the process and its outcomes look good. This means that we can pressure them to put the extra resources into our district that will actually make it a leader, both in the State and in the Nation. The truth is, they can’t afford for this not to succeed because we have to be their advertisement for other small districts facing financial distress.

I propose that we begin gathering parents for meetings to lay out what we want in our ideal district. These meetings should, at some point, include Willow Run parents and students, and they SHOULD NOT be lead by either District, or the WISD, or the MASB or the State Board of Education, or any other agent of the State who will just listen politely and then insert their own formula.

Here are my preliminary ideas of what a truly visionary district looks like (taking into account the features of our demographic). I know some of you will agree with some of them, and not with others, but the point is that we should together to craft something that is sustainable, intellectually meaningful, culturally relevant, nurturing, and civically engaged. Our children ARE our community, and we should see the schools as central to providing them with the tools they will need to build a healthy and cooperative community in the schools and beyond:

Wish List:

· Small high school environments (no more than 500)

· Small middle school environments (no more than 500)

· Small Elementary school environments (no more than 300)

· Project-based learning opportunities

· Much greater, and more coordinated involvement of U of M and EMU across the District

· Civic/Community Engagement as a CORE VALUE (Children should have structured opportunities to contribute to their school community and the broader community). These might include volunteer programs, beautification opportunities, community blogging, etc). Their intellectual work should be tied to transforming our community.

· Sustainability as a CORE VALUE – this should be incorporated into curricular, civic engagement, and enrichments programs.

· All buildings should adopt a sustainability code

· All buildings should have community gardens, and connected curricular (math, science, social studies) and enrichment programs that teach students about stewardship, ecology, sustainable agriculture and food justice. An urban agriculture program would be ideal.

· Social Justice curriculum beginning at the Middle School and continuing through High School. We need to instill the idea that knowledge can be a tool for social justice and not just something they must acquire through memorization and assessment regimes.

· An Enrichment Director who can coordinate enrichment programs and university partnerships across the District

· And Every Student College Bound program beginning at thee early grades (2nd?). I know that some say that not all students are destined for a college degree, but shouldn’t it be an option that they can think about from the time they start their structured learning? I often wonderhow many of those students who are supposedly “not destined for college” just haven’t been exposed to the idea from a very young age?

· Tiered mentorship programs (College students mentor high schoolers, high schoolers mentor junior high kids, junior high kids mentor elementary kids)

· Discipline – implement a restorative justice program (Student Court).

· We should create administrative structures at the HighSchool level that include student voices and ideas.

None of the things above are “pie in the sky” ideas. All of them have been implemented in public schools, charter schools, and private schools. Only a few of them would require a substantial amount of money. In any case, if true vision is what they want, and if, as the administration and board constantly say, we need put the interests of children at the forefront, we have to do everything we can to truly re-imagine what education can be in ourconsolidated district.

For a list of Maria’s earlier posts on the subject of Ypsi public schools, just click here.

And just how disheartening is it to know that we’re paying $40,000 to a out-of-state entity, which is owned by a textbook company, to develop our curriculum?

]]> http://markmaynard.com/2012/06/is-there-an-opportunity-for-the-community-to-take-control-over-the-impending-consolidation-of-ypsi-and-willow-run-public-schools-and-push-for-a-visionary-curriculum/feed/ 51 http://markmaynard.com/2012/06/the-emergence-of-local-economy-centers/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-emergence-of-local-economy-centers http://markmaynard.com/2012/06/the-emergence-of-local-economy-centers/#comments Wed, 06 Jun 2012 22:22:22 +0000 Mark http://markmaynard.com/?p=19536 I didn’t have an opportunity to meet her at the recent BALLE conference in Grand Rapids, but, as luck would have it, I was able to dial in to a conference call during my lunch hour a couple of days ago, and ask a few questions of Kelley Rajala, the woman who runs the Sonoma Country Share Exchange in Santa Rosa, California. Rajala, along with Dave Feldman, a co-founder of Bethesda Green in Bethesda, Maryland, were talking about the emerging trend growing out of the Transition Town movement, of people creating Local Economy Centers in their communities. [note: Together, Rajala and Feldman run a consultancy called the Livability Project.] Ragala said that she started her center in 2010, when it became obvious to her that a physical location was needed if Santa Rosa was going to accelerate the pace of transition toward a more sustainable future. What they needed, she thought, was a community facility where all of the various initiatives that were taking place, in the areas of food, entrepreneurship, energy and health, could come together, under one roof. The hour-long conference call was set up by Transition US, and I’m told that a recording will be available available online in the near future. In the meantime, though, here are my rough notes, which focus primarily on the Santa Rosa case study, as I think that, of the two, it’s the one that’s most relevant to our situation in Ypsilanti. [note: My quotes may not be exact. I believe, however, they're pretty close.]

Ragula explains her decision to open a brick-and-mortar location as follows: “There comes a point (in a movement like this) where there needs to be a more outward-facing presence, that seeks to engage the wider community. We’re at that point. We need small epicenters of transition activity, where (the principles of) BALLE and the Transition movement, can come together (and be put into action).” She envisions a future in which such centers exist across the country, leveraging downtown storefronts left vacant in the wake of shopping malls and big box retailers. Each center, she says, would be independently run, and take on the flavor of the community in which it’s housed. The subject matter addressed within these centers, she says, could span from healthy food access to business incubation, with the common thread being the shared values of localism, social justice, permaculture, education, biomimicry, economic empowerment, etc.

Rajala’s Local Economy Center, the Share Exchange, is one block off the main drag in Santa Rosa, the second largest city in California’s Wine Country. (Their population is 167,815.) They chose not to pursue corporate sponsorships, as other centers have, but, instead, to focus on the grass roots. They are organized as a cooperative under California law. (They’ve yet to define their bylaws, but that is in process.) Their intention is to become both a consumer coop, and a worker coop. The space is 1,800 square feet, and they pay $1 per quare foot. (The space was relatively move-in ready when they took possession.)

Their rent, for the most part, is covered by the sales of the Made Local Marketplace, which takes up the first 400 square feet of their space. At present, according to Rajala, the goods available in the store, all of which are made in their county, are relatively “gifty.” She’s hoping, however, to transition, over the coming year, into more practical items. The vision, says Rajala, is to have it be like a general store. (I believe she said that, since opening, they’ve sold the work of close to 250 artists, makers, etc.) The entire space is open to the public from 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM… I asked about the revenue generated by the Marketplace, and she said that it covered half of their budget. (Their budget was $100,000 the first year, and $130,000 the second.) She also said that half of the Marketplace sales were recorded in the first three weeks of December. Last year, they hosted a street fair, hoping to generate non-December sales. (I didn’t ask how much they raised.)

Behind the store, there is a co-working space, which presently has 60 members. This area has a kitchen, video conferencing room, etc. And, over time, they will be adding entrepreneurial services, helping people to launch businesses that make the community more sustainable.

They also generate revenue by renting their space, after hours, to organizations that are “mission aligned.” (They rent the space approximately 200 evenings a year.) Craft groups, community organizations, and local businesses, among others, make use of their meeting rooms, which are outfitted with white boards, and other tools to facilitate the creative exchange of ideas.

Furthermore, they’ve started something called the Local Economy Institute, which they hope will evolve into something like the Evergreen Cooperative, in Cleveland, helping to create jobs by looking for opportunities to fill in the local supply chain. For example, she mentions that Amy’s Kitchen, a huge, vegetarian food processor in her area, imports most of their ingredients. So, she wants to start a worker-owned farm to supply them. The Local Economy Institute would not only identify such opportunities, and help launch companies to take advantage of them, but also hold courses for people on how to be responsible, successful worker/owners.

The secret to staying afloat, she says, is to diversify revenue streams, and thereby bring in enough money to support those activities that don’t make money. (They also do some contract work for nearby cities that are interested in sustainability, marketing work for local businesses, etc. Furthermore, a local bank has recently stepped up to be a sponsor.) The key, she says, is to stay flexible.

The organization has two staff members. And, there are five makers/artists who volunteer to run the store. In exchange for running the store, these five people pay a much lower commission rate on their pieces that sell in the store. (Occasionally the two employees of the organization need to run the store, as the volunteers can’t always make their shifts.)

When asked what she would have done differently, Rajala says that she would have done more outreach concerning co-working. As it was something new in the community, she said, people weren’t ready for it. And, as a result, those spaces aren’t fully utilized, and, as a result, the people who are using the co-working facility, are essentially being subsidized. She says that she doesn’t know if co-working is going to work in the long run. They may have to transition some of their co-working space into dedicated offices for startup companies, she says, which they can rent by the year.

They’re constantly trying new things. They looked into the possibility of a time bank, but decided to put it off for the time being. They’re working with the national Slow Money Network to roll out their Credibles program, which is a platform though which people can pre-pay for goods at their favorite food-related businesses, and, in so doing, help budding food entrepreneurs by advancing them working capital. They will also soon be rolling out a matchmaking service through which people with unused yard space in urban areas can be matched up with would-be farmers who are looking for plots to cultivate. And, they’re hoping to replicate the Port Townsend Local Investing Opportunities Network (LION) that I told you about not too long ago, in hopes of getting high-net-worth individuals investing in local startup enterprises that create jobs, improve the community’s resiliency, and contribute positively toward the local ecosystem. And, they want to explore all kinds of swapping and sharing, whether it be in the form of hosting local fabric swaps, or facilitating equipment lending networks. She also says that they’d like to do more to get the people who create things for their store into stores of their own. The main thing, she says, it to keep going… to keep finding new sources of revenue, so that you can continue to push the envelope. In order to do that, according to Rajala, you have to be creative, and you have to foster partnerships.

I had thought, since the first Shadow Art Fair, that Ypsilanti might be able to support a year-round store, managed by volunteers, that would sell the products of our food entrepreneurs, craftspeople, and makers. The idea that such a business could serve as a gateway to something bigger, though, is something that I hadn’t considered. And I like it. Unfortunately, what works in a city of 167,000, where you only pay $1 a square foot in rent, may not work in a considerably less affluent community that’s a fraction of that size. Still, though, it’s interesting to consider what a Local Economy Center would look like in Ypsilanti.

]]> http://markmaynard.com/2012/06/the-emergence-of-local-economy-centers/feed/ 6