February 9, 2017
Members of the Council:
By way of introduction, I served as Chair of the community group that lobbied for construction of the new Splash Pad Park beginning in 1999 and have since continued working on its behalf as an advocate, volunteer coordinator, and Editor of the Splash Pad News. I would add that, over time, I’ve evolved from being the farmers market’s staunchest supporter to one of its harshest critics. As briefly as possible, I’m going to explain why that’s the case and why we’re asking you to reject outright the Agricultural Institute of Marin’s (AIM’s) request for a five-year lease (plus options) and to, instead, issue a Request for Proposals (RFP).
Let’s start with the January 24, 2017 Agenda Report, which recommends approval and paints a rosy picture of the market’s operations to date. I’m extremely disappointed that contrary views from the Grand Lake community (outlined fully in this September 2016 list of suggested operational guidelines) have not been incorporated. Nor, apparently, have the preparers sought input from the park maintenance staff tasked with keeping our neighborhood park, designed by Walter Hood, clean and beautiful. And I’m befuddled as to why there’s any question as to whether or not Splash Pad is zoned as a park. That said, I am in agreement with the Agenda Report when it notes that the Grand Lake Farmers Market is extremely successful and that it provides tangible benefits for local residents and the adjacent commercial district. Nonetheless, it has become increasingly evident that the market could be even more successful and far better serve the City of Oakland and its citizenry under more enlightened, local management.
How much has AIM contributed financially?
AIM launched the farmers market in 1998 and, until last year, operated it rent-free.- In 2015, AIM spent $39,000 to resurface the decomposed granite pathway that traverses the park – long overdue repairs that were necessitated due to wear and tear from farmers market usage. FYI: the adjacent gravel bed is in equally poor condition resulting in frequent falls. There’s no immediate prospect of repairs.
- In 2016, AIM began paying rent for the first time. Although the City Administrator’s office initially proposed an $800 monthly fee – the amount AIM’s attorney said “they could afford” – the amount was bumped up slightly to $1,000 after Jerry Barclay and I strenuously objected.
- A rough estimate as to what AIM has spent thus far for rent, city services, and infrastructure repairs: $55,000.
- A rough estimate as to what AIM has grossed thus far from vendor booth fees: $2 million or more.
Can AIM afford to pay more? While they are a non-profit organization, they are an extremely profitable, non-profit – reporting $2.57 million in total income in 2015 – approximately $250,000 of which is generated annually from Grand Lake Farmers Market booth fees. The more relevant question is whether the $1,000 monthly fee is in accordance with the Master Fee Schedule for special events. As shown below, even if you deduct 25% for their non-profit status, the monthly fee should be in excess of $5,000 . From a different Perspective: Is AIM paying anything approaching fair market value? The best mechanism for determining that would be issuance of an RFP.
What services are they providing?
As noted in the Agenda Report, AIM does support the CalFresh and Market Match programs, but the same services are offered at virtually every market in Oakland and the out-of-pocket expenses are mostly in the form of staff or volunteer time. More affordable prices would be helpful but AIM has recently issued an edict establishing minimum prices and penalizing farmers if they offer discounts. On the positive side, they do provide live music and do welcome informational groups, including StopWaste.org and the Masters Gardening program. While there’s tons of potential to do more, they don’t – and I attribute that, in large part, to AIM’s almost exclusive focus on their original Marin base. Here in Oakland, they’re doing their best to minimize expenses and maximize profits to be spent elsewhere. Here are a few examples that I find particularly troublesome:
- A disproportionate percentage of prepared food vendors are from Marin and Sonoma Counties.
The worst example: The “Local Spicery” (which isn’t local – it’s from Novato) competes with Oaktown Spice – two short blocks up Grand Avenue.(UPDATE: The Local Spicery is no longer selling at the Grand Lake Market effective late 2016) - This past year, the Grand Lake Market finally hired an employee from Oakland who happens to be a person of color – the first in eighteen years to be either. (UPDATE: Jonathan Ruiz is no longer employed by AIM)
- Several years ago, AIM vetoed a former Grand Lake Market manager’s request for a blackboard to publicize special events but, over in Marin, they were (and still are) soliciting over $10 million in donations for a year-round Public Market in San Rafael.
Has AIM successfully fulfilled the terms and conditions set forth in the original Encroachment Permit?
HARDSCAPE
The underlying assumption for an encroachment permit is that the applicants will leave the property in the condition in which they found it. From Day One, AIM has demonstrated gross negligence by failing to consistently provide “protective devices” to minimize damage to impermeable surfaces and landscaping. The photos below (taken in September 2016) depict grease stains in and around booths where vendors prepare foods and serve samples. In theory, AIM should be responsible for preventing and abating these conditions. They have been doing neither.
LANDSCAPING
As for the permeable surfaces, two plant beds have been totally obliterated but the grass has been the most glaring casualty. Chris Blackburn, the market manager who retired last year, was the very first to make a major effort to protect and restore it. Since his retirement, the situation has deteriorated markedly – particularly in the last several weeks. Please note that the photo on the left was taken in September. Four months later, the same vendor is in the same space with the same set-up and nothing has been done to abate the problem or prevent further damage.
Action Items
1. We are asking the City Council to open the process by issuing a Request for Proposals.
2. As an integral part of any new lease, we are asking the Council to mandate a comprehensive set of operational guidelines under which the market would operate. Key elements would include:
- Agreement on a market footprint that would ensure that perimeter sidewalks and walkways within the park are unobstructed and wide enough to safely accommodate shoppers and also allow free access to seating walls and benches.
- Staffing sufficient to adequately monitor activities within the park until the last vendor leaves. Current practice is to ask vendors to replace the bollards and not drive across the lawns – a practice that’s obviously problematic.
- An early morning inspection to make sure that all surfaces are adequately protected and an after-market inspection to pick up litter; make sure that garbage cans are emptied and to identify problem spots.
- A guarantee that market vendors are hauling off their own trash and not taking advantage of the free garbage pick-up service provided by Oakland’s Public Works Administration (PWA).
3. Specify which city department is responsible for regularly monitoring the farmers market to ensure that they are complying with the terms of the agreement, are held financially liable for damages, and are subject to the threat of revocation for repeated violations. Thus far, there’s been a complete vacuum with no one willing or able to take charge.
Please let me conclude with a personal perspective:
It disturbs me that 43% of the neighbors who filled out a community survey last September never, or only occasionally, visit the market. This is the case for a host of reasons, but primarily due to the claustrophobic congestion, the traffic, and the parking – the last of which was happily just resolved by AIM.- It disturbs me that Walter Hood, Oakland’s super-star landscape architect, stopped coming to the market years ago (before it got REALLY crowded), because he “couldn’t see the park.”
- It disturbs me that Arvi Dorsey, the “Mayor of Grand Avenue” and member of the original Farmers Market Board, threw in the towel more than a decade ago, upset over the absence of tarpaulins in food vendors’ booths.
- It disturbs me that Caroline Kim who, as leader of the East Park Preservation Association, lured the farmers market to the Grand Lake and then saved the park from a proposed strip mall, now chooses to shop instead at the Old Oakland Market on Fridays.
- But more than anything, it disturbs me because I no longer feel comfortable in the park that I helped create or, more specifically, at the Farmers Market that I once promoted so enthusiastically as the “hippest and happiest venue in the East Bay.” At some point, I’d like to be able to repeat that mantra.
Respectfully,
Ken Katz
This Farmers’ Market has been a terrific resource for us for years. I love it and shop there every Saturday morning. The objections in the “open letter” strike me as more about turf wars than real problems. Possibly I am missing something. Certainly the author is missing a lot of what’s there and is terrific for all users.
I love the splash pad farmers market. I go on alternate weeks in winter, and every sat. I can in summer. The paths are very crowded, but I still love it. I can sit if I get tired.
My thoughts:
1. the most important factor listed above is monitoring and completion of cleanup, with penalties for infractions. AND, damage that is not repaired so that during the week, the splash pad is beautifully kept without damage. This must include an oversight board who has authority to levy and collect fines.
2. Calendar of participants on any specific week. It would be lovely to have on the website, a calendar of participants each week. This could be automatic as part of online booth registration by a participant as they sign up for a booth or cancel. Booth number would be a welcome addition, as would a diagram with booth numbers included on the website. I am a web designer, and developer and would love this commission to complete such a project when there is a budget for it.
many thanks,
Eve Lurie
Local Farmers market shopper
I am very concerned about the recent changes that the Marin market management have instituted at the Splash Pad Farmer’s Market. Of concern to me is the new price fixing, under the current regime the farmers are no longer allowed to offer their goods at discounted prices at the end of the day. This is a huge disservice to the larger Oakland community, the association accepts food stamps and WIC but is pricing out those very consumers who have been historically disenfranchised vis a vis fresh produce by this price fixing scheme. Our market is a special place, it serves well the multi-ethnic, multi-racial Oakland community and the posh folks in Marin do not seem to understand our community’s needs. Moreover, I am bi-lingual and I have heard directly from the farmer’s how difficult the changes are for them the Marin association is trying to cut into their profits and many told me that it will not be worth it for them. Finally, as teacher, I appreciate being able to purchase fresh fruits and veggies for my family at a discounted price. Anyone paying attention at all knows full well that we teachers are underpaid.
Wow, seriously? They banned late day discounts? That’s BS – hurts the farmers and the shoppers. We rarely get there until noon or 1pm and love it when we can get some “going home” prices.
for a long time I have wondered about Marin being in charge of our Farmer’s Market. Why don’t we have our own management group run the market. I fully agree that the vendors ought to be able to lower their prices at the at the end of the day. it helps them and the community.
i agree we should open it up to a request fort proposal to a number of groups who would be interested in managing the market preferably a group in Oakland.
I have gone to the market every Saturday for years with my husband who purchases fresh food there for the week. We love it. This past year we have noticed that people with dogs are wandering around the market even though dogs are not allowed per signage. If it’s a health hazard or legal issue to keep dogs away from the food, then the signs should be enforced. I do think the market is often too crowded both for dogs and for large strollers. I don’t care one way or the other as long as the dogs are well behaved but of course you never know about that. I think the signs should be enforced (is there any security?) or taken down. The other issue is that there are some aggressive panhandlers both outside and inside the market. One of them is a known thief (as seen stealing from a local store by both of us) and I suspect the cause he is petitioning for is fraudulent). Security would help this situation. I have pointed this person out to a vendor near where he solicits since the cash box is pretty obvious. I also would advocate for an Oakland based group to manage this farmers market.
For all the reasons you’ve mentioned plus several more, I’d second the advisability of security.
My wife and I shop at the Grand-Lake market nearly every Saturday. If for some reason we’re unable to, we go to Temescal, Montclair or Jack London Square on Sunday.
As others have pointed out, the market is very congested. The central walkway is, in my opinion, too narrow; at times it is impassable. The walkway on the side next to the freeway is uneven and prone to puddling whenever it rains. I have on several occasions turned my ankle on the metal ridges that protrude from the ground. At the very least, several truckloads of gravel should be spread there to level the ground. I also agree with others that the no-dog rule is poorly enforced.
I don’t care who oversees the market as long as they operate it efficiently and emphasize fresh produce. I think Urban Village does a good job at Temescal, where the walkways are nice and wide. Even though Grand-Lake is just a short walk from our home, I am happy to drive to Temescal because the market is produce-centric, with a much wider selection of fruit and vegetables. For example, Happy Boy Farms offers far more produce there than it does at Grand Lake. There is also less emphasis on takeout food there and far fewer non-food (e.g., candles, soap, jewelry, pottery) vendors. It’s my impression that Marin is trying to cram as many vendors into Splash Pad Park as it can to maximize fees.
I agree with Ken Katz that Marin could do a better job restoring the park, particularly the grass, after the market. But this begs the question: Should the booths even be located on the grass? None of the other farmers markets I can think of in Oakland and Berkeley are located on grass in parks.
Sadly,
AIM is not really willing to work with low income customers. They have clearly shown that they are only there for the money and their 20 million dollar project that will strictly benefit their county. Multiple issues have been voiced to them and nothing has been done about it. The congestion in the market is considered a violation. I’m not sure with whom, but a fire truck is supposed to be able to fit in the aisles of a market in case of an emergency. The dogs are against health code but clearly ignored. Many vendors love animals but the lack of AIM’s management can get many vendors shut down. But the loss isn’t on AIM it’s on the vendors and they just shrug their shoulders as our vendors suffer for their mistakes. If the health department shuts a stand down because of a dog, they must forfeit all their product and go home. This causes a price increase to make up for the loss. Most vendors are low income and try very hard to offer a great product at a fair price. A lot of vendors can no longer afford to be involved with AIM or are losing customers because they can’t, or feel they can’t, be fair to their customers any longer to make a living. Many of these issues can be fixed but will fall on deaf ears. Many vendors no longer come to the markets on rainy days because they get charged full price for coming even if they make nothing and for a long time they dealt with it for their customers but now the new pricing rules have made that impossible. For an Association that can afford to put up a 20 million dollar building you would think they would at least have some pride in the Oakland market and put some money back into a low income community that is supporting them. A thousand dollars a month in rent is nothing compared to that building. Not when the farmers they are dictating to are paying that and not even allowed to run their business their way!! We have to ask the Oakland city council to have pride in our community and turn the market over to someone that cares for the vendors coming out to support us and someone willing to take pride in Oakland. I have been a customer of all the local markets for years and have spoken to many of the vendors about the issues that AIM is forcing them to deal with.
I too want to see RFPs for new market management. I’ve spent time talking with a couple of the farmers who have booths there. Let’s be sure to really support the farmers and vendors. I’ve shopped there almost every Saturday since it opened. I depend on the market. I enjoy getting a bite to eat from the food stalls. The market is a key part of my neighborhood. I walk so I don’t need to park.
I would love to see Oakland management for the market and some of the profit used to benefit Splashpad Park and support local organizations. One of the lights has been broken for months. Yesterday the market manager Johnny was telling me he’s requested a replacement for a missing stanchion. The hole where the stanchion is missing is a injury hazard. Let’s have RFPs! Thanks!
I really appreciated this open letter and found it very enlightening. I’ve often had questions about the Farmer’s Market, and this letter has revealed some of the “inside baseball” that goes into its management and operation. In general, I feel that the Farmer’s Market has been good for Oakland, but I also agree with Ken that there should be high quality and maintenance standards when organizations like AIM, operate in Oakland. As a 46+ year Oakland resident, I’ve seen the city evolve and grow, and it needs to get over its “2nd class status” insecurities of the past and ask for what it needs and wants, particularly, as it’s experiencing a renaissance.
I agree that:
1. There should be a competitive RFP process. The process itself would put AIM on notice and create more urgency around these issues
2. The maintenance and protection of the park should be prioritized. I remember how beautifully and flawlessly it was maintained when it was first opened.
3. What? There are no people of color who work with the current management? (Okay, one, as alleged by the post…) Geez…..if the City of Oakland can’t manage diversity expectations with AIM, how on earth is it going to insist on providing desirable jobs of all types for our diverse residents when Uber comes to town?
4. The congestion and prices are an issue. It’s not relaxing to deal with traffic, on a weekend, no less; but I decided to stop patronizing Bay Area Farmer’s Markets because the prices stop being competitive, and I have long stopped feeling that I was paying Farmers directly (which I supported), while also financially benefiting from cutting out the middle man. This price fixing scheme supports my suspicions. I grab my Blue Bottle and head for Berkeley Bowl these days.
I’d be interested in knowing where this issue stands now. Will there be an RFP and will preference be given to Oakland-based organizations with some skin in the game and local vendor contacts? Please keep updating via postings.
Thanks,
R Adams
Thank you for the excellent letter. In answer to your question, our RFP request is currently in limbo and meanwhile, AIM is on a month-to-month lease. At the April 5 community meeting to discuss the farmers market, eight of the ten neighborhood residents attending voted in favor of an RFP. As for the price fixing situation, this originated from AIM and the only reason we know about it is that at least some of the farmers are vehemently opposed. One way or the other, I’m hoping we can transform the market and get people like you back on board.
A late comer to the posting but figured I’d throw my two cents in for what its worth. I second the issue with the proliferation of dogs in the market. On a number of occasions I’ve witnessed owners completely unaware of their pets rooting through boxes, urinating on tent poles (one even proceeded to pee on a produce box until I called out, only to have the owner give me a dirty look), and the tripping hazards caused by leashes and jumpy dogs. Most don’t behave as service dogs, meaning well-behaved, and it really is too crowded for pets in such as place like the market. I also agree with the original post in that having wider aisles would provide better accessibility, especially for those with mobility-assistance devices.
I love this market, contributed to the Splash Pad Park at its birth. I am all for the RFP and in support of a more local group managing the Park. Thanks to the open letter and the effort put in getting it together.
Please note that this is not an open forum. Letters are screened and only approved letters are posted.
Screening comments is an absolute necessity since 90% or more are advertising spam. Virtually all the legitimate comments are published regardless of the content. The exception, which prompted Ms. Wood’s complaint, contained allegations that were highly critical of a locally-owned, neighborhood business and, as such, were deemed not appropriate for publication.
Yogi Berra once said of Rigazzi’s restaurant, “Nobody goes there anymore. It’s too crowded”.
The mere fact of the many happy shoppers, who regularly come to the market on a Saturday, dispel the grousing of the noshows.
Yeah, the vendors should be able to “sale price” at the end of the day. This would help people afford quality food, just as Berk Bowl does.
I do agree, dogs do not belong, nor aggressive panhandlers. No problem with political and social organization tables. That is discourse.
My wife and I contributed, at the beginning, and are very happy that the market has thrived. We shop there almost every week.
Periodic tweaking is useful. Do that.
Lary, The problem isn’t that the market’s “too crowded”, the problem is that it’s too congested due, in large part, to a major expansion over the last several years in the market’s footprint which is to AIM’S advantage since fees are based on the size of any given space. In addition, the management is refusing to implement common-sense measures that would require a minimum 8-foot wide walkway free of obstructions on the asphalt roadway as well as the double row of vendors closer to the freeway. With the latter, we’ve calculated that the proper placement of booths would accommodate an 8-foot wide walkway on each side of the columnar maples that parallel the freeway. Judging by the placement of a brand new vendor this past Saturday about three feet away from the nearest tree, my assumption is that they plan on making the congestion worse – not better. This lack of responsiveness is also evident in the ongoing damage to the park’s infrastructure and their unwillingness over the years to give back much of anything to the community. This is not a choice we made lightly but we continue to maintain that a Request for Proposals is in the best interests of the Grand Lake Neighborhood, the City of Oakland and, most importantly, the farmers market itself which has tons of realized potential.