May
2006
Down On the Farm
The South Central Farm was still in existence at 8 AM this morning, when I turned my security post over to another volunteer protester and staggered off towards the Blue Line to come to work. However, it might not be in existence by the time you read this. The farmers are under an eviction notice, and, along with Julia Butterfly Hill ensconced in a tree, dozens of farm supporters are staying on the land, waiting to protest in the only way left when the eviction notice is finally enforced.
What is the Farm? It’s the largest urban garden in the United States, but it’s more than that; it’s an oasis of greenspace in a poor, industrial, polluted area, but it’s more than that; it’s, unfortunately, a legally disputed area that is targeted for development as an industrial warehouse — but it is so very much more than that.
The Farm was created in 1992, on land originally taken by the City in an eminent domain proceeding in order to create an incinerator (a project which fell through). After the 1992 riots, the City gave the land to the Los Angeles Food Bank to use as a community garden — and what a community garden it turned out to be. On this 14 acres — a large block in South Central LA bounded by Alameda, Martin Luther King, and 41st Streets — more than 350 mostly Latino immigrant families have farmed for 14 years, planting fruit trees, medicinal plants, corn and cabbage and squash for food and gladiolas and roses for the pleasure and beauty of it. The maze of fences surrounding each little plot gives way to a central area under a huge tree (Julia’s home at the moment), where the neighbors come together in community. The Farm, as you walk around it, envelops you in the sense that here is something truly more than concrete — it is a monument to human effort to create something worth loving out of the most unlikely of materials, and to the response nature gives us when we offer our own hard work.
Real estate developer Ralph Horowitz, from whom the land was taken originally, bought it back from the City a few years back and now would like to sell it to build a warehouse. After much negotiation, he agreed to sell it to the Trust for Public Land for $16.3 million. The Farm and the Trust had less than a month to raise that money, and unfortunately were able to raise only $6 million. Although that would cover the money that Mr. Horowitz paid the City for the property, it is not acceptable under the terms of the agreement.
So the eviction notice has been served, and now there seem to be very few options. Among them are putting Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who has claimed to want a “Green LA,” on notice that here is a chance to contribute to that dream that won’t come around again. The Mayor’s office has recently stated that Villaraigosa supports the Farm, but unfortunately statements are not enough. The city has been able recently to find a great deal of money to build a new stadium; surely the Farm is worth a few million dollars as well. Another is to donate personally to the Farm — if the money can be raised, the Farm might still be saved by the Trust for Public Land. If you’d like to do that, or to get the most recent updates on events and the vigil at the Farm, visit http://www.southcentralfarmers.com.
And of course, there is prayer: prayer for a solution we haven’t thought of, for a softening of Mr. Horowitz’s position, for more time. The garden is a place of prayer. Many of the little plots have shrines, and during the protest it has all become a sanctuary. Julia Butterfly Hill is not merely sitting in the tree; she is praying, and is in fact on day 11 of a water-only fast. The tree is surrounded by candles, votives, vases; it has been incensed with burning sage, drummed around, prayed beneath, through these days. The garden calls one to prayer, and prayer is needed.
Meanwhile, the protests go on, peacefully; it is a place which provokes peace. I urge you to go experience it before it is gone — and to do what you can to save it, even at this latest hour.
Sorry, but after the horrendous Kelo v. New London decision, we have more problems with property rights than a bunch of “farmers” losing land they never paid for in the first place.
Eminent domain abuse is a real, tangible tragedy. This is just a bunch of socialist-minded simpletons who managed to hire a liberal attorney dumb enough to take their case.
Hi Libertarian Guy — of course this is the libertarian creed, and I don’t blame you for seeing it this way!
But it is more than this. The Kelo v. New London decision is as horrific to me as it is to you (especially as a Northeasterner who knows the land whereof we speak). The SCF issue is the vanguard of the problems of the future, in terms of balancing the greater good of a community with individual property rights and the rights to unlimited individual accumulation of wealth. I’m neither a libertarian nor a socialist, but a Christian — and I’d like to point out, from my point of view, that Jesus took a pretty dim view of property rights and wealth, as did the author of Acts of the Apostles…and most of the 8th century prophets. But that’s not going to carry weight with you, and that’s OK. Let’s look at it from a larger, non-faith-based point of view.
The issue is not eminent domain per se, but what eminent domain has been and is now used for — for projects that will increase the tax base of a community, and, in Kelo, for the rights of one private entity to gather wealth at the expense of another private entity (BAD!!). But SCF points to the fact that in the cities of the future, there are community goods that actually are not based in wealth, and we need to learn how to value them accordingly as we balance individual and community rights. When intangible community goods are not honored, tangible community goods will suffer. The lack of decent food, peaceful community endeavors, and greenspace in South Central LA is deeply connected to the high level of violence, physical illness, unemployment, and poverty in that area. The state of the world, libertarian guy, argues that the ability of individuals to pursue their own happiness can indeed be negatively impacted by the constraints of their local communities; and that people who value individual happiness as the highest good, in order to be logically consistent, need to value community intangibles along with money and property rights.
That’s where the rub is here, and that’s where we need to develop new and different thinking in our crowded, impoverished, and sick inner cities. The SCF shows that individuals even in the worst circumstances are eager to do what they can for their own good and the good of their community. Why not support them with all the power of our polity?