Here a hub, there a hub, everywhere a food hub
In a recent article of the Springfield Business Journal (SBJ) one can read about the plans of the organizers of Farmers Market of the Ozarks to invest millions in building a "food hub." As more and more local schools and medical centers face the growing demand in the area for healthy, locally sourced fruits, vegetables and meat, small family farms must develop a plan to work together to meet that need.
Many people across our region and the country are clamoring for access to locally grown, non-GMO, (genetically modified organism) organic vegetables and fruits, and more humanely, locally grown meats which have not been produced through use of antibiotics, growth hormones and the feeding of GMO crops.
Farm Resettlement Congress, FRC, believes they have the answer to the lack of local food security and economic opportunity in our area. Their answer also involves locally-owned food hub creation. Specifically, FRC seeks to restore the soil, return the youth, and revive our heritage. Put another way, FRC wants to retain the land, resettle our youth and restore self-management, and while accomplishing these things, they also seek the creation of healthy community relationships.
On February 25, fifteen Farm Resettlement Congress activists, most of whom either are forming or will be forming their own watershed congresses, met outside and across the street from the Court Building in Jefferson City, MO. There, they met passers by and made and engaged in what they described as "a soft coming out," handing out literature to those who appeared to be interested. This event coincided with the public launching of their Web site, http://www.farmresettlementcongress.org, and the creation of a facebook group and a forum for comprehensive communication.
Through the use of FRC's "20-Year Plan for Food Security," they believe local communities within the Mississippi River, Missouri River, and White River Watershed boundaries can revive independently-owned, local food chains and return one million jobs to the region, preserving individual liberty by restoring food, energy security, and prosperity to the people.
Occasionally, someone will ask me, "What has become of the Well-Fed Neighbor Alliance?" Well, they are still around, you just need to know where to look. In the SBJ article, I noted the name of Well-Fed Neighbor Alliance founding member Aubree Sanders. Sanders, who now is a co-owner of Celestial Spring Herbs in Ava, supports the idea of a local food hub. As I visited with one of the co-founders of the Well-Fed Neighbor Alliance in my kitchen Monday morning, I was reminded of what a small planet we populate. If you are interested in more information about Farm Resettlement Congress or think you might be interested in joining give this number a ring: 417.712.3835 and Galen Chadwick will be glad to take your call.
Saturday, February 28, 2015
Thursday, February 26, 2015
MO Supreme Court Hears "Right-to-Farm" Ballot Language Challenge
Can the Court Legally Consider it?
On February 25, the Missouri Supreme Court heard a challenge to the "Right-to-Farm" amendment (Amendment 1 on the August 2014 ballot). Missouri voters passed the amendment by a slim margin. 50.12 percent of voters said "yes," while 49.88 percent of voters said "no" to the amendment. There was an immediate call for a recount but the recount only confirmed Amendment 1's passage.
The challenge, brought forward by Wes Shoemyer, et al., (Shoemyer) pertains to whether the ballot language was deceptive or confusing to the average voter.
There are questions as to whether the court can legally even consider the case. The questions appear to revolve around whether Shoemyer has any standing to bring suit challenging the language post election. At the minute mark of 7:30 minutes in, the MP3 records the Court asking the attorney for Shoemyer, "Counsel, if you're concerned that voters have been misled by this language, why wasn't suit brought prior to the election because there's no question of insufficient time to do so here?" The attorney for Shoemyer responded, "You are absolutely correct, your honor...I think that's exactly right, I think there is a huge issue here with regard to whether or not we should have challenged it within the first ten days." He then points out, "You are talking about Missouri citizens who are not lawyers, they're not linguists, they're not semanticists. They don't get a copy of this on the day that it's certified, although they probably can download it, probably, from the Missouri State Legislature's Web site. You're essentially asking people who may have no training in the law to look at this and determine whether or not it's deceptive, go find a lawyer who can, within ten days, get a case on file. How many of those are out there and who have expertise in this area? That's a pretty narrow window."
Shoemyer wants a three pronged remedy. They want the election to be set aside. They want the ballot language to be rewritten, and they want to have another election with the new ballot language.
The "contestee" in the case, Missouri Secretary of State Jason Kandor, et al., in their response brief claims, "Shoemyer had a year to litigate the Right-to-Farm ballot title before the election," going on to claim that "he did not, preferring instead to sit on his hands."
Governor Jay Nixon announced about 75 days before the August 5, 2014 election that he would put Amendment 1 on the ballot.
On February 25, the Missouri Supreme Court heard a challenge to the "Right-to-Farm" amendment (Amendment 1 on the August 2014 ballot). Missouri voters passed the amendment by a slim margin. 50.12 percent of voters said "yes," while 49.88 percent of voters said "no" to the amendment. There was an immediate call for a recount but the recount only confirmed Amendment 1's passage.
The challenge, brought forward by Wes Shoemyer, et al., (Shoemyer) pertains to whether the ballot language was deceptive or confusing to the average voter.
There are questions as to whether the court can legally even consider the case. The questions appear to revolve around whether Shoemyer has any standing to bring suit challenging the language post election. At the minute mark of 7:30 minutes in, the MP3 records the Court asking the attorney for Shoemyer, "Counsel, if you're concerned that voters have been misled by this language, why wasn't suit brought prior to the election because there's no question of insufficient time to do so here?" The attorney for Shoemyer responded, "You are absolutely correct, your honor...I think that's exactly right, I think there is a huge issue here with regard to whether or not we should have challenged it within the first ten days." He then points out, "You are talking about Missouri citizens who are not lawyers, they're not linguists, they're not semanticists. They don't get a copy of this on the day that it's certified, although they probably can download it, probably, from the Missouri State Legislature's Web site. You're essentially asking people who may have no training in the law to look at this and determine whether or not it's deceptive, go find a lawyer who can, within ten days, get a case on file. How many of those are out there and who have expertise in this area? That's a pretty narrow window."
Shoemyer wants a three pronged remedy. They want the election to be set aside. They want the ballot language to be rewritten, and they want to have another election with the new ballot language.
The "contestee" in the case, Missouri Secretary of State Jason Kandor, et al., in their response brief claims, "Shoemyer had a year to litigate the Right-to-Farm ballot title before the election," going on to claim that "he did not, preferring instead to sit on his hands."
Governor Jay Nixon announced about 75 days before the August 5, 2014 election that he would put Amendment 1 on the ballot.
Tuesday, February 24, 2015
The Politics of Food
BREAKING: Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Libertarians, Green Party members and all other voters eat food! GASP!
Wow, folks! It's been a long road back to here! I'm glad to be back. This is going to be my new landing spot for posting about all sorts of things.
Shortly I'll be sharing information about the Farm Resettlement Congress...the public surely will want to know all about it. It's the only organization I know of that actually has a plan to deal with creating an adequate local food supply!
The food movement in our local area is still going strong though the focus seems to have shifted now and again, and of late, seems to have even gotten a bit political, at least in some quarters. We still all need to work at keeping political zealotry out of the food supply in my, yes humble, opinion. You see folks, we all still have to eat, whatever our political persuasion. There might be a silver lining to the fact that all political animals have to eat, as Galen Chadwick (remember him?!?) often pointed out, we all vote three times a day...with our forks. We get to choose what we eat and where we buy it. Regarding politics, however, there are not many things more divisive than a good dose of that, I'd rate it's divisive properties right up there with serving G(enetically) M(odified) O(rganism)s at an organic picnic. That would separate the ants from the ant-eaters! I think the last food related meeting I attended was in a downtown facility which happens to have been owned by a Democrat. Why do I even know that? Because this Democrat owner went so far as to suggest, when there was an inquiry about the price of reserving the facility for an event, that depending upon the political persuasion of the potential client there might be a discount involved, and I don't think the potential client was going to qualify for any discounts there. Anyway, I'm getting lost in the pompous (sic) grass here.
Another great food activist in our local area is Ruell Chappell. Ruell continues to foot bang the drum slowly, literally when he plays music at McSalty's Pizza Cafe on East Sunshine every Thursday night from 7-9 PM, and figuratively when he reminds just about everyone he comes into contact with to buy local, eat local, and shop locally owned businesses. Ruell has also been fighting in opposition of the Right to Farm Amendment which passed in the last election. A group, sorry the name escapes me at the moment, including Ruell has challenged the ballot language as not having actually given a fair and accurate representation of what the amendment actually would, in affect, do. So, I think maybe tomorrow, Ruell is going to be sharing more news about that.
Well, I hope someone in the area finds this here food topicky stuff more interesting that an old, dry, boring City Council meeting report, and will drop in to see what I might be blogging about occasionally. Needless to say, my past readership of City Council nerds was rather numerically limited - I know it's really hard for City Council nerds to understand that the majority of people find City Council reporting on the dry and boring side, but, hey, I can't help that, it's the reality, believe or not.
Wow, folks! It's been a long road back to here! I'm glad to be back. This is going to be my new landing spot for posting about all sorts of things.
Shortly I'll be sharing information about the Farm Resettlement Congress...the public surely will want to know all about it. It's the only organization I know of that actually has a plan to deal with creating an adequate local food supply!
The food movement in our local area is still going strong though the focus seems to have shifted now and again, and of late, seems to have even gotten a bit political, at least in some quarters. We still all need to work at keeping political zealotry out of the food supply in my, yes humble, opinion. You see folks, we all still have to eat, whatever our political persuasion. There might be a silver lining to the fact that all political animals have to eat, as Galen Chadwick (remember him?!?) often pointed out, we all vote three times a day...with our forks. We get to choose what we eat and where we buy it. Regarding politics, however, there are not many things more divisive than a good dose of that, I'd rate it's divisive properties right up there with serving G(enetically) M(odified) O(rganism)s at an organic picnic. That would separate the ants from the ant-eaters! I think the last food related meeting I attended was in a downtown facility which happens to have been owned by a Democrat. Why do I even know that? Because this Democrat owner went so far as to suggest, when there was an inquiry about the price of reserving the facility for an event, that depending upon the political persuasion of the potential client there might be a discount involved, and I don't think the potential client was going to qualify for any discounts there. Anyway, I'm getting lost in the pompous (sic) grass here.
Another great food activist in our local area is Ruell Chappell. Ruell continues to foot bang the drum slowly, literally when he plays music at McSalty's Pizza Cafe on East Sunshine every Thursday night from 7-9 PM, and figuratively when he reminds just about everyone he comes into contact with to buy local, eat local, and shop locally owned businesses. Ruell has also been fighting in opposition of the Right to Farm Amendment which passed in the last election. A group, sorry the name escapes me at the moment, including Ruell has challenged the ballot language as not having actually given a fair and accurate representation of what the amendment actually would, in affect, do. So, I think maybe tomorrow, Ruell is going to be sharing more news about that.
Well, I hope someone in the area finds this here food topicky stuff more interesting that an old, dry, boring City Council meeting report, and will drop in to see what I might be blogging about occasionally. Needless to say, my past readership of City Council nerds was rather numerically limited - I know it's really hard for City Council nerds to understand that the majority of people find City Council reporting on the dry and boring side, but, hey, I can't help that, it's the reality, believe or not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)