Sunday, March 04, 2007

Boulder Knoll

Boulder Knoll farm and the barn (WRA, by Lauresha Xhihani) are back in the news. I think there's a Council Planning Committee meeting at 6:30pm, just prior to the 7:30pm public hearing on elderly tax relief.

Tim White
Town Council, 4th District

17 comments:

Anonymous said...

Tim,

I urge you to support the Friends of Boulder Knoll in their drive to reestablish agricultural activity at Boulder Knoll Farm. Let me appeal to your sense of energy conservation. The next time you buy salad mix at the grocery store (you are eating your veggies, right?), imagine the amount of energy that was consumed to place that salad mix before you. There's the natural gas to make the fertilizer, the fuel for the farm machinery, the energy to process the lettuce (triple washing), the oil to make the plastic bag or box to package the salad, the fuel to truck the bag of salad from California (90% of fresh vegetables are grown in California) to Connecticut under refrigerated conditions, and the energy to store the salad at the grocery. Compare that to the energy costs of lettuce grown in Cheshire and bought at a local farmer's market. The potential energy savings of buying locally grown food are tremendous. Now, let me appeal to your taste buds. Go to Everybody's and buy the Earthbound Farm's Spring Mix (produced in California) and the salad mix from Two Guys from Woodbridge (grown in Hamden, I believe). Even though the Earthbound salad is organic it doesn't compare in taste or texture to the locally grown salad. So, lower energy costs and better quality food. Chew on that.

Anonymous said...

I dont think saying that this will result in substantial energy savings is a reason for the town to foot the bill in anyway for Boulder Knoll Farm.

Anonymous said...

The town shouldn't spend anymore money on the Boulder Knoll Farm. We have a few farmers in town who work hard to farm their own land and sell their own vegetables to the residents in this town. What sense does it make to have the residents buy a piece of the Boulder Knoll Farm to farm their own vegetables? What will that do to the current local farmers' businesses? You're still going to have to buy California lettuce, tomatoes, etc. in the winter as you can't grow it year round here. I say we should hike the rent up for the family renting the house. $600 is way too low. If anyone wants to farm the land, they should do it all at their own expense.

Tim White said...

first... the boulder knoll meeting is on Tues Mar 13, not tomorrow.

Now about the farm...

I find it to be a rather interesting philosophical debate here.

First and foremost, generally-speaking, I do not want gov't competing with private business. Private business and gov't both get some stuff right and some stuff wrong. On balance though, I think business gets stuff right more often than government. (or at least business adjusts more quickly as they run the risk of "going out of business"... something that is not a concern for gov't.)

However, when our produce comes from California or elsewhere and our current transportation system is 97% reliant on oil, then you know how I feel about that... not a happy camper.

Both sides make a lot of sense to me. As I see it, what we really need is some sort of comprehensive reform... at both a state and national level. And until that happens, our efforts at a local level are probably largely futile... except to the extent that such a project is framed in terms that promote sustainability/energy-conservation, etc. and is targeted at increasing public awareness of the issue of our dependence on foreign oil.

And as for whether I believe gov't should be involved in America's oil addiction... yes. absolutely. With 90% of oil owned by foreign governments, I think government has to be involved here in America.

And on a somewhat related note... I can't wait until our first biodiesel factory opens in Cheshire!

Tim White said...

As for the rental fees for town-owned (or is it housing authority owned?) houses on town land, the town manager explained the process to me a year or so ago.

Every year or two, the town reviews the rental fees to ensure that they are a fair market value.

As for the cost to rent some of the houses... I believe each house has their own particular issues that may reduce the rental rates. But for the most part, the houses are rented at FMV.

Anonymous said...

From what I understand, the police officer that lives in the house has been fixing the place up to keep itlivable....just having a cop over there will at least keep the vandals away from the farm....

Anonymous said...

The Town should not fund any startup business and that is what the Friends of Boulder Knoll (FBK)are asking for. The majority of the money they want is for salaries for 3 people, look at the proposal they wrote and presented. In the proposal there was no money set aside for equipment, their plan was to ask local farmer to donate time & equipment for their cause. Here are a few other issues not written about in the article. The place is contaminated with waste products from the dairy farm. Gil Lassen grew hay on the fields only because other than sunflowers, that is about all the land can grow. The barn is not historic, it is falling apart and is an environmental hazard. To knok it down will require a large environmental protection effort due to cresote, lead paint and other pollutants. I do not have a problem if the FBK want to restore the place but do it on their own time & money and do not ask the taxpayers to invest in a startup business.

Anonymous said...

and boulder knoll’s well water is not drinkable

Anonymous said...

Support the growing of Sunflowers for charity....good cause, no funds needed

Anonymous said...

Can we build a "lifestyle" center on the farm? People would then have a place to shop.

Anonymous said...

Somehow I cannot invision people buying and farming parts of Boulder Knoll. I have helped out my in-laws, family farmers in town for years, on their farm for many summer growing seasons. We were up at the crack of dawn, working in 90 plus degree heat, and didn't finish working sometimes until sundown, or at least until the work was done. They awoke at 3 am and brought their produce up to Hartford every weekend to sell at the farmer's market. It was extremely hard work day in and day out.
Somehow I can't picture many Cheshire residents doing the same or not even close to the same amount of work.
I think they should just stick to their little backyard gardens.

Tim White said...

breach... yeah. I like Kerry and I like what he's proposing.

Anonymous said...

Tim-
I also urge you to look more carefully at the Friends of Boulder Knoll proposal. The group is not looking to be a start up company, nor to compete with local farmers. The group is looking to establish a community farm, that grows organic produce to sell at farmer's markets, to local supporters and to donate to local food banks and needy communities. The group's proposal also aims to maintain conservation land and walking trails. Also worth noting is that the group hopes to make Boulder Knoll a farm that provides educational opportunities to the community, and helps to support the existence of agriculture in the town of Cheshire, through educating its citizens as to the benefits of local agriculture. The farm proposed by the Friends of Boulder Knoll is therefore not a start up company, but an educational, agricultural and environmental asset to the town, that's aim is not for profit, and indeed, very charitable.

Anonymous said...

I would like to clear up some misconceptions that people here seem to be having...

Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) does not require an individual to farm the land him or herself. Rather, a farmer is hired (as is specified in our funding request) to farm the land, and a subscriber to the CSA may help in chores around the farm in exchange for a discount on subscription fees. The subscriber then receives a box of seasonal produce each week.

In terms of the comment regarding the funding request, equipment costs were included over the three year period that funding would be required.

Anonymous said...

There is a fundamental misunderstanding here. Tim White and the others on this blog seem to think that Friends of Boulder Knoll is just about a proposal made to the town last September. Friends of Boulder Knoll formed with a mission of "educating the local community about the responsible use of open space." FOBK formed because the town has NOT used its open space responsibly or intelligently at Boulder Knoll. The town bought the land (1.6 million for the Lassen Farm, plus whatever was spent on the Jackman Farm and the Blauvelt property), and then abandoned it. The town created a management plan, and then ignored it.

The town signed a conservation easement with the state DEP, accepted the $460,000, but has not provided public access, has not preserved the wildlife habitat and wetlands, and has not developed a conservation plan for agriculture, all of which are required in the agreement.

Friends of Boulder Knoll wrote a proposal because the town issued a Request for Proposals. That is the only way the town government was willing to communicate with the citizens of the town about this town-owned piece of land they had purchased and abandoned years ago. A lot of the specifics of the proposal were dictated by the requirements of the RFP or the conservation easement of the state. The proposal was written quickly in order to meet a the deadline set by the town.

The proposal was submitted 6 months ago. The town has never decided anything about the proposal -- it has never accepted it, rejected it, or made any useful suggestions about how it might be modified. The town did accept Kerry Deegan's proposal, and that's fine. Sunflowers will be attractive and raise money for cancer charities. That accounts for three acres of the 153 acres of Boulder Knoll (including Jackman and Blauvelt). What about managing the rest of it?

Since presenting the proposal, with no useful response from the town, Friends of Boulder Knoll has continued on with its mission of educating the local community about the responsible use of open space. FOBK pushed the town into getting an Environmental Review Team, a FREE service that will bring experts from across the state to work with the town on how to make the best use of its land. It is something the town should have done seven years ago, but at least it is making a positive step now.

Dr. Bob Giddings, vice president of FOBK, has put forward a plan to manage 5 acres as wildlife habitat, mowing the field annually, and to create a trail leading to the wildlife habitat. He has offered to do this with his own equipment, on his own time, at no charge to the town. This offer has been unanimously endorsed by the Environment Commission -- two months ago. The town has not yet decided whether to accept this offer.

The Friends of Boulder Knoll are now working on getting the town to mow the fields north of Boulder Road. This is in the town's management plan, adopted two years ago. This is essential in order for the land to continue to be usable either for agriculture or for grassland wildlife habitat. The town could do the mowing itself-- it has equipment and employees -- or it could hire it done. Estimates from local farmers are about $7,000 to do it once. Additional work and expense would be required to continue to improve the land for any purpose -- hayfields or agricultural cultivation or wildlife habitat.

So, what do you have to say, Tim White, as a member of Town Council? You talk about the responsibilities of government and business. But business has nothing to do with this -- the property is owned by the town government, and the conservation easement says the Lassen farm can only be farmed by the town or by a non-profit organization.

So, the town has to take responsibility for its own land. Let's see you step up to the plate and do it.

Anonymous said...

I find it interesting that immediately after my last post, urging Mr. White as a town councilman to step up and take responsibility for the town's management of the land, the topic "Boulder Knoll" moved from near the top of the "Categories" section to near the bottom of the "Archives" section. I guess that means Mr. White won't be taking responsibility for Boulder Knoll any time soon.

Tim White said...

"immediately after my last post, urging Mr. White as a town councilman to step up and take responsibility for the town's management of the land, the topic "Boulder Knoll" moved from near the top of the "Categories" section to near the bottom of the "Archives" section."

I have no idea what happened. I certainly didn't change anything.

However... I presume you wrote the last two comments? In all seriousness, I just haven't had the time to respond much recently. I've been focused on the budget this past week.

As for Boulder Knoll, I'm not on the Planning Committee and have not been deeply involved in discussions about future of Boulder Knoll. Off the cuff, the most I can say is that I spoke with Diane Visconti briefly this past weekend and Boulder Knoll came up, but not in great detail.

So I am trying to stay aware of all town issues, but I do rely on the advice of others... in this case, I'm awaiting the Planning Committee's direction.

Feel free to give me a call, if you'd like to discuss further.

439-4394

I'd be happy to talk.