Jefferson's Dream

Published in edited form in the Foothills Sun-Gazette, April 24, 2013

     It's been a rocky two weeks.  After shenanigans pulled at the April 9th Lindsay City Council meeting regarding Dollar General's "withdrawal," while we supposedly celebrated our agricultural heritage in the Orange Blossom Festival and the fragrance of orange blossoms wafted through town, I was tracking what actually happened.  All we really know is that the developer cancelled escrow on the Citrus Exchange site and the building is not now scheduled for demolition.

     When people heard the building had been saved, ideas about its future flew in like a flock of crows.  Everything from an orange museum to a family crisis center has been proposed.  When I didn't automatically applaud, people asked "Well, what do YOU think it should be?"  Waiting for an answer to arrive, I tried words like "community resource center" and "non-profit meeting place."  Then it came:  what I want to create there is The Center for the Dream that Dreamed Jefferson.

     That's not a name that would really light up the skies.  The idea is one that came in a sentence 20 years ago as I prepared a presentation for the 1993 California Studies conference describing the work of Paul Taylor, a professor of economics at UC Berkeley whom one scholar had described as "the last Jeffersonian."  Jefferson was an agrarian, and luckily scholars since 1993 have discovered that agrarians still exist and are working in the widening cracks of our decrepit economy.  Twenty years ago I was maintaining that Paul wasn't the last, and no one ever would be because what moved him, like what moved Thomas Jefferson, was bigger than any one person.  What I was maintaining was that both men were responding to the drum beat of a different Drummer, who is not going to stop drumming.

     I described the dream as the dream of human equality that formed this country, equality made possible by democracy. What Taylor and Jefferson both recognized was that democracy is maintainable only so long as the country's resources are evenly distributed.  Both men understood that land is the primary resource, and both worked for widespread land ownership for the greatest number of people because they both saw it was in the country's interest as well as the people's.

     Jefferson's dream was partial:  he didn't see that, in scoring the Louisiana Purchase for Americans to settle, they would be displacing Native Americans from their land.  Taylor's dream was partial:  he didn't see that developing irrigation supplies for small farmers would drown out valleys, destroy salmon runs and drive off antelope from desert lands that never should have been farmed in the first place.  But the dream that dreamed Taylor and Jefferson wasn't partial:  it was inclusive, universal.  They were cooperating, doing their part as best they could, and they both left enormous legacies we don't yet know how to appreciate.

     My part was to look again at the way landownership patterns influence the development of small towns, updating a research project conducted by one of Taylor's students, Walter Goldschmidt, who later became professor of anthropology at UCLA.  What I found was that the pattern holds:  towns that grow amidst a larger number of smaller-scale farms are healthier economically, socially, culturally and politically than towns that grow amidst larger-scale farms operated by a few.  It's the night-and-day difference between the east and west sides of our Valley that we all observe but fail to interpret because the economic power of the large landholders - "the big boys," as Paul called them - has put blindfolds on our thinking, gag orders on our mouths.

     What I want to create in the old Exchange building, that historic site of cooperative effort which maintained a viable place in the market for small citrus growers for fifty years and thus enriched this town beyond its own awareness, is a place where we can take the blindfolds off and look at what matters.  I want to create a place where the gag orders can be left at the door and we can begin to speak about solutions.  In that elegant, artfully-crafted building of light and sound I want to create a place where you can still hear that drum beat - so more of us can begin to do our part.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trudy Wischemann is a dreamer who has often been accused of being merely nostalgic.  You can send her your dreams of restoring Lindsay or any small town % P.O. Box 1374, Lindsay CA 93247 or leave a message below!

Begging the Question

     "Why did they want to tear down that beautiful building?" a lovely woman asked me at the bank last week, one of our stalwart members of Lindsay, speaking of the Citrus Exchange building we'd just saved.  I hadn't been totally sure of the answer until Tuesday night's council meeting.  "They wanted a parking lot, new curbs and gutters, and a bulbout," I told her, still in disbelief.

     The agenda for the council meeting was more placid than usual.  Councilwoman Kimball was absent on a trip to Washington DC with TCAG, so no controversial items were considered.  The withdrawal of the Dollar General proposal was tucked into the consent calendar along with the minutes of the last meeting, the request by El Quinto Sol to use Sweet Brier Plaza April 27th for their Dia del Nino event, and the mayor's proclamation opening Orange Blossom Week.

     I had questioned my attorney why the council would need to approve Dollar General's withdrawal; on the surface it seemed a moot point.  He thought it had something to do with limiting the time period in which that proposal could come back to the council without re-doing the environmental documents.  So I let the question drop and prepared to simply witness the formality with dignity and gratitude.

     Surprisingly, Danny Salinas asked to have that item removed from the consent calendar, wanting  more discussion.  "I'd like to get a little more insight on what happened. Bill?"

     Ready, Zigler replied "The developer pulled the project because the developer was concerned about litigation.  The scope of the project was such that they couldn't afford to litigate."  My mind did a back-flip.  If it had gone to court, it would have been the City of Lindsay trying to defend Zigler's environmental documents, not Dollar General.  If we had proven their inadequacy, which we were prepared to do, it would have been the City of Lindsay who paid, because Zigler had not included any indemnification clauses in the conditions on the project.  We were grateful to not have to put that burden on the taxpayers, ourselves, for a staff still out of control.

     Zigler continued:  "As a result of that, if the City of Lindsay wants a pedestrian-friendly bulbed intersection, the citizens will have to pay for it."  Another backflip:  when did we ever ask for a bulbout anywhere?  "If the City wants an additional parking lot, the citizens will have to pay."  The list went on.  "If the City wants street improvements on North Mirage, the citizens will pay for that.  If the City wants improved curbs, gutters and landscaping on Hermosa, the citizens will pay for that."

     I was stunned.  We have not been begging for any of those things.  The only things we have been begging for are to have our streets fixed and our city government re-opened so it is responsive to its citizens, and so far our desires have been unmet.

     Zigler noted that the developer was going to pay for all these things, as well as architectural features masking the metal building's true structure, then concluded "So that's the result of this project being withdrawn.  I'd be happy to answer any questions."

     The only question Bill Zigler will not be happy to answer is "Who says we need these projects?"  It's not the citizens, so who is it?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trudy Wischemann is an ex-patriot planner who loves small towns for their authenticity.  You can send her your ideas about who wants these projects % P.O. Box 1374, Lindsay CA  93247 or leave a comment below!

Dollar General's Silver Linings

Published in slightly edited form April 10, 2013 in The Foothills Sun-Gazette    

     The fight is over, at least momentarily:  Embree Group has withdrawn its proposal to construct a Dollar General in downtown Lindsay.  Now I can organize the papers on my desk and glean the lessons learned from their pages for whatever lies ahead.

     And many things do.  If we learned anything from this, it's the need for a planning commission.  Our planning staff, which we also learned is half invisible, has had its way far too long.  My immediate task is to bring that part to light so we can move ahead with plans that meet the needs of the population, not the city planner's glorification.

     We learned that we need a component in our general plan that speaks for historic preservation.  Exeter adopted one last year, which could serve as a model for one for Lindsay.  This isn't rocket science:  it's understanding the qualities that make a small town environment special and preserving them rather than bulldozing and paving them over.

     Something I myself learned was the value of asking for help.  My whole life I've been help-impaired:  I don't know how to ask for it and don't know what to do when help arrives.  But that shifted for me these last two months, and it started with Steve Slagle, one of my former mini-storage customers who cares for people's lawns and the Lindsay United Methodist Church.

     Steve was standing outside the church one Sunday morning in his suit and tie when I drove by, trying to track the truck routes Dollar General's semi's might use.  Robin Mattos, my attorney's dynamite research arm, had discovered that the Exchange building's architect had also designed a church in Lindsay, but not which one.  So I pulled over, jumped out and asked Steve if he knew who designed that beautiful, Spanish-style church right next to city hall.  He said no, but knew there were plans in the basement he might be able to find.  By 9:45 Monday morning he had the answer:  yes, it was Wm. W. Ache, in October 1954.*  From that moment on, I knew we could demolish the city's finding of "no historical significance," and hopefully prevent the demolition of the Exchange building.

     In response, the developers offered to move off the Exchange building site and develop on Elmwood where a parking lot had been planned.  That was fine with me until it became clear they were going to demolish Ed's Auto (now M&J's) for their parking lot.  After talking with Miguel about what would happen to his business if that occurred, I was distraught.  It felt like Sophie's Choice:  which child do you turn over to the Nazi's for their incinerators, your son or your daughter?  So I prayed, stopped talking with people who thought it was a reasonable deal, and prayed some more.  Good Friday the answer arrived, and it was "No."  Neither my attorney nor I knew what the developers would do.

     Gracias a Dios, they backed out.  Now there's work to do creating a new life for the Exchange Building, protecting the life already in full-swing at Miguel's, and continuing the effort to make this city's staff accountable and transparent.  But for one moment more, I'm celebrating the silver linings that came part-and-parcel with the Dollar General project:  reconnection with members of this community who know and care about it, and the fresh and jubilant reminder of the role of faith.

*Mr. Ache had designed the Exchange building in 1933 as well as the Sierra Citrus packinghouse on Tulare Road that same year, which, with its domed roof, was very innovative at the time.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trudy Wischemann is a formerly faithless person who is rebuilding her ideas of community.  You can send your silver lining stories to her % P.O. Box 1374, Lindsay CA  93247 or leave a comment below!

Place Value

     "What's the APN number on that property?" my attorney friend asked during a discussion of the Dollar General proposal.

     I hesitated as a small explosion occurred inside my brain, left side, a little toward the front.  I recognized the signs, like an epileptic who knows a seizure is about to occur, and kept my mouth shut a few moments longer before answering "I'm not sure."

     Though I've had these episodes regularly during my life, it wasn't till that moment I realized how much difficulty I have talking about places as property.  My friend deals with properties, planners and developers throughout the Central Valley.  It's part of his family history as well as central to his career.  He meant no offense.

     And I don't mean to be quixotic, always tilting at windmills.  I recognize the value of property, how having some (or not) totally shapes our lives in this country, both economically and socially, and that it's one of the ways we make home.  My little explosions, however, are triggered by the way we fail to recognize the place value of property, which transcends parcel lines and ownership, and derives from community uses over time.

     For instance, some of the opposition I heard to the proposed demolition of the Citrus Exchange building was about the loss of that building as a place that represents a moment of community well-being.  My friend Sal Natoli, who graduated from LHS in 1966 and hasn't lived here since, said "Not that building - both of my sisters worked there!"  Quality work environments matter to us:  they confer status, help us integrate with the rest of the community, contribute to our self-worth.  Located on the northeast entry to the business district, it stands as a cornerpost for the community's well-being, even though empty, because its contributions live in our memories.

     And take Ed's Auto, now M & J's, on the northwest corner.  To my mind, the place value there is just as high as the Exchange building, but in an opposite way.  Ed Schapansky's career as an auto mechanic contributed to my well-being so often I went into mourning when he retired, turning over his business to Miguel (whom he calls "Magill" in his Okie interpretation of Spanish.)  Once a Shell gas station, the traces of that national petroleum chain's designs still showing, Ed's Auto is a monument to one individual's entrepreneurial skills and decades of elbow grease meeting a need for care of auto owners as well as their vehicles.  I once saw him change the windshield wipers so tenderly for Wayne Wolf, then very elderly, I almost cried.

     Although it's difficult to use CEQA to defend the kind of place values I'm describing, that doesn't mean we have to discount them.  It's what distinguishes the small town environment from the urban one, and it's time those contributions are recognized.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trudy Wischemann is a writer who has always loved places over properties.  You can send her your list of place values % P.O. Box 1374, Lindsay CA 93247 or leave a comment below!

The Small Town Environment

Published in slightly edited form March 27, 2013 in The Foothills Sun-Gazette

     "We need more businesses downtown!  Why are you trying to stop this store? All you do is complain.  If you don't like it here, maybe you should leave.  I think you need to grow up!"

     The older woman had come to the podium at the March 12th Lindsay city council meeting to speak during the public comment period, and she had turned to face me directly, where I was sitting in the front row.  Mayor Padilla kindly reminded her that she should address the Council, not the audience, and she turned her heat back to the microphone.

     It was a humbling experience, to be yelled at like an unruly teenager by someone who may have less years than I have.  I was glad I was sitting between two men, both a little larger and a little older than I am, all of us wedged into those theater-like chairs from a time when bodies came in somewhat smaller sizes.

     An hour later, the Dollar General proposal would be removed from the agenda at the request of the applicant, tabled to the April 9 meeting largely due to the efforts of myself and my attorney.  Since that day, we have been working relentlessly to figure out what would be best for Lindsay, the whole community and the downtown, given what knowledge exists about developments of this kind and what tools are at hand to shape them.

     It is because I love Lindsay and the small town environment it provides me and the rest of this community who love it, too, that I'm giving every spare minute to this question.  After weeks of wrestling with it, I know that a Dollar General store downtown would serve many of our residents.  I also know it will take away business from many local shopkeepers, and I don't know who will fail as a result.

     The location and the design elements could make a big difference.  Although our city planner uses words like "interconnectivity" and "walkability" to describe the way Dollar General will support the downtown, it appears to me that his plan is actually oriented toward supporting the McDermont complex instead, pulling activity northward, away from downtown.

     The issue is whether residents coming to Dollar General to shop will just pull into the spacious parking lot, get their goods and go, or whether they'll use that trip to stop in at the hardware store and maybe meander further along Elmwood and Honolulu to see what the other shops have.  My position, knowing myself, is that if I've parked on the street and walked along the sidewalk to get to the Dollar General store, I'm more likely to keep walking afterward than if I've pulled into their parking lot.  When I've parked in somebody's parking lot, out of respect for the business as well as pure habit, I'm more likely to get back in my car and go rather than leave my car there whle I walk around town shopping at other businesses.  Parking in a public space changes that completely.

     There are other elements that could make a difference:  orienting the building to face the street, positioned on the sidewalk with parking (and a back entry) behind; display windows and doors along the public sidewalk, inviting people to come in; hiring practices that place local people in the sales positions rather than ever-changing strangers from outside. Windows that let in natural light to sense what time of day and weather make a more humane shopping and working environment than these windowless box stores that shut out everything.  Right now I'm arguing for an exterior facade that ties into the brick buildings downtown rather than the Spanish-style architecture mimicking city hall because it's a way of honoring the business community it seeks to become a member of, rather than the government entity giving it access to our local buying dollars.

     In a fine article describing the explosion of dollar stores in this region (Sun-Gazette, Feb. 27, 2013,) John Lindt wrote that these stores are being placed in communities that have never been served by national chains before.  That's true of towns like Farmersville, Ivanhoe, Goshen, maybe even Woodlake, but not for towns like Lindsay, Dinuba and Exeter.  In their heyday, they were a mixture of national chains like J.C. Penney's, Mode-O-Day, Western Auto and Sprouse-Reitz and the independent cafes, shoe stores, dress shops, stationery and furniture stores that developed right alongside.  A healthy small town has both, and they provide a rich environment for raising families that offers models of individuals' entrepreneurial skills and connectedness to the national economy and culture.

     I recognize that what the dollar store phenomenon connects us to is an economic reality of the schism in our culture:  the disappearing middle class, the engorged ranks of the people falling below the poverty line, and the enormous economic power of the tiny minority at the top.  It's not pretty, but I don't blame that on Dollar General.  The question is whether we are community enough to require them to join us in rebuilding our town by altering their designs in ways that will support rather than erode our central business district, or whether we'll just let them scrape off what little cream there is.  Please join me in asking for their assistance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trudy Wischemann is a writer and researcher who has been estimating and defending the value of small town environments all her life.  You can send her your thoughts % P.O. Box 1374, Lindsay CA  93247 or leave a comment here, below.

Some Walls

Published in edited form in the Foothills Sun-Gazette, March 20, 2013.

"If there's any hope

for love at all,

some walls, some walls

must fall."

                     Randy Sharp

     Tulare County's own Randy Sharp was in Lindsay on Saturday, providing a lovely, homey concert at our community theater.  Making a living as a songwriter most of his career, he sang a long, engaging list of his works.  His clear, sweet voice carried his words and melodies, backed up by his dynamic guitar playing.  He's a thinker and a lover, and the night out was pure pleasure.

     He taught me something as I sat there taking in his music.  The theater's house lights were fully on:  apparently there's no rheostat, no way to dim them.  They're either on or off, and Randy preferred the less glamorous full light because he felt he could better communicate with his audience that way than sitting there alone in the spotlight, talking and singing to the dark.

     Sometimes writing this column is like that:  very solo, no way to see the audience until the concert's over.  The paper comes out, the house lights come back on, and then I get to wonder how it went.  If I didn't have my job at the market, I wouldn't get to hear the applause.  For years I wrote thinking no one was listening.

    Recently I've heard some boos, even caught a couple of rotten tomatoes.  That's ok, at least we're communicating.  Anyone who wants to hear my rebuttal to their arguments will have to look below at the entry preceding this one, however, because I'm not wasting any more trees on those words.  What they're really complaining about is that I've been keeping the house lights up on this city's activities, and they prefer working behind the scenes, then performing in the spotlight where the flaws are hidden.

     Take Bill Zigler's most recent folly, promoting a Dollar General store downtown on the site of the beautiful, historic Central California Citrus Exchange building.  Last September the Council directed Zigler to look elsewhere for this project:  three of the five, including Mayor Murray, were dead set against that location and the proposed demolition of the building.  Regardless, in January Zigler came back with a re-designed Spanish-style store front on the same site and the pronouncement that the Exchange building does not have historical significance.  And just in case someone might still want to restore it, they had an inspection report done that supposedly showed the building is in such poor condition that it would be financially prohibitive to save it.

     This plan has so many planning flaws, not to mention potential economic impacts, that I called in some reinforcements.  While they worked on the legal requirements of CEQA (the California Environmental Quality Act that governs all planning proposals,) I went to work researching the historical significance of the Exchange building and examining Ziglers historial and inspection reports.  Zigler's historical survey was done by his young assistant planner who knows nothing, apparently, of the importance of Sunkist Growers to this community, and the inspection does not estimate even one red cent of potential repair expense.  Those "studies" are just walls thrown up to protect a project even Mayor Murray did not want.

     It appears to me that Mr. Zigler, once again, is serving special interests at the community's expense.  The city attorney appears to be in on the game plan:  her advice to Council to close the public hearing on this project even before bringing it to a vote was another wall thrown up to keep out any new evidence on the adequacy of Zigler's environmental documents.  That is what the Council has been told it is voting on, and the inadequacy of those documents is what we are showing.

     A brave Council would re-open the public hearing and investigate the real motivations behind Zigler's plan before proceding, lest we become saddled with more of Zigler's Follies.  If there's any hope for love at all, some walls - these walls - must fall.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trudy Wischemann is a writer who thinks more truth can be found in words attached to music than in words alone.  You can send her your thoughts on the Dollar General plan % P.O. Box 1374, Lindsay CA  93247 - or leave a response here!

Diluting the Fire

 Journal entry, March 11,2013   

      Last week, while cooking under the influence (CUI), I added a whole canned chipotle pepper to my pork sirloin/yellow bell pepper stir fry.  I have been adding extra ingredients to the mixture ever since, trying to dilute the fire.

     It's a little like trying to shed light on who's shaping Lindsay's future.  Get too close, and it's like biting into a whole chipotle all by itself.

     Take, for example, Janet Kleigl's letter to the editor in March 6th's Foothills Sun-Gazette.  Pricked by my defense of the new councilmembers' attempts to introduce the concept of fiscal responsibility to the staff regarding the use of loan money to repave a parking lot, Janet took 16 column inches describing the inaccuracies that plague my writing and chastised the paper for printing them.  Yet Janet was not at the council meeting where she said the 2-2 vote on that project was taken, which it was not.  Danny Salinas, who was running the meeting because Mayor Padilla was absent due to the death of her sister, feared that he might have a 2-2 tie and decided to continue the vote to the following meeting rather than have the measure defeated.  Because she was not there, Janet also did not hear any of the discussion of the concerns expressed by the two new council members who might have voted "No" if given the chance, and she did not address their concerns in her letter, although they had been sufficiently explained in Councilman Mecum's letter to the editor the week before.  She wrote about the two new members as if they'd been insolent, unthinking children.  That arrogance, unfortunately, was one of the hallmark characteristics of her administration of the school district.

    In her letter, Janet accused me of not contacting her regarding the acquisition of the property on which the new high school was built.  I didn't.  I contacted the former owner, Mark Arredondo, who loved his lovely orange grove and modest ranch-style home nestled among the stately trees.  When I spoke to him, as the trees he loved were dying because there's no point in irrigating a grove on its way to being bulldozed, he was so demoralized by the way Janet and her crew of arm benders had come to him that I feared for his health.  They explained that if he didn't sell to them, they'd simply take it by eminent domain.  Mark died before he ever got to occupy the new farm he bought with the money the school district finally provided - more than a year overdue - for the purchase of his property.  Janet suggested that I got my information through the rumor mill, but in fact it was first-hand testimony of a primary - and unwilling - participant.

     And in fact that farm was irreplaceable.  Mark purchased it from Bob and "Mama Tiger" Kiersey, who had hired a friend of mine to farm their land.  When my friend was investigating the grove's history to document damages from the 1990 Freeze for insurance purposes, he had discovered that much of the grove he tended had actually been planted by the original owner, G. Stockton Berry, the inventor of the steam harvester.  Along with Capt. Hutchinson, Stockton Berry was a major influence in pioneering production agriculture around Lindsay, and thus responsible for the town's development.  The land is (or was) deep, well-drained alluvium formed by Lewis Creek, a soil type we have in very limited quantity.

     Unfortunately, I also know the inspector who did the property assessment of Mr. Arredondo's place for the school district.  He didn't find the historic information my friend did, and he didn't recognize the priceless soil and so the true value of this property was undermined.  Many of the trees the school district bulldozed were over 100 years old and still producing well.  That fact alone is testament to the fertility of that soil.  Unfortunately, during construction of the new high school the soil profile was completely destroyed and now that precious dirt is nothing more than underlayment for asphalt and concrete, buildings and playing fields.

     Trying to turn my criticism of certain City staff for having trouble telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth on my head (I said they regularly misspeak,) Janet said I misspoke when the staff told the council they'd solicited public input on the park redesign.  It was at the Jan. 10, 2012 meeting; I was there, she wasn't.  In her sixth paragraph she even misquotes me, a somewhat shameful thing for a former teacher and school district superintendent to do.  I was maintaining (in the portion she left out) that the park design was finished (Sept. 2011) before the events occurred where they say they received public input (Dec. 2011-Jan. 2012.)  Janet mentions two different meetings she attended where public input was received from as many as 10 different people (that's 0.001% of the population, by the way,) but she doesn't give the date.  Sorry, Janet, but that's a strike.

     Which brings us to the swings.  I challenged the staff's promise "there will be swings," in a column which came out the day after (and which was written several days before) the staff's first announcement that swings were on order.  After promising the people from the Dolores Huerta Foundation "there will be swings," the staff had ordered playground equipment which did not include swings and declared it final.  Additionally, nowhere on the plans for the park is the location for swings identified.  When I asked Maria Knutson (assistant to the city manager) where the swings, now reported as "coming," would be located, she had no idea where they would be placed or what kind of swings they would be.  "I hope they're not baby swings," I said.  "I hope they're big enough for me."  I'm hoping I don't have to drive to Cutler Park to swing once again, the only place left I know where an adult bottom can fit into the swing fixture and remember what it was like to dream.

     As I've walked around talking to people about the city's plans and problems, many of you have expressed your reluctance to express yourselves before people who really don't care what you think.  I know what you're talking about, because I'm constantly having that shoved in my face, even while describing what seems to me to be really important aspects of the quality of our lives in this town, and then getting torched.  You could help dilute the fire by adding extra ingredients to the mixture:  your opinions about the quality of our lives, and what makes living in this town peculiarly special.  Add your voices to the mixture, add your sweet selves to the count, and pretty soon we'll have this fire out.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trudy Wischemann is a small town girl who was raised without a small town.  You can write to her with your small town dreams % P.O. Box 1374, Lindsay CA  93247