Divisions: More than Football at Stake...

This is not about football. So let's get that out of the way right now. While Mount St. Joseph Academy's recent forfeit to Mount Anthony was cause for a renewed debate about the team's Division I status, the alleged behavior that precipitated the forfeiture is the more significant discussion.

Characterized publicly as a violation of "Christian principles," it does not take much investigative work to piece together the details. Through comments on the Herald's message boards, Facebook, and simply talking to people around town, the community has learned what purportedly happened.

It appears that there has been a pattern of hate speech — racist, anti-Semitic, and homophobic — allegedly practiced by some students in the MSJ community. Some accounts suggest that this behavior reaches back several years. Such occurrences should be taken seriously and addressed directly and unequivocally. I applaud Principal Paolo Zancanaro and the rest of the administration, faculty, and staff for the disciplinary action they took. I am less impressed with those within the MSJ and the greater Rutland communities who seem to want to ignore this issue, choosing either to divert the discussion to a debate about football or to dismiss outright this transgression as nothing more than "boys will be boys" behavior.

This isn't a free speech issue. The First Amendment guarantees our right to express ourselves freely, however a great responsibility is attached. While we are granted the right to say whatever we want, the true test of a citizen is acknowledging when those freedoms begin to harm our neighbors. There is a line. And hate speech crosses it.

These are not just words. Hate speech is indicative of a deeper systemic problem. It troubles me deeply that there seem to be those in the community who see no need to confront it. MSJ can lay a solid moral foundation, but that work is in vain if families undermine it at home either through practice or indifference. It's exactly these kinds of attitudes that lead to hate speech. What starts innocently as a joke, soon turns to belief, and eventually into action. That action may manifest itself radically in violence, or often, more subtly in deeply engrained prejudices that breed intolerance within families, communities, and entire nations. History has borne this out time and again.

This behavior is neither unique to MSJ nor is it the prevailing ideology there. To be sure, many within the school community are saddened by these actions and support Mr. Zancanaro's decision. I also do not wish to single out the football team. A student at another local high school agreed that trash talk on the field of play often involves racial epithets. Spend any time around some teenagers, and you will quickly notice how at ease they are with certain hate words. The N-word enjoys a special currency.

When pressed, they will defend its use, insisting that, to them, it carries no hateful connotations. While much has been made of the effort within contemporary African-American culture to reclaim the N-word in order to strip it of its power, there is a vast gulf between Dave Chapelle using it, and a bunch of white kids in Vermont saying, "He's my n—," let alone "Kill the n—s."

What happened in front of St. Peter's Church could have just as easily happened on the soccer field or in the cafeteria or in another school in another part of the country (and it does). Did these kids make a mistake? Yes. And they have been disciplined. It wasn't so long ago that I was a high school student. I know you don't always think before you speak or act. Everyone deserves a second chance, especially in a Christian institution like MSJ. I only hope they are sincerely apologetic and have truly learned something from this experience — a lesson they will hopefully carry with them into adulthood.

So here we are. Despite the so-called "post-racial" era ushered in by the election of our first African-American president, racism is still prevalent. We ask ourselves why kids are talking like this. The easy answer is the media, but that's a simplistic and myopic argument. I've watched the same TV shows as these kids — "South Park," "Family Guy," Chappelle's show — and I turned out fine (a lot of people did). But I know that hate speech is wrong. I understand these programs are all dealing in satire, and I view them within that context.

Still, I cringe every time I hear someone use the word "f-g" in a hateful way. Why? Because certain values were instilled in me from a very young age. Respect. Acceptance. Love. Justice. Dignity. I have my parents to thank for this moral core. But I also had an education that reinforced these values. For those of you who don't already know, I am a proud graduate of MSJ.

Looking back on the arc of my intellectual and moral development, I can think of two individuals who had a significant influence on me. One was Father Charles Durham. The other was Paolo Zancanaro. The education I received from these two people has in no small way led me to where I am today. My passion for social justice, the environment, and community action are all a direct result of my experiences at MSJ.

So why then is there resistance to confronting instances that violate these Christian principles? Why has there been backlash against the administration for the disciplinary actions that were taken? More pointedly, how on earth can anyone even begin to justify hate speech? It's because we refuse to admit there is a problem. In a community as culturally and racially homogenous as Rutland, notions of race are just that, notions — ideas that very rarely get put into practice. In the absence of a diverse population, we get lazy in our efforts to celebrate diversity and teach acceptance.

As principal, Mr. Zancanaro can do much to address intolerance. I have no doubt that he will use this incident as a teachable moment. However, despite his position, he is only one person, and as I have already stated, the school's efforts will not succeed if these lessons are not being reinforced at home.

I urge the administration to remain proactive. Some sort of diversity programming should be implemented above and beyond the strong values that are already being taught. Intellectual development must be fostered, and more opportunities for new cultural experiences must be explored.

As for the rest of the MSJ community, we must re-evaluate what is really important for the future of our school. Over the years, it seems as though we have lost our way. (Now I am talking about football.) As a friend and fellow '01 graduate noted, football should be an accessory to MSJ. Unfortunately, the most vocal and supportive alumni seem to think that football is the whole point, that Christian values are the accessory.

I respect the tradition of football at MSJ. However, it seems to me that there are those who would sooner see the entire school fail than move down a division. This is selfish and egotistical. Attitudes like this suggest that MSJ is more about superiority and winning than charity and humility. I am not a religious person; my faith lies somewhere between skeptic and atheist. However, the principles of love, acceptance, and justice transcend belief. This above all else should be MSJ's proudest tradition.

Remember, words become beliefs, and beliefs become actions — a progression that can also be used for good. It begins in our schools and in our homes. If we do not teach love, humility, and acceptance, if these ideals are not being upheld by the community, then we have all failed. We will not only be mourning the loss of a school, we will be mourning the loss of an entire generation.

click here to read more...

Catalysts.

Sometimes living in Rutland feels a lot like the movie Groundhog Day. No matter what happens during the course of any given day in Rutland—no matter how much progress is made—you can go to bed confident that when you wake up tomorrow, everything will be exactly the same.

Enter into this miasma of status quo, the recent Downtown Rutland Market Study. For the first time in quite a while, Rutland actually has a vision and a plan. The work conducted by consultant Tripp Muldrow and the study’s Steering Committee (full disclosure: I am a member of this committee) took a long, hard look at the reality of Rutland’s market—its trade areas, strengths, weaknesses, opportunities—and from this data, developed a comprehensive and multi-faceted strategy for Rutland’s future.

Now what?

We have a fantastic plan. We have a strong vision. But how are we going execute it? Who’s going to make sure it gets done? It’s no surprise that people are cynical. Many have lost faith in the alphabet soup that is Rutland’s community organizations. Being involved in a number of them, I can understand people’s frustrations. Too often, they are all working off different playbooks; communication is infrequent, and as a result, coordinating joint efforts can at times be difficult, sloppy, and poorly executed. But at the end of the day, these organizations are composed of committed, passionate individuals who have Rutland’s best interests in mind. I am not here to be an apologist for anyone, but I am here to say that there’s hope.

This market study requires all of us to work together. It requires us to finally work off the same playbook. It gives us the damn playbook. Signed, sealed, and delivered. However, success or failure is dependent upon everyone’s willingness to get behind it. Everyone. In his presentation, Muldrow spoke of catalyst projects—large-scale community efforts that build support and enthusiasm for Rutland. Think the Berwick or the Alley. I submit that we need two more catalyst projects—a catalyst in community attitude and involvement, and a catalyst in leadership.

The success of this plan, and ultimately Rutland’s future, hinges on the community’s wiliness to embrace it. You need to be excited about this. You need to get involved. You need to want to make Rutland a better place. It’s easy to sit at home, to hide in anonymity on the Herald’s message boards, and pick apart this plan piece by piece. To say it will never happen. That Rutland fails at everything it does.

You know what? You’re right. And it’s your fault.

Support the good things we have instead of constantly pointing out the bad. Celebrate our triumphs. Help to improve the places where we have challenges. Be proud of Rutland. That’s the challenge for all you pessimists out there: get involved, be constructive, and help us make Rutland a better place. And to the great many of you whom are already involved, thank you and please keep up the good work.

Still, that’s only one side of the equation. This plan cannot succeed with grassroots community involvement alone. We need leadership. We need our state legislators officials and city government to get behind us, as I’m sure they will. We need the executive directors from invested area organizations to work together and show the leadership, energy, and vision that I know they are all capable of. It was here that we stumbled when unrolling the materials from last summer’s branding exercise. Lacking a cohesive strategy, these fantastic designs lingered in bureaucratic limbo, and are only recently being rolled out in any significant way. This time around, we must act swiftly, deliberately, and strategically. We cannot afford to do otherwise.

To those of you who may dislike this plan, I would like to hear your suggestions. Unless others come forward with an alternative vision and strategy for Rutland, we are going to proceed with the one we have. (It’s a pretty damn good one.) We do not have the luxury to sit on our hands. It’s true; we are in tough economic times. Getting funding for some of these projects will be a challenge. However, we are also in a time of great opportunity. With the right combination of visionary leadership and enthusiastic, positive community involvement, Rutland is uniquely poised to capitalize on it.

Moving forward, I pledge to continue my support of this effort. I plan to remain on the Steering Committee, and seeing to it that this work gets done. This is going to happen. When we wake up one of these days, things are going to be different. Rutland will be a community that everyone can be proud of—a vibrant, thriving, and authentic model for the rest of Vermont. Lead, follow, or get out of the way.

click here to read more...

No Parking? Think Again.

It’s a paradox. How can a city with so little going on have such a huge parking problem? Now, I’m assuming these two criticisms are true since I hear them all the time, Sometimes I even hear them both from the same person, which raises another interesting paradox of how people can reconcile two seemingly conflicting notions without their heads exploding à la the guy from Scanners.

If I may be so bold, I’d like to suggest that there really isn’t a parking problem in Downtown Rutland—that it’s all myth cooked up by the Herald on a slow news day, or possibly by Rutland Town in an effort to lure shoppers to the Diamond Run Mall with its ample, ample, ample free parking.

Then again maybe there is an issue. Maybe we’ve just exaggerated it. And maybe the solution is taking some simple steps (literally) on our own in conjunction with some focused efforts on behalf of the city. Here are my modest suggestions:

• Hoof it. Despite the occasionally treacherous sidewalks, Rutland is a very walkable city. If you’re able-bodied and healthy, park a bit further away from your destination (or better yet, leave your car at home). There are a number ten-hour meters on Wales, Court, and upper Center Streets that go largely unused. Leave the closer spaces for those among us who actually do need them. Judging by the City’s recent wellness report, the few extra steps would do us all good.

• Bike it. Again, a mode of transportation that lends itself well to our City. While some of our streets may not be bicycle friendly, they are not all that bad. As Rutland moves forward in its commitment to become a sustainable community, the installation of clearly marked and planned bike routes and lanes will be a necessity. So grab your helmet and get peddling.

• Bus it. In Rutland, we have a fairly comprehensive bus service. While there may be some holes coverage and access, it’s still pretty impressive for a community of our size. And while there seems to be an aversion to The Bus by some in the community, the average number of riders for a typical Rutland City route in 2007-08 was over 45,000. So somebody’s using it. The real challenge lies in get the message out there—emphasizing the environmental benefits of public transportation, park and ride opportunities, and affordable fairs.

• Deck it. Did you know we have a parking deck in Rutland? It’s on West St, it’s like five stories high, provides easy access to Center St. and Merchants Row, and is vastly underutilized. Still can’t find it? Well, that’s because there’s barely any signage. On top of that, most people think it’s too expensive for short-term parking. To be fair, free parking is available in the evenings, but that seems to be kept secret for some reason. 

The deck, which is owned by the state, should adopt a payment structure similar to
the decks in Burlington where parking is free for the first hour or two. Free short-term parking would encourage more frequent use by downtown shoppers. (And dare I say toss some solar panels up on the top of that thing? It would be a valuable and high profile sustainable energy initiative for the city.)

While we’re on the topic of transportation and such, here are a couple more quick thoughts:

• Wayfinding signs! I can’t be the only one who has met people who think that the extent of Rutland is the unsightly sprawl on Routes 4 and 7. Similarly, some visitors recently told me about the difficulty they had locating Pine Hill Park. Why are we hiding our best assets? We have a pile of great designs and strategies from last year’s branding exercise that for the most part have yet to be used (poor form, folks). Seems like a good use of those Zamias funds, if you ask me.

• Reverse Wales St. Our current configuration of traffic flow denies us the opportunity to direct traffic into the heart of our city. Making Wales southbound all the way to Washington would draw in traffic from West St., and give people better access to Center St., and eventually the Alley once that project gets underway.

To be sure, none of these ideas are particularly novel nor are they entirely my own. They have been tossed about for some time. But like many good ideas, they have languished in committee limbo—initially met with great enthusiasm, but ultimately neglected due to a lack of focus, determination, and leadership. It’s time for us to begin working with a clearer vision of what we want Rutland to become, and parking is a small albeit important piece of this puzzle.

At the end of the day, all cities (yes, we are a city) have parking issues. As someone who has lived in and visited larger cities, parking in Rutland is pretty convenient. People who cite it as a deterrent to shopping downtown need to find a better excuse. Like I said, the fact that some struggle to find a place to park is a testament to how much actually is happening here. With a little more effort from both the City and us residents, we can improve the minor problems we have, and lead the way to an even more accessible, vibrant, sustainable city.

click here to read more...

This Generican Life.

Here we go again.

Last week, the Rutland Commons project moved a step closer to reality when it received Act 250 approval. That some people still think the Commons is a good idea is utterly amazing to me. The box store model—like the shopping mall before it—is broken. By now, we all know the “buy local” refrain—money spent here stays here; it’s that simple. However, my disapproval of this project goes much deeper than my localista leanings.

(And it’s not a Rutland Town thing, either. Despite what the Select Board may think, I am not secretly plotting against them. My columns do not contain coded instructions to the underground cabal that is working on the Merger (we have a Facebook group for that).)

Make no mistake; if this project were in Rutland City, my opposition would be even stronger. I know all the pros—jobs, tax revenue, an Olive Garden. In the short-term, these are all plusses (free breadsticks!). It’s the long-term impact of the Commons, however, that troubles me.
Recently, I took a drive down to Florida. Roundtrip, I traveled about 3,000 miles. In that span, I saw too many of the plastic, sprawling, Wonderbread communities that I hope Rutland will never become. Even when I reached my destination of Naples, I witnessed the impact unchecked growth and rampant consumerism has on local economies, local attitudes, and the local culture (to say nothing environmental concerns).

In Naples, the strip mall is part of the natural ecosystem. While the structures are ubiquitous, hardly any of them are at full occupancy. This speaks to the greater issue of a national decline in year-to-year retail sales for national chains versus independent stores. In other words, the boxes are tanking while the independents are on the rebound. To be sure, no one is thriving right now (except for liquor, guns, and churches, which is presents an entirely different set of problems). Nonetheless, independent retailers are fairing better nationally compared to their chain store competitors.

This entire Commons scheme looks like it was cooked up inside a vacuum. Despite whatever research the developers may have conducted, it does not take the current economic situation into account (unless they’re planning on opening a Bread Crusts, Bindles & Beyond). Reaching 50% occupancy—which is the threshold at which construction will begin—is likely; however, it is doubtful that they will ever get the other fifty.

Indeed, the current state of the Diamond Run Mall and the persistent rumors about Dick’s and Michael’s potential departures only breeds more skepticism about the success of the Commons. In the face of such uncertainty, can Mr. Kalish honestly say that this project is in the best interest of Rutland’s economic future? Can’t we do better?

With all the criticism heaped upon Mayor Louras and the Partnership for the empty downtown storefronts (which, I might add, at an 86% occupancy rate for first-floor retail spaces, is right in line with the national average), I wonder if Mr. Kalish and the Rutland Town Select Board will be as proactive as the City is when dealing with the inevitable albatross of a box store ghost town.

This all may sound negative, but I feel it is in the community’s best interest to voice a strong objection to this project. I am not hoping for it to fail, I am hoping it never happens at all. To think that the Commons is some kind of silver bullet to the area’s woes is just wrongheaded. If Mr. Rhodes honestly believes that this is the “smartest and greatest thing ever to happen to Rutland Town,” I’ve got a bridge I’d love to sell him. (I also have some magic beans he might be interested in).

Maybe, it’s me. Maybe, I just don’t get the appeal of box store culture. To me, it seems like incredibly vapid and impersonal. It’s a culture that promotes homogeneity and thoughtless consumption as a preferable substitute to unique and authentic experiences. At its root, this is an existential matter, which I believe trumps any possible economic benefit.

A critique this abstract may be easy for some people to dismiss, but in a community that has always had self-esteem and identity issues, the impact of prefab culture on our collective psyche is worth analyzing. These businesses reduce shopping and dining experiences to impulsive, thoughtless acts where one never considers where a product is made or who the person is behind the counter not to mention whether or not you even need that product in the first place (I’m looking at you, ShamWow).

Is this really what we want? I’ve done my share of traveling. I’ve seen the wave of “Generica” that has swept away local cultures and economies. Local coffee shops, books stores, restaurants—in some parts of the country these are an endangered species, but in our community, we have them in spades. We should be proud of this fact. We should do whatever we can to support what we already have and foster new local businesses. To think that any community would willingly succumb to the box store trend is anathema to me.

I know I’ve covered this subject in the past, but I feel the need to revisit it because I believe that we can change this culture. Our community cannot and should abide the erosion of the local for cheap clothes and chicken wings. Call me anti-business, protectionist, or whatever else you want. Communities like ours need to draw a line in the sand. We need to show the rest of the country that we can survive (and even succeed) without bowing down to the banal, plastic lifestyle currently being hawked as culture and experience.

The fact that this project is still on the table shows how out of step some people are with the real future (and past) of our community. This is shortsighted economic development achieved at the cost of our local soul. If you want to see real solutions for long-term growth in the Rutland area, check out the impressive work organizations like the Rutland Area Farm and Food Link are doing. Projects like the Food Hub and the incubator farm are both economically viable and maintain the character and integrity of our natural landscape and rural agricultural heritage. The process may take a bit longer, but the end result will be a sustainable, viable, and equitable economic, environmental, cultural future for our community.

originally published in the Rutland Herald 3/19/09)

click here to read more...

Shrinkage.

Last week the Rutland Herald, like so many other ladies of a certain age and distinction, got a facelift. The result is a slimmer paper that, despite costing a quarter more and being an inch-and-a-half thinner, is still our same old daily.

Rutlanders have a complicated relationship with the Herald. While I’ve never understood the derogatory “Russian Herald” moniker (is it run by communists?), the name speaks a certain disdain some readers have for our local paper—a paper, I might add, that is the oldest continuously-running, family-owned local newspaper in the country. While so many independent news organizations have been gobbled up by corporate media behemoths like Tribune and Gannett, it’s heartening to see our local paper trying to stay alive.

I am by no means an apologist for the Herald. There have been editorial choices that I’ve disagreed with, and I will continue to remain critical of the content, focus, and tone of the reporting when necessary (as any responsible reader should). Nonetheless, it’s our paper—free of corporate influence and outside interests. And despite your political leanings, you cannot say that the Herald doesn’t present a thoughtful and earnest local perspective.

Naturally, this sounds good to a raving localista such as myself. But we all must recognize the significance of the fact that we still have an independent daily paper. Complain about the Herald all you want—that’s your right—but at the end of the day, we all need to support it. If the Herald were to fold (that’s the only pun, I promise), we would be left with no local reporting—no eye on city government, no local sports coverage, no one to egg on my “feud” with Rutland Town.

Some have suggested that bloggers may benefit from the demise of local papers. God help us if that’s the case. Have you ever read a blog? As a blogger myself I can attest to the fact that 92% of everything we write is libelous and inaccurate (the other 8% is celebrity gossip and Lost fan-fiction).

But like so many newspapers across the country, the Herald is going through a difficult time that is only going to get worse. In the Digital Age, the printed word is struggling to compete. While I do prefer reading a physical paper, I appreciate the convenience and efficiency of the Web—I consume less paper, and am able to read it anywhere for free (sorry, but free is an incentive). Aside from the environmental benefits, the Herald’s slimming saves them $200,000 annually. A savings like that is invaluable right now. However, it’s hard to say if that will be enough. With that concern in mind, I’ve got a couple-few unlikely suggestions on how the Herald can up its sales:

1) Start a “Page 6”-style local gossip section. As any longtime Rutland resident can tell you, there is no dearth of scandal and intrigue in our town. Let’s report on it. Where are Rutland’s favorite local celebs dining? Who was at Muckenschnabel’s last Friday night? Which Rutland hottie was spotted without makeup ordering a latte at Café Terra last weekend? Juicy stuff, right? Paper sales would skyrocket, but you’ll probably have to give back the Pulitzer.

2) Citizen reporters. Judging by the volume and quality of comments on the Herald’s online message boards, there seem to be a number of engaged and articulate readers who should be given a wider forum. Let’s give these eager, thoughtful, and even-tempered folks press passes and set them loose on the community. This does, however, bring up one important question: can all these new reporters call themselves “None None”?

3) Do more twittering. I’m not entirely clear on what Twitter is, but apparently it’s really important and everybody’s doing it. Get on board, guys. This does mean you’ll have to limit all your stories to 140 words of less. On the plus side, this will make the Alderman beat more bearable for Stephanie Peters.

I could keep going, but if I do, this might be my last column. Suffice to say, if local papers are to survive, they need to be current, nimble, and innovative. In any medium, an independent daily needs to demonstrate its commitment to the community and its dedication to local issues. The Herald has provided this service for generations. While we may eventually lose our battle to preserve the print edition, we must ensure that the entity remains. The Herald’s task now is to be ready—to develop a blueprint for the transition to a Web-only format that is economically viable while still maintaining comprehensive and critical local coverage.

(originally published in the Rutland Herald 2/11/09)

click here to read more...

Unwrapping Rutland's Future.

The Holidays (yes, I said Holidays) are upon us. However, this year won’t be all wassail, mistletoe, and ugly sweaters. After a year where our country’s financial and manufacturing institutions (and even some state governments) are so far in the red they’d blind Rudolph, it’s hard to get into the spirit. Unemployment is skyrocketing and the economy looks worse than our sidewalks. Yet the season marches on. But this year, many of us are faced with desperate and dire situations that make the prospect of putting presents under the tree look pretty daunting. We all must learn to live more simply, and in this time of great need, do whatever we can to help those less fortunate than ourselves.

Still, this is the season of receiving as well as giving, right? So with that in mind, I’ve drafted my own holiday wish list of some gifts that I think would benefit our whole community. While some of these requests might be shooting for the moon, there’s no harm in at least entertaining a discussion.

1. Broadband Municipal Internet. Of all the infrastructure upgrades we need, this may not be at the top of most people’s lists; however, it is essential if Rutland is ever going to make positive step forward in the twenty-first century. Being a wired community gives us a competitive edge that will encourage economic development and radically change the way we do business. Imagine taking our municipal services online—bills, invoices, permits all submitted without paper.

Additionally, we need to bridge the digital divide that currently exists between the rich and poor when it comes to access to information. All citizens deserve Internet access. To that end, I would encourage free wireless Internet throughout the city.

2. Sidewalks. Contrary to popular aldermanic belief, people do use them—the disabled, the elderly; people for whom the current condition of many of our sidewalks is simply unacceptable. In a community that is so easily walkable (and bikeable), the fact that our sidewalks (and some streets) are in such poor shape is disappointing. How can we encourage people to not take their car to work when we are unable to provide them with a safe alternative?

3. The Food Hub/Community Kitchen in Rutland. For those of you unfamiliar with this project, it essentially is locating and installing a large food processing facility to be used by our local farmers and food producers. Organizations like RAFFL have been instrumental in promoting this project, and have been working hard to make it a reality. This facility would be a boon to local agriculture and our local economy.

While the location of this kitchen is currently being debated, I argue that it is imperative
it be located in Rutland. As the largest urban center in southern Vermont—surrounded by an abundance of available and fertile farmland—it only makes sense that this project be located in our city. I believe that the future of economic development in Rutland County is dependent in part upon our ability to return to our agricultural roots. We are a farm to city community, and we need to once again embrace this asset.

4. More Community Gardens. Staying with the agricultural theme, I can envision the vacant lots throughout the city being converted to gardens maintained by neighborhoods. The community garden on Woodstock Avenue is a start, but we need to think bigger, and more creatively. An initiative like this would serve to get fresh, healthy food in the hands of those who otherwise might not be able to afford it. Being a community effort, it would strengthen relationships, and give people a sense of pride and ownership in their neighborhoods.

5. Recycling. Did you know that there is no recycling ordinance in Rutland County? While the Solid Waste District does a great job providing information and support, it is entirely voluntary. For a city this size, that is intolerable. Despite the fact that the market for recyclable goods is almost nonexistent at the moment, we must remain vigilant and committed to this cause.

6. Better Food in our Schools. When was the last time you had lunch at you child’s school cafeteria? The quality of food is at sub par at best—enriched flours, empty carbohydrates, high-fructose corn syrup, frozen, processed foods. And for many children, this is the best meal they get all day. While the meals are mandated to meet federal nutrition guidelines, they do so on paper only. Our children deserve better.

Fortunately, there are organizations and resources in our state that feel the same way (and
even a group of local parents working to this end). Vermont FEED is one of them. Through, education and implementation, this organization provides schools with fresh, local alternatives to the frozen, processed menus students currently have. Indeed, a component that I have been championing lately is the planting of gardens on school grounds. An initiative like this gives kids a personal investment in the food they eat (and who knows, we might get our next generation of farmers out of it, too).

7. The Merger. You know the one I’m talking about. City + Town = 1. While there’s no love lost between these two entities, their ugly relationship needs to be resolved. How can there be any forward progress or growth in our community if you two can’t get out each other’s way? Save for a few persistent curmudgeons, we are one community. The growth of one should not be at the expense of the other. The sooner we can resolve this dispute, the sooner we can move forward together. But if you continue to breed divisiveness and contempt, this community is going to wallow in municipal and economic limbo for another century. And for what? The pride of a few stubborn old men holding a decades-old grudge? On a personal note, I have a request for the Rutland Town Select Board: Can we be friends? It’s the Holidays, guys.

I could go on, but I think that’s enough to think about for now. If any of these issues are important to you, by all means speak up. There are many great forward-thinking organizations in our community that are working to make these wishes a reality, but community support is crucial—let them know you are behind them, get involved, and together we can finally move this community in a positive new direction.

(originally published in the Rutland Herald 12/18/08)

click here to read more...

Bag the Bags.

America is riding high on the wave of change. With the election of Barack Obama, we are a tangible step closer to undoing the disastrous, divisive, and embarrassing policies of the last eight years. Of these many disasters, President Bush’s environmental policy has been lost in the shuffle. For almost a decade, our planet has endured the rollback of Kyoto, a preposterous global warming debate, and a dependence on (foreign) oil that is best summed up in Dubya’s Crawford Ranch handholding sessions with Saudi princes (“Oh, Abdullah, why can’t I quit you”).

To be sure, an Obama presidency isn’t a panacea—we still have a national oil addiction, corporations who put self-interests ahead of the common good, and a loud segment of the population that still refuses to acknowledge our own culpability. Tina Fey wasn’t that far off when—playing Sarah Palin on Saturday Night Live—she suggested that global warming was a sign of the End of Days. And there’s the rub. Our nation’s policies on the environment won’t change until our attitudes do. Try as he might, President Obama’s efforts will only be hindered until all of us face the facts.

In his acceptance speech, Mr. Obama reminded us that there would be sacrifices; that his policies would only be as successful as our willingness to meet him half way. As much as we want to believe the populist/Robin Hood trope of taxing the rich and bullying corporations, those tactics will do nothing unless these groups themselves want to change. Despite the dire (and increasingly irrelevant) warnings from the Hannities and Limbaughs of the Right, we are not Socialists. This is still a free market, and as such, money talks. If we put the screws to the car manufacturers, oil companies, and all the other environmental offenders via organized boycotts and other (peaceful and legal) actions that affect their bottom line, we can make a difference.

This is where our sacrifice comes in. We need to change our attitudes and our habits. We need to realize that our actions and lifestyles do have an impact on the natural world. As I said, the success of any new, progressive environmental policy is dependent upon our support. And it’s more than catchphrases and empty expressions. “Being green” is easy to say, but let’s start to put that into action. I’m not calling for sweeping changes. We need to start small with simple, but effective demonstrations of action.

To this end, Sustainable Rutland is launching a Bag the Bag Challenge (this has potential for a James Brown reference, but I’ll try to resist it). We are encouraging people in the Rutland area to stop using plastic bags. Ideally, we would like to see an outright ban on disposable bags like many other cities have adopted, but like I said, baby steps. What is the impact of a few bags, you may ask. Well, let me drop some science on you (in easy-to-read bullet points):

• Americans use over 380 billion polyethylene bags per year. Only 1% of these are recycled.

• Plastic bags are made of polyethylene, a petroleum product. Their production contributes to air pollution and energy consumption.

• It can take up to 1,000 years for polyethylene bags to photodegrade. As they break down into increasingly smaller toxic bits, they contaminate soil and waterways, and inevitably enter the food our food chain.

• The estimated annual cost to retailers for plastic bag manufacturing is $4 billion. Naturally, this cost is passed on to you.

• And paper bags are pretty bad, too (even worse in some ways).

So what are you to do? Roll out of Price Chopper with a cart full of loose groceries like some paranoid lunatic who thinks plastic bags are trying to steal your thoughts? No, there’s an alternative: reusable canvas bags. Remembering to bring your bags out with you may be a hassle at first, but ultimately all you doing is trading a bad habit for a good one. (As an aside, while any type of reusable bag is preferred to paper or plastic, not all reusable bags are created equal. Some are made of synthetic materials, or are produced in distant countries like China. If possible, seek out organic domestically-produced canvas bags.)

But wait—you don’t have a reusable canvas bag? No problem. Pick up one of Sustainable Rutland’s new canvas bags available at participating downtown businesses and the Winter Farmers Market. Smart, stylish, and affordably priced at only $2, you’ll be the envy of all your localista friends.

Like I said, small acts can make a difference, and can carry a powerful message. It is encouraging thinking that we could eventually become a bag-free community, and inspiring when we consider what else is possible when we commit ourselves to positive change and progress. So grab some canvas and do your part, because Rutland’s got a brand new bag. (Sorry).

(originally published in the Rutland Herald 11/12/08)

click here to read more...

Making the Brand.

Growing up in Rutland, I’ve developed a cynical attitude that has often tainted my experiences here. I’ve tossed around the “Rut Vegas” name with self-deprecating irony, and when traveling, I’ve often said I live in the “Killington area” with the type of fervent denial that would give St. Peter pause. If you talk to me for more than ten minutes in Café Terra, I’ll likely be lamenting local news coverage or calling for the ouster of an Alderman (or several). While I may not be as bitter as the “Debby Downers” who lurk in anonymity on the Herald’s message boards, I am far from Rutland’s biggest cheerleader. But lately, I’ve been sipping the Kool-Aid, and it’s not all that bad.

I was skeptical when I first heard news of Rutland’s re-branding. Paying somebody to come to our town to tell us what is special about it seems like an indicator of a much bigger problem—a problem that a new logo and catchphrase couldn’t possibly fix. However, it’s unfair to write off what the folks from ArnettMuldrow did as simply an empty ad campaign. This project isn’t about attracting tourists or new residents (though, that is an eventual part of the strategy); it’s first and foremost about changing our own perception of the Rutland Area.

My experience at this series of meetings was wholly positive. For those of you who think it was just the same Good Ol’ Boys and Gals sitting around and talking about how great Rutland used to be, you’re wrong. The discourse was honest, frank, and at times, even philosophical. We explored the psyche of the city—what were we all about, what made us tick—and despite all the shortcomings that we so often get bogged down in pointing out, we came through with a positive image.

As expected, people were quick to tear down the work of not just the “outsiders,” but also that of their neighbors—the ones who took the time to get involved in the process. Remember, folks, all these events were open to the public, and adequately publicized. The Facilitated Public Input Session at the Paramount only drew forty people. The Brand Presentation wasn’t much better.

Given our community’s proclivity to only see the negative, I have not been at all surprised by “Connected, Naturally’s” cool reception. From the choice of a non-local firm to the ambivalence over the logo to the perceived vagueness of the tagline, Rutlanders have been quick to heap criticism upon the project.

People have attacked the Rutland Redevelopment Authority for not opening this project to bid locally. As “one of those buy local people,” you may think it hypocritical of me not to take issue with this, however, in this circumstance, I believe that there is a benefit to getting an objective point of view. Those of us who live here are not able to see Rutland beyond the lens of our personal experiences and interactions. After attending the branding meetings, I saw the importance of having people involved who have an outsider’s view of the area. As a result, they were able to make observations and connections that most of us have missed for years.

As for the logo, yes, it does need some smoothing out. However, the concept behind it is strong—it connotes movement and positive progress (often a dirty word around these parts), and manages to tie in colors that allude to Rutland’s urban/rural duality. Remember, this isn’t the final product; it’s currently being reworked based on the suggestions given by those who attended the meetings.

Similarly, many have expressed their confusion as to what exactly “Connected, Naturally” means. One the face of it, the notion of being connected is a way of engaging the surrounding towns and villages with Rutland. Chittenden, Mendon, Pittsford, Clarendon, Rutland Town (yes, even you)—we’re all part of the same community. Something else that was repeated frequently over the three days of meetings was the Rutland area’s dual nature—an urban center surrounded by a lush and productive rural landscape where agricultural and recreational activities abound. We are a true farm-to-city community. One thing that became evident in our discussions was the necessity to embrace this unique and increasingly relevant relationship.
It’s very easy to criticize; however, being a constructive, active contributor requires some commitment. I know people are busy with work and families. Making it to a one of these meetings may not have been a top priority (though, I would argue that those who dominate the negative discussions on the Herald’s message boards seem to have more than enough free time).

If I may be blunt, you can’t have it both ways. You can’t sit on the sidelines, and then tear down the work others have done. The opportunities for input and involvement were there (and are still available); if you have something constructive and helpful to say about anything in our city, then get involved. But if all you have are put downs and mean-spiritedness then please stay at home; nobody wants to hear it.

It’s time for a moratorium on the negative attitude, Rutland. We have a strategy. Now, comes the execution. This is the part where Rutland has faltered in the past. The challenge of making this effort succeed lies squarely on all of us. It is the responsibility of our leaders in city government and organizations like the RRA and the Partnership to implement these strategies effectively.

And it is upon us to be supportive of these efforts. It is our responsibility as citizens to be promoters of positive change and intelligent progress that moves our community forward. It is the challenge for all of us to move in a direction that embraces and preserves our rural agriculture while promoting the types of successful local business opportunities and smart growth that are necessary to the betterment of our community.

(originally published in The Rutland Herald 10/9/08)

click here to read more...

Tragedy of the Commons.

I was at the Diamond Run Mall the other day. I passed one yet-to-be-filled storefront after another, and I left disenchanted over the lack of shopping options in the Rutland area. Then, as I looked west across Route 7, to the verdant, rolling hills and lush pastures, I was suddenly re-enchanted. Soon, the Rutland Commons would abet my insatiable need to buy.

If I looked hard enough, I could see it all before me: In that pasture over there, a beautifully paved parking lot unfolded before a stately Barnes & Noble. And by that stream, the towering pillars of a Best Buy stretched upward in majestic splendor; it’s sign a golden beacon, a glowing pronouncement of salvation and discount retail treasures.

Can’t you see it?

News of the proposed Rutland Commons consumerarium has not sat well with me. It is an unfortunate step away from Vermont’s local first ethic, and yet another attack on small-town culture. This project is just more of the cart-before-the-horse thinking that has plagued our community for years. The belief that “if you build it, they will come,” is deluded and shortsighted. The real problem in Rutland is not a lack of culture or places to shop; it’s a lack of industry. People follow jobs, not TGI Fridays and Office Depots.

To be sure, John Kalish, the mastermind behind the Rutland Commons is right; the 200-plus jobs is a positive. But what kinds of jobs are we getting? Retail and foodservice—minimum wage employment. We should be looking for ways to bring higher paying jobs into the area. Maybe, Rutland should take a look at burgeoning cleantech and green industries, and find ways to create green-collar jobs that utilize both skilled and professional labor.

Kalish’s research alleges that the area remains “underserved” by current shopping options. What about the Diamond Run Mall? Did Kalish’s research point out that, at over a decade in, it has never been filled to capacity? We built it, and they didn’t come. That should say something about the potential success of his project. While the DRM’s struggle to attain mediocrity speaks to an overall decline in the shopping mall model nationwide, empirical evidence would suggest that there is not much of a market for a shopping Mecca in Rutland. Our mall doesn’t even have a Gap. Doesn’t every mall have a Gap?

So the question remains: Is the Rutland Commons even necessary? The environmental impact of the sprawl created by a potential white elephant troubles me greatly. I’m not being a tree-hugger or hiding behind Act 250, I’m simply questioning the need to build something that could very well end up vacant in a few years. Route 7 looks bad enough without creating a garish box store ghost town (think, the Eddy House with a Cinnabon).

And let’s not forget the negative impact this project will have on our downtown. I commend Mayor Louras’ skepticism of the Commons, (give ‘em hell, Chris), and his continued concern for the downtown merchants. People who think this project will benefit the downtown are living a fantasy. If all your shopping and dining needs are met at the Commons, then what will draw people downtown? The shopping carts?

I could spend this entire column pointing out the economic and environmental problems created by the Commons, but let’s make this issue a bit more meta. Let’s talk about the name itself. Rutland Commons. Historically, “commons” refers to a green space where the community gathers. Over time, the word has been imbued with certain commercial connotations, but at its heart, it is denotes an open community space. Think of the village greens that are ubiquitous throughout New England. Those are commons. How many of them have a Chili’s (though, it does sound like something New Hampshire might try). The decision to call the Rutland Commons the Rutland Commons is just slick marketing. Face it, guys; it’s just a shopping plaza with trees.

It’s time we reappropriated the word.

Recently, the Farm to City Group—a freethinking collective of locals with loose ties to the Rutland Partnership—acquired use of the long-vacant green space on the corner of Wales and Washington Streets. (Full disclosure: I am a member of this group). Thanks to the generosity of the Rutland Masonic Building, the green now may be used as a community gathering space, which we have named Wales Street Commons at the Masonic Corner.

Our Commons is another step forward in our efforts to the engage people in the local—a concrete (figuratively) manifestation of the Think Local. Buy Local. Be Local. ethic, which is an essential component to the success of any small town economy. In the future, look for live music, children’s activities, and a number of other exciting and interesting events we have planned for our green.

And when the Rutland Commons does arrive, dazzling us with Wonderbread sprawl and conspicuous consumption, try not to forget the role you play in our local community.

(originally published in The Rutland Herald 9/26/08)

click here to read more...

To Debbie, With Love.

You know that scene in every disaster movie where that one alert guy who was ignored in the first act is finally vindicated when the volcano explodes or the boat sinks or Samuel L. Jackson gets eaten by a shark? Well, lately, I’ve been feeling a lot like that guy. While I’ve yet to save the life of the inexplicably gorgeous scientist who will then fall madly in love with me (I’m sure that will happen any day now), I have been feeling particularly righteous for another reason.

I returned to Rutland last summer to spend some time wandering in the desert of post-collegiate existential despair (read, unemployment). This being my second extended stay in the area since graduating high school (a friend likens Rutland to the island from Lost: “some people aren’t meant to leave”), I knew the importance of keeping myself busy. I also felt the need to give something back. Was it my growing sense of civic pride or the dearth of content in the “Volunteer” section of my résumé? We may never know for sure. The important thing is, I decided to get involved. So I found an issue that I could get behind: Localism.

In recent years, the push for buying local has been steadily gaining strength. Vermont has always championed this ethic, albeit with varying degrees of enthusiasm. The idea of supporting local business is nothing new to me. (Full disclosure: My family has owned and operated the Palms Restaurant in Rutland since 1933 so it goes without saying that I have some strong opinions).

In a society where small town culture is rapidly being eroded by corporate strong-arming and Internet instant-gratification, it is important for people to stand up in support of local economies. The encroachment of box stores and the homogenous, pre-fab lifestyle they promote speaks to a deeper existential threat facing our society. Americans have abandoned their sense of experimentation and adventure. We thrive on consistency and sameness while eschewing the thrill of a new experience. Why buy your clothes at a local boutique when you can get a six-pack of jeans at Costco for $9.99? To be fair, those jeans do have elastic waistbands.

Some time last year, I was at my family’s restaurant, when a customer—let’s call her “Debbie”—approached my father and I to lament the lack of quality eating establishments in our community. “We need a good family restaurant, like an Outback Steakhouse?” she suggested as if their signature Bloomin’ Onion could amazingly solve all Rutland’s problems in some kind of deep fried gestalt.

With all the courtesy I could muster, I reminded Debbie that she was in fact, at that very moment, dining in a “quality family restaurant.” I informed her that in the past, the opening of a plastic restaurant typically meant the closing of an independent one. I asked her why, in such a small community, would she not want to give the local guys a chance.

“Oh, you’re one of those buy local people?” she asked with McCarthy-like derision.
“You’re eating in a restaurant, which my family has run for over seventy years,” I said, “Yeah, I’m one of those ‘buy local people.’”

It was at this point that Debbie ended our conversation by pretending to answer her cell phone.
The lesson is clear: When you eat out, don’t tick off the help. If you do, you’d best not order from the tiramisu.

The other reason I mention this encounter is because Debbie represents an ideology that must be overcome if local economies are going to thrive. Money spent in the community stays in the community. When you spend $100 in a box store, only $14 stays in town compared to the $45 in local spending generated when you buy from a locally-owned business. That’s something we all should think about the next time we choose a box store over a local one. To be sure, shopping at the boxes is inevitable; there are some products that cannot be purchased anywhere else. But when there is a choice, think local first.

As we Americans have increasingly lost our confidence in the federal government’s ability to provide for and protect us, the shift to local and regional dependence has become inevitable. The goal of this column is not to preach to the choir nor is it a bully pulpit for me to guilt you into buying local (though, as a once and future Catholic, I know the effectiveness of some well-placed guilt). Rather, it is a chance for discussion, education, and reflection on issues of localism.

Indeed, there are naysayers. But as the cost of goods and fuel continues to skyrocket, their tired strains have become less convincing. In many ways, our nation is at the beginning of a major paradigm shift. Locally, we are a long way from reaching our goals, and we can’t do it alone. It will take the commitment of the entire community.

So as “one of those buy local people” concludes the inaugural edition of this new column about localism, I can’t help but think of Debbie. I wonder if she ever found her bloomin’ onion.

click here to read more...