Really good LA Times article written by Joe Mozingo about the garden on June 4, 2018.
Really good LA Times article written by Joe Mozingo about the garden on June 4, 2018.
Again, Sector 3 is burdened with additional 4 “lotes” lots.
The water schedule is still subject to change every 2 weeks. The reason given, “The changes are due to the fact that some areas are not favored with water.”
This makes no sense. What areas? Seems like Sector 3 should have more watering days, not adding more “lotes” to our watering days. See no reason for the schedule change when nothing else is changing. All areas are given an equal number of watering days. As it stands, we only get 4 watering days out of 31 days of August all front loaded at the beginning of August. What about the last 2 weeks of August. Plants need water at the end of the month too.
Gardening on 13% water in the month of August is a joke. How is this gardening?! This is absolutely ridiculous. Can’t others (Carlos) do math to see that 250 gardeners cannot maintain gardens on 13% watering. Not to mention, this is only for 3 hours on those days. Sigh!
The watering schedule arranged by Carlos (Board) has inequality built in again. Carlos and the “Board” consistently makes bad decisions.
The biggest issue with this water inequality schedule is in Sector 3. Sector 3 was the most affected by the water source being closed on the north side, no water for almost 3 years while other sectors did. Then, with the pipe reconfiguration, many were left without proper piping and/or irrigation.
Now, to add insult to injury Carlos is burdening Sector 3 water-load to 8 areas ( #1, #13, #14, #15, and +4 lotes (lots)). It makes not sense to have another 4 “lotes” included in Sector 3 when all sectors have their appointed watering days and times listed on the schedule. Unless Carlos is opening the water to other sectors when he should not be. Carlos needs to be questioned about this decision.
Sectors 1 and 2, the least burdened, only serve water to 5 areas. Remember each area serves about 40-50 gardens, so the more areas, the more water is required and the longer hours needed.
Making a schedule that changes every 2 weeks is bad. This means we don’t know when water is going to be available consistently and without change. Also, it would help if there were watering days in both the morning (AM) and afternoon (PM). This would also help spread the water load to different times. Now, people are forced to use it at the same time, causing low water pressure, and not enough water. People have different schedules and by not offering both leaves gardens to die.
Once again Carlos and the Board have made decisions that are bad for the San Pedro All Year Community Gardens. They have let down the gardeners they are meant to serve. This trend of bad decision making will continue with Carlos and his appointed “Board” until they are replaced.
Click to read full list of rules for 2018 (this is only page 1).
Still missing the most important rule, which is to make applicants to San Pedro All Year Community Gardens be a resident of San Pedro.
This is the fundamental basis as the name of the garden implies, San Pedro All Year Community Garden. First, it is for the residents of San Pedro who want to grow vegetables in a community garden. This is the only correct way to deal with the waitlist for gardens as well.
Other important rules include, if someone leaves their garden faucet open unattended, this should be a violation since this can cause the decrease in water pressure for others and importantly flood surrounding areas and soil erosion causing collapsing of make-shift retaining walls. This has happened and is a serious violation to qualify for losing the right to garden in SPAYCG.
In area 13, 14, and 15, the irrigation system is a mess. The foundation of the piping was bad to start with. When the water source on the northside was shut down there were many unsuccessful attempts to solve the water problems.
There was the initial piping with the water source from the northside, so all piping was configured to water the gardens from that source. It worked fine.
After, there have been 2 new attempts to route water to area 13, 14, 15 (there might be other areas without water which I am not aware of). For now, we will address these areas since I know what has been done.
There was an attempt to re-pipe and configure the water initiated by 2 gardeners. Let’s call this system the “A-system” with the water sources coming from the northside. Because of conflict with Carlos (Board), the system was never “official” even though the new piping was completed.
Then, another system, let’s call this “C-system” was implemented which was a hybrid system connecting to A-system using the water source closer to the Green house. This C-system is done incorrectly.
The diagram below shows the dashed (–) lines as the main ateries into the garden. The pipes are setup to distribute water into only half of one artery leaving the rest of the lower gardens without water. The 2 smaller pipes (right of diagram) only supply water to private gardens.
It exludes piping to one of the main arteries into the garden. This cause gardens to not have water and places the water piping in private gardens which makes no sense. This then becomes an issue when trying to connect new pipes. Gardeners who benefits from the placement of water pipes do not want others connecting to that water sources as they feel a right of false ownership because of pipe placement in their gardens. They don’t want to have less water and or pressure. These private water pipes should be moved to the main artery of the garden.
This is the C-system in place and needs improvement to provide water to lower gardens.
I was really hopeful to have water, but I’m sad to report no water.
So what was done?
Dues collected from the 85 gardeners who have not had water. A notice was put up and then taken down after about 7 days. It was more like 2 days for collection of dues since I was there on the first day and Carlos was not in the office at the allocated time to collect money.
No emails were sent to them, no calls were made, no attempt to be proactive by “The Board” to notify people, except for a posted notice. I’m sorry to say, gardeners might have lost their gardens since they did not have a chance to see the dues notice. This is unfair to them. How could they anticipate this after so many years of no water when the notice was going to be put up? There should be an appeals process put in place to rectify this issue.
New LA Garden Counsel rules were given to us. I have compared the rules to other gardens, and the main rule that say’s gardens should be for the residents of San Pedro was missing. Other community gardens have this requirement and so should the San Pedro All Year Community Gardens.
As for the water – it appears as if it was a pipe that was already connected. The shut-off valve was simply turned on to allow water to move to our side of the garden.
The gardens at the top benefit because of the water pipe location and being turned on. It never reaches the bottom gardeners who are affected the most severely from not having water for years. This tells me, no additional piping was done to fix the water problems and supply water with proper pressure to all the lower gardens.
“The Board” has once again done a below expectation job of implementing this new water system. Right now, it’s simply a schedule. Until more thought, and all gardens are getting water fairly will not improve our gardens. For now, there is NO water.
Taken directly from the LA Community Garden Council.
“The Gaffey Street Community Garden in San Pedro was founded more than 40 years ago on a 4-acre site owned by the Los Angeles City Bureau of Sanitation, one mile west of the port of San Pedro and alongside the 110 freeway. There are 200 families working 15’ x 15’ plots to grow healthy food in the garden. Los Angeles Community Garden Council is working to revitalize this garden and we have hired a consultant community organizer to work with the gardeners to organize an effective volunteer management team and regular gardener meetings. ”
–They are going to Revitalize the garden
-Hired a Consultant to organize a volunteer management team of gardeners
Revitalize is a big word, but what does it mean? I don’t know what their scope is when calling it a revitalization. Will wait to see more as the days get closer.
Not sure who the consultant is, but hey, if this is what it takes to get Carlos and the existing “Board” gone, then so be it.
This project is listed below 4 other projects. This means our San Pedro Community Gardens will still not have water for a few more years – its already been 3 years.
I hope the Los Angeles Community Garden Council can help provide us with a temporary water solution before coming in to revitalize our gardens.
Coming up to the 3 year Anniversary of No Water at the garden.
Over 900 days and counting of no water by the city. This issue has been brought to their attention and in-decision and in-action has been the Los Angeles City decision.
There has been no interrim solution, which could have easily been implemented. Instead, they chose to simply let indecision be their defining strategy.
A temporary day could have been set aside for those to carry water in buckets, or a hose pipe attached to the Department of Sanitation 1-day per week could have also helped out gardeners.
Now, I see there are no gardeners left on the Northside. I carry 5 gallons buckets into my garden. This is not considerate for the elderly who cannot do this or injured.