While the expression “vote with your fork” has become a slogan for the modern food movement, many advocates struggle with how to move from conscientious consumerism to engaged citizenship. Harnessing the groundswell of public interest in food to create lasting policy change was the subject of a recent San Francisco Kitchen Table Talks, a monthly conversation about food issues.

Richmond District Supervisor Eric Mar, San Francisco Urban Agriculture Alliance co-coordinator Eli Zigas, organizing expert Stephen Burdo, and 50 local food advocates gathered at 18 Reasons to discuss tactics and tools for activating the good food movement. Surrounded by street artist Zoltron’s images of a conflicted Ronald McDonald, the conversation focused on two successful campaigns that put San Francisco food policy on the national stage.

Supervisor Mar brought his perspective as a legislator and chief sponsor of the Healthy Meal Incentive Ordinance, passed last November. Misleadingly nicknamed the “Happy Meal Ban” by critics, the ordinance holds fast food restaurants accountable by placing limits on calories, sugar, and fat in kids’ meals served with toys.

Facing a fierce opposition from chains like McDonald’s, Mar credits the campaign’s success to uniting diverse community interests under the banner of public health. “Legislation is not the most important thing; it’s the process of empowering or disempowering people,” he said.

The campaign found allies in local community groups with interests in food access and children’s health, including the SEFA Food Guardians in Bayview Hunters Point, the Women’s Collective of La Raza Centro Legal, and Literacy for Environmental Justice. They also partnered with Corporate Accountability International, authors of the Retire Ronald and Value the Meal campaigns.

McDonald’s threw lobbying and advertising money into a strong counter-campaign, claiming that the regulations would hurt small businesses and take away parents’ right to choose. In response, the Healthy Meal campaign framed the issue as a public health concern, rallying pediatricians and parents groups behind the cause.

Eight supervisors’ votes were needed to override Mayor Gavin Newsom’s anticipated veto. The campaign put pressure on Supervisors Sophie Maxwell and Bevan Dufty by mobilizing parents and communities in their districts. The ordinance passed eight to three. By asserting local rights over the interests of multimillion-dollar food corporations, the groundbreaking legislation sent a powerful message. “It’s a small step forward but it’s a proud moment when you force corporations to make some changes,” said Mar. “We have to be revolutionaries in thinking about the food system, not only about what we do as individuals. It has to challenge the corporations that rip off and oppress our communities.”

From the Grassroots Up

From the citizen frontlines, Eli Zigas discussed how the San Francisco Urban Agriculture Alliance (SFUAA) went about changing outdated zoning code, thereby empowering urban farmers to cultivate and sell their produce in the city. The initiative originated with two young urban farmers, Brooke Budner and Caitlyn Galloway of Little City Gardens, a 3/4-acre farm in a residential neighborhood in the outer Mission district. When they decided they wanted to set up a farmstand and start marketing to restaurants, they ran up against city rules requiring an expensive conditional-use permit and a hearing before the S.F. Planning Commission.

They launched a campaign to revise the old law, backed by the newly formed SFUAA, who began sending letters to the mayor’s office. After an influential sympathizer wrote a letter of support, the mayor began to take notice.  Motivating many individual citizens to take action (grassroots), while simultaneously forming alliances with well-connected or well-respected champions (“grasstops”), were key ingredients in the campaign’s success. “Much of what we did was not about electronic activism,” said Zigas. “It was about old-school activism that used electronic tools in turning out people and sending in letters and making phone calls and turning out people again.”

After nearly seven months of meetings with city departments and supervisors, Supervisor David Chiu and Mayor Newsom introduced the new legislation, kicking off a larger public debate. As a volunteer-run effort, numbers were important, with some individuals being more or less involved. Participants showed up at hearings, circulated petitions, solicited businesses for support, got other groups to sign on, wrote letters, built a Web site, and presented to classes.

Timing and luck also played their part. Urban ag was experiencing a renaissance and public support was flourishing. In 2009, Mayor Newsom passed the Executive Directive for Healthy and Sustainable Food, which called for an increase in urban food production through an audit of unused public land, support from Rec & Park, and new marketing opportunities for local farmers. The SFUAA’s proposal was right in San Francisco’s sweet spot.

On April 12, 2010, the bill passed unanimously, raising the level of power and influence of farmers and gardeners in the city. “When it came down to it, the most important thing was packing 70 people into a City Hall hearing room, so much so that the police had to keep people out,” said Zigas. “That had an impact on everyone who saw that hearing.”

Tools of the Trade

Stephen Burdo, Political Director for Kathleen Russell Consulting, a strategic communications firm specializing in nonprofit and political campaigns, described the importance of blending tried-and-true traditional organizing methods with modern tools.

Prior to social media, some of history’s most successful movements, such as the Montgomery Bus Boycott, organized through word of mouth: church meetings, phone calls, knocking on doors. From the food movement playbook, federal food labeling requirements started with a group of California mothers who organized through PTA meetings, leading to the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act of 1990.

With the advent of social media tools, the rules for engagement have changed, but they haven’t replaced direct action; they’ve just maximized it. “Social media increases your ability to organize by 100 times,” Burdo says. An early example of social media organizing, Kitchen Gardeners International’s 2008 Eat the View campaign gathered 110,000 signatures through online channels, successfully urging the White House to plant a garden. The project reached a critical mass after months of campaigning when their petition jumped from 10,000 signatures to 20,000 in six days after it posted clever videos that went viral.

How can food activists successfully blend old-school tactics with modern technology to create real and lasting change?

Tell a story. The SFUAA’s campaign gained attention by presenting a simple, easily relatable story about two young gardeners who just wanted to sell their veggies. Create strong, clear messaging, and use voices, photos, and videos to bring your issue to life.

Get the word out. Know where your message is going. According to Burdo, 71 percent of Americans are on Facebook, making it the place to go to build and converse with supporters. Only 5 percent of the general public, but 90 percent of media professionals, use Twitter, making it less useful for grassroots organizing and more useful for framing the debate for reporters.

Seek grassroots and grasstops allies. Form coalitions to build numbers. Partner with community groups and organizations that share interests in public health, local development, and the environment. Don’t underestimate the power of sympathizers in high places, who can push your cause behind closed doors.

Use social media, but don’t overuse it. Clogging feeds and inboxes with e-blasts is no way to keep supporters. Be strategic in your communications. “Post no more than three to four times a week on Facebook,” said Burdo. “Organizing is about building a list and turning that list out.”

Keep momentum going. In drawn-out political campaigns—and most of them are—the worst thing you can do is let momentum fade, according to Burdo. To keep supporters engaged, provide concrete actions to participate in, such as meetings or rallies. Zigas agrees: “When you ask people to do something make it meaningful (don’t waste volunteers’ time), make it fun, and win.” Celebrate victories of all sizes, even if it’s just scoring a hearing date.

Make it personal. What about those chain-letter petitions that glut our inboxes? The panelists agreed that a personalized paper letter goes much further in getting a legislator’s attention than a boilerplate e-mail. Put time into your communications to elected officials, write from the heart, and create a meaningful connection.For the SFUAA, having online petitions, a Facebook page, and a MailChimp list helped keep their supporters informed, but they were just tools of the trade, not ends in themselves. “It’s not how many tweets you have, but how well your tweets and phone calls get people out to do tangible things,” said Zigas.

Further Reading

• Michael Pollan discusses how the good food movement is winning the culture war but making little progress with the political one. Read his article in The Nation.
• Online campaign strategist Michael Silberman summarizes the best articles about online organizing. Read his work at the Huffington Post.
• Frances Fox Piven describes the process of change through grassroots efforts in Challenging Authority: How Ordinary People Change America.
• For an instructive take on the late 19th Century farmers’ insurgency, read Lawrence Goodwyn’s The Populist Movement.
• Mark Bittman relates Occupy Wall Street to the modern food movement, calling for a systemic approach to change. Read his column at the New York Times.
• Want to get involved now? There are many opportunities to engage around the 2012 Farm Bill. Visit Food and Water Watch.

The world is still, after several long years, desperately trying to climb out of the financial abyss brought about during the latest global financial meltdown. Painful “austerity” measures, largely impacting working class people who already suffered the most during the crisis, are proffered by those responsible as the short-term economic fix to what ails nations around the world.

After roughly 150 years, and the countless day-to-day tribulations of billions of people, capitalism is being questioned like never before. Not surprisingly, the Bay Area’s counterculture spirit transforms economic models as well. New, locally minded businesses whose lifeblood includes notions antithetical to the dominant paradigm, including shared prosperity, enabling and/or giving to others, and creating community, are thriving.

Do they offer a more satisfying, rewarding, and ultimately more viable path for long-term success for society at large? On Wednesday, June 29, please join Kitchen Table Talks as we discuss the vision, mechanics, and spirit behind these “Alternative Business Models.”

Joining us in conversation will be:

Cathy Goldsmith, member of the Cheese Board. Cathy graduated from the University of Michigan with a degree in education and has cooked at various restaurants in the East Bay, Philadelphia, and London.  Her interest in food, politics, and social justice have found a home at the Cheese Board (a 100 percent worker owned co-op since 1971), where she’s been for the past 16 years.

Anthony Myint, restaurateur, chef, and author. After eating his way across 31 countries at age 25, Anthony landed in San Francisco and proceeded to co-create Mission Street Food, Mission Burger, Mission Chinese Food, and Commonwealth Restaurant–with its “benevolent business model.” Anthony was named among the most influential people in food in 2010 by Chow.com and among the “Top 40 under 40” by Food & Wine magazine.

Jessica Prentice, Co-Founder, Three Stone Hearth. Chef, educator, innovator, and mother, Jessica has been a spark in the Bay Area for the past 15 years. Formerly chef of the Headlands Center for the Arts and Director of Education Programs for the Ferry Plaza Farmers Market, Jessica coined the word “locavore” and co-created the Local Foods Wheel. Her first book, Full Moon Feast was released by Chelsea Green Publishing in 2006.

Caleb Zigas, Executor Director, La Cocina. After interning with ProMujer in El Alto Bolivia where he learned about microfinance in its infancy, Caleb brought those lessons to bear at La Cocina when it opened its doors in 2005 and has been shaping its incubator program ever since.  A former Yoshiyama Young Entrepreneur and named one of five “Community Organizers making a difference” by Inc. magazine, Caleb’s combination of food industry experience and commitment to social justice helps strongly define La Cocina.

The Panel discussion will be preceded by an introduction to the Living Wage by Karl Kramer, Campaign Co-Director of the San Francisco Living Wage Coalition.

When: Wednesday, June 29 from 6:45-8:00 pm

Where: Viracocha, 998 Valencia Street @ 21st Street, San Francisco

Kitchen Table Talks is a joint venture of CivilEats and 18 Reasons, a non-profit that promotes conversation between its San Francisco Mission neighborhood and the people who feed them. Space is limited, so please RSVP. A $10 suggested donation is requested at the door, but no one will be turned away for lack of funds. Sustainable food and refreshments will be provided, courtesy of Bi-Rite Market and Shoe Shine Wine.

As a father, there is perhaps nothing more profound than being mindful, present, and open-minded enough to life’s lessons that my young child incessantly and brusquely thrusts in my face. As a winemaker, little has motivated or reminded me more about our natural propensity to be captivated by our sense of smell and taste, as much as watching my toddler instantly become enraptured with chocolate. In chocolate, at three-years old no less, he likely had already discovered one of the few things that will remain among his favorite pleasures for many decades to come. A remarkable lifetime relationship that will bring virtually uninterrupted pleasure. Anyone think they can compete with that?  Sweet dreams.

But just recently, when he turned four, I thought he was compassionate enough and could emotionally handle the “dark side” of chocolate. By forcibly inserting his brain into his heretofore frivolous relationship with chocolate, beyond just tickling its pleasure receptors, I was hoping to elevate his enjoyment of chocolate beyond mere taste. Now, when he comes to understand the implications of his chocolate consumption decisions, it will not only taste great, but also feel great.

It is achingly beautiful to witness the instinctive, boundless love, and yes, even empathy, in a young child’s heart. At four, my son does not yet know that the world is supremely unjust and that children are not born equal. He does not yet know a single reason why anyone, no matter the circumstance, deserves anything less than true happiness, fulfilled. There is a glorious magic, wisdom, and starkness to the simplicity with which he approaches logic, reason, and justice.

He sees a picture of a young child working hard on a farm and he wonders. He hears that those children, in a forest far away, work very hard all day while here, he laughs and plays. That those children rarely have any food, while he eats often. And he learns that those children don’t have a choice, while he sometimes has a choice  (if I’m in a good mood). Occasionally at night he is read the story of Chaga and the Chocolate Factory and he begins to quickly make sense of the land and life of those “other” children in a forest far away.

He doesn’t yet know the horrific nature and history (past and present) of slavery. But he doesn’t need to. To my four-year old boy, it is so incredibly simple. What isn’t so simple is how somewhere along the road to adulthood, youth lose empathy. They lose the energy they once had to fight for something better for themselves and especially others. And their idealistic instincts drift away with each puff on a long forgotten dandelion.

From Gnats to Farmers

People have seemingly always been obsessed with chocolate. Ancient civilizations such as the Olmecs, Aztecs and Mayans had long ago used cacao as currency, ceremonial offerings, and as food reserved for the elite. The botanical name for the plant, Theobroma cacao, means “food of the Gods.” It is a curious plant: While fermented and processed cacao beans (i.e., chocolate) is recognized as one of the most aromatic and intoxicating substances known, the cacao flower itself has neither fragrance, nor nectar. As such, it is pollinated by chance and not by bees, but by the lowly gnat.

Cacao is grown in a narrow belt around the equator in some of the world’s poorest nations, with West Africa (Ivory Coast, Ghana) responsible for around 70 percent of the world’s supply. Farming cacao is not where the money is: It is estimated that approximately 90 percent of the world’s cocoa is grown on small family farms of less than 12 acres. As such, the World Cocoa Foundation estimates that 40-50 million people worldwide are dependent on cocoa as their main source of income. Widespread reports persist of large scale poverty, farmers cheated myriad ways, and systematic and pernicious exploitation despite hardscrabble toil and enormous profits and pleasure derived from their labor.

While executives and their boards of directors have sought profit from the exploitation of human beings within their corporate family, the earth fares no better. Poor soil fertility, increased pest pressure, declining yields, and other immediate economic factors have led to widespread disfigurement of diverse cacao habitats and deforestation, which leads to an endless cycle of ecological destruction.  In its 2004 report, “Commodities and Conservation: the Need for Greater Habitat Protection in the Tropics,” the Center for Applied Biodiversity Science estimated that cacao production has been responsible for the loss of 80 percent of the forest habitat in West Africa over the past several decades.

Chocolate and Slavery: Indelibly Intertwined

Most abhorrent of all, despair and hopelessness plaguing the nations bordering cacao exporting countries (Mali, Burkina Faso) has led to conditions conducive to child slavery. UNICEF, the U.S. State Department, and many others have reported [PDF] the use of child slaves in cocoa production for more than 10 years, particularly by the world’s largest exporter of cacao, the Ivory Coast.  According to the International Labor Rights Forum, the State Department estimates that more than 109,000 children in the Ivory Coast work under “the worst forms of child labor” and that an estimated 10,000 are unquestionably slaves.

Tcho chocolate, an innovative chocolate maker based in San Francisco, is frank when they write on their Web site, of the Ivory Coast, “Children are stolen from their homes…and sold to Ivory Coast growers, where they are shackled, threatened, beaten, and, all too often, killed.”

Once the condoned use of child slaves by today’s multinational chocolate barons was unwrapped in these reports, the industry attempted to deflect scrutiny and meaningful regulations and committed to address the (ready for this non-sequitur?) “worst forms of child slavery” by 2005.  Working with Senator Tom Harkin and Representative Eliot Engel, the industry formally outlined steps they would take to meaningfully reduce this practice when they signed the “Harkin-Engel Protocol” in 2001.  Having failed to reach their modest targets in 2005, the industry defensively re-affirmed their “commitments” and extended the protocol in 2008 and again in 2010.

How determined is the chocolate industry to ending child slavery in their immediate corporate families? In his May 2008 testimony during a public hearing on child labor and human trafficking conducted by the Bureau of International Labor Affairs (ILAB), Larry Graham, president of the National Confectioners Association of the U.S. (a signatory to the Harkin-Engel protocol), concluded, “Cocoa should not be on ILAB’s list. If placed on the list it would serve as a discouragement… It would send the wrong message to industries and others… Indeed, it would lead to the logical question, ‘if cocoa is on the list despite the enormous resources devoted by the industry, governments and NGO partners, why mount such an effort?’”

In September 2010, Tulane University, working with the U.S. Department of Labor (USDOL), released its oversight report for Congress on progress with the Harkin-Engel protocol over nearly a decade. In it, they reveal that the “majority of children exposed to the Worst Forms of Child Labor remain unreached by the remediation activities currently in place.” Tellingly, they also reveal that the USDOL had committed $10 million in taxpayer dollars in 2010 towards implementing the steps outlined in the protocol. At the same time, the industry itself, with billions of dollars in cash at their disposal, had committed $7 million in “new” funding—over the next five years.

Be-Twixed and Bewildered

During his October 2010 presentation at the World Cocoa Foundation partnership meeting, Allesandro Cagli from Ferrero, reassuringly presented a slide which read, “Several surveys have shown that while consumers in the EU and US may pay lip-service to sustainability issues, many do not put it into practice when shopping.”

In the chocolate industry, the companies, executives, and their boards who have pocketed billions of dollars in cash from the exploitation of millions of people and the Earth: Hershey’s, M&M Mars, Nestlé, Kraft, Cargill, Archers Daniels Midland (ADM), know that you know. In fact, they snicker at the fact that you just don’t care enough to do anything about it. Throughout the world, executives of these global corporations (and their top subordinates) with billions of cash sitting in their bank accounts, meekly cast the complexity of supply chains as the indecipherable code blocking greater transparency, information, control and progress towards ending slavery under their nose.

It is said with a hint of exasperation (and surely a wink) in this whopper of a tale, that millions of small farmers harvest their crops in remote lands, then travel over rugged dirt roads to markets, co-ops, or weigh stations.  There, freshly harvested and highly perishable cacao is bought or sold, aggregated and exchanged, or immediately and coldly rejected outright. As countless village markets are aggregated and sold to larger constituents, volumes amenable to global trade slowly begin to take shape.  The result, they meekly suggest, is impenetrable obfuscation.

Yet, if I were to look for a simple, fairly tasteless chocolate bar to satiate a sugar craving, I don’t have to spend very much money, or expend much energy, looking for one. While in sourcing cacao their global supply chain leaves these highly compensated executives be-twixed, the aforementioned companies have miraculously found a way to get their supply of chocolate into every retail store, shack, hut, newsstand, school or ferry on the planet and all happily accounted for in the profit statements which “inform” their bonuses.

Tomorrow: Part II of this article, A Better Way: Chocolate with Dignity

Photos: Daniel Rosenthal, used with permission. Top: 9-year-old Jean Baptiste doesn’t attend school. Work begins at 8 am and involves cutting cocoa fruit off the trees with a machete and removing the beans. The family has no other viable source of income. Jean Baptiste has no idea what happens to the cocoa beans. Here he is taking a short rest from the strenuous work. Middle: Ivory Coast, near Sinikosson. Harvesting, hands full of cocoa beans. Bottom: 11-year-old Ibra, using a machete tied to a stick to harvest cocoa pods from a tree on father’s cocoa plantation on outskirts of village of Sinikosson. He does not attend school; work begins at 8 am. He has no idea what happens to the cocoa beans.

For its sixth installment, Kitchen Table Talks will begin to dissect the complex issues of genetically engineered foods and equip participants with knowledge and specific actions to protect themselves, our community and the environment. Two of the most laudable champions in the fight to educate and protect the public from the unregulated, untested genetic engineering of food and unchecked interests of industrial agriculture will lead the conversation: UC Berkeley Microbial Ecologist Ignacio Chapela and Center for Food Safety attorney Zelig Golden.  Kitchen Table Talks No. 6 will take place Tuesday, Oct. 27, from 6:30 – 8:30p.m. in a new location, SUB-Mission gallery in the Mission District of San Francisco.

For more than a decade, one of the largest genetic experiments in history has been taking place and all of us have been unwitting, or at least non-consenting, participants.  According to the Center for Food Safety, up to 85 percent of U.S. corn, 91 percent of soybeans and 88 percent of cotton (cottonseed oil is often used in food products), is genetically engineered, which means an estimated 70 percent or more of all processed foods on supermarket shelves–from soda to soup, crackers to condiments–contain genetically engineered ingredients. Thanks to the tireless work of GE-critical farmers, lawyers and activists, progress is being made to shed light on GE food. The New York Times via Greenwire reported last week that the USDA has been ordered to conduct an environmental impact statement for the first time on a GE crop.

Representing the scientific perspective of genetically engineered food at the Oct. 27th Kitchen Table Talks, Dr. Chapela is the lead author of the ground breaking 2001 Nature paper that exposed the presence of genetically engineered DNA in wild Mexican maize and was a featured expert in the documentaries The Future of Food and The World According to Monsanto. Providing a view of the policy landscape and the powerful role of legal action against GE food, Zelig Golden is the Center for Food Safety attorney who was integral to the recent Federal Court victory that ordered the USDA to conduct a rigorous assessment of the environmental and economic impacts of “Roundup Ready” beets in Oregon.

Need a primer on the basics of GE food? Check out this entertaining, enlightening three-part series by Bill Nye before the Oct. 27 conversation:

Check out Part Two and Part Three.

Kitchen Table Talks is a joint venture of Civil Eats and 18 Reasons, a non-profit that promotes conversation between its San Francisco Mission neighborhood and the people who feed them. Space is limited, so please RSVP to ktt@civileats.com or leave a message at 925.785.0713. A $10 suggested donation is requested at the door, but no one will be turned away for lack of funds. Sustainable food and refreshments will be provided, courtesy of Bi-Rite Market and Shoe Shine Wines.

KEEP THE CONVERSATION GOING! Thursday, Oct. 29, 18 Reasons will host Kitchen Table Talks Continued in conjunction with its weekly 18^th Hour community reception. Join our guest speakers Ignacio Chapela and Zelig Golden, and Kitchen Table Talks and 18 Reasons organizers, for an informal, drop in reception open to all, 7-9pm. A donation at the door is requested ($5 for 18 Reasons members, $10 for the general public); delicious Bi-Rite refreshments including Alter Eco chocolate will be served.

Photo: USDA

Paula Jones, Director of Food Systems, S.F. Department of Public Health and lead drafter, discussed the background and development of Newsom’s directive. It set out to increase the amount of healthy and sustainable food in San Francisco, promote public health, social responsibility and environmental sustainability; eliminate hunger; reduce the environmental impact of the food system; encourage food production within the City and on City property. Jones explained that rather than write a new resolution, it was decided that an executive directive would be the best means of implementing this ambitious food policy. Typically a directive has the immediacy and power to garner implementation across all departments more efficiently than a resolution. A resolution has its role in city policy, but it cannot advance policy as quickly. Jones stated one final important point that no new funds were allocated for or used to create the Executive Directive. She researched existing policies and resolutions relating to food and combined them to draft the directive.

Our second speaker, Antonio Roman-Alcala, has been instrumental in reviving Alemany Farm. The recent interest in food systems and policy made it easy for Newsom to support such a distinctive food policy.  Initially critical of the directive and Newsom’s connection to it, Roman-Alcala realized that it was the result of the combined hard work of Jones and community activists that made the directive a reality. However, he pointed out that an executive directive is only valid and enforceable during the course of that mayor’s term. Once the term has ended, so goes the directive. Roman-Alcala said that this is why it is critical for people to get involved now, especially since Newsom’s term could be coming to an end as he runs for California Governor. So, how do we ensure that parts and/or the entire directive become permanent policy?

A lively discussion with the audience began after our speakers finished. A point that came up several times is that local government is paralyzed by the number of issues facing the food system. A possible hope for institutionalizing sustainable food policy is to pick a few key issues that are likely to succeed; start with those and let the policy continue to grow and develop. Eventually, we will have a healthy and sustainable food system but it cannot happen overnight.

“How about those organic carrots?”

Roman-Alcala said the most important thing we can do is talk to our friends, neighbors, and community. Discuss organics, composting, or whichever component of the food system is most important to you.

“Democracy is a verb”

Jones told participants to pick up the phone and talk to your city supervisors. Find out who is in charge of the issues that concern you most and then contact them to discuss it. If enough of us call, they will take interest and start to listen.

San Francisco residents need to get involved and make their voices heard to help institutionalize sustainable food systems and policy which can ultimately be adopted in other cities and areas around the country.

To learn more about the steps San Francisco is taking towards a just, sustainable food system, visit: SFFood.org.

Kitchen Table Talks is a monthly conversation about the American food system. Its purpose is to build a coalition of stakeholders from all segments of society who come together to develop relationships, exchange knowledge and ideas and leave with specific actions they can implement to make meaningful improvements in our food system. To receive our newsletters, please email ktt@civileats.com.

Kitchen Table Talks announced its fourth installment of its new conversation series about the American food system, School Food: The Nitty Gritty Details, will be held on Tuesday, August 25 at 6 p.m. at Hotel Vitale in San Francisco.

The topic of school food is challenging and complex. Every day, nearly 30 million children benefit from the National School Lunch Program. However, these meals usually consist of unhealthy processed foods and low grade industrial meat. The Child Nutrition Act which governs the National School Lunch program is up for reauthorization this year, so there is still time to have our voices heard and ensure our children have access to healthy, quality food. Join us as we discuss current policies and programs, challenges and what you can do to get real food in our public schools. Guests speakers include, but are not limited to: Colleen Kavanaugh, Executive Director, Campaign for Better Nutrition and Lena Brook, grassroots parent advocate.

Kitchen Table Talks organizers request a $10 donation to go towards administrative costs. However, no one will be turned away for lack of funds. Sustainable, local refreshments will be provided, courtesy of Bi-Rite Market. Space is limited; to reserve your seat, please email ktt@civileats.com or leave a message at 925.785.0713. Please note, this month’s KTT will be held at Hotel Vitale, 8 Mission Street, on the Embarcadero and across from the Ferry Building.

Jeffery Betcher was clear — he and his fellow organizers consider themselves community, not food, activists. Betcher, co-founder of the successful Quesada Gardens Initiative in the Bayview Hunters Point Neighborhood of San Francisco, was joined by fellow co-founder and board co-vice chair James Ross as featured presenters at Kitchen Table Talks’ third installment: Community Organizing: Addressing Food Access and Security in Bayview Hunters Point.

For decades, Bayview Hunters Point (BVHP) has been much maligned for regular reports of violence, environmental hazards and poverty. Betcher, a 10-year BVHP resident, believes the neighborhood doesn’t deserve its negative reputation. It has many strengths, including the highest rate of residential property ownership in the entire city, and many of its residents are thriving despite enormous environmental and economic injustices.

Ironically, this neighborhood that now processes 80 percent of the city’s waste, used to be the primary food shed for the city; a lively patch work of pastureland, vegetable farms, breweries, slaughter houses and food processing and shipping facilities. Studies show that there’s a $30 million potential for profit from food production in BVHP Hunters Point, said Betcher.

As its landscape shifted from breadbasket to toxic industry and waste processing, its residents increasingly suffered the highest rates of cancer, asthma, diabetes, obesity and heart disease. While asthma and cancer rates have been tied to environmental conditions, all other health-related issues prevalent in BVHP are food related. “All the –isms are there here,” said Betcher. “Poverty is the fundamental problem.”

While the problems are obvious, solutions are harder to come by, said Betcher and Ross. For solutions to stick, they need to be not only accepted by residents, but owned by them. This is the secret to Quesada Gardens’ success. “If people are involved in change, they will reinvest in community,” said Betcher.

Ross and Betcher believe that once you gain consensus, people will not only accept an initiative, but work hard to advance it. This was why a food survey, led by Quesada Gardens as a project of the Southeast Sector Food Access Working Group in 2007, was a critical step to help organizers understand what residents really wanted. “We know there’s a lack of fresh produce options in the neighborhood, but how do we know the residents want a supermarket?” said Betcher. Of the 562 residents surveyed, 95 percent said they would “actively support new food options,” 58 percent said they wanted a co-op market and 53 percent said it was important to have foods free of pesticides and chemicals.

Started with one garden on the median of Quesada Street, the initiative has grown to include 14 individual backyard gardens and nine community gardens. Residents are relishing in the abundance of fresh fruits and vegetables they are growing and readily sharing it with elderly and hungry neighbors. But something even more fundamental has sprouted that is changing the fabric of the neighborhood. “People are coming out of their homes. They’re meeting their neighbors. They’re looking out for each other,” said Ross.  He has lived intermittently in BVHP since the 1980’s. “This is the first time that I know everyone on my block. The garden has become a safe place for people; a place to gather instead of the street corner.”

When asked about how they avoid vandalism and other forms of destructive resistance, Ross pointed to the community’s feeling of ownership of the gardens. “When there is vandalism, it comes from outside the neighborhood. Everyone on the block is looking out for the community gardens and their neighbors’ gardens because they feel a sense of pride and involvement,” said Ross. “People are more aware now. They will come outside and spend time with their neighbors instead of closing their doors.”

After hearing an overview of the Quesada Gardens Initiative from Ross and Betcher, a lively conversation among a record crowd of Kitchen Table Talks attendees followed.

When the question was asked, “what happened to SLUG,” — the San Francisco League of Urban Gardeners — Paula Jones, Director of San Francisco Food Systems and former SLUG Director of Urban Agriculture, pointed out that the urban agriculture movement is thriving, but an organizing framework for all the disparate groups such as the one that SLUG once provided would be ideal.

The million dollar question of the night: if so many people want supermarkets in BVHP, why aren’t there supermarkets? “There is a misconception that there’s not enough money in poor neighborhoods. Corner stores gouge their customers with a huge mark up,” said Oriana Sarac, founder of Neighborhood Fruit. Oakland’s HOPE Collaborative Project Manager Hank Herrera offered the insight that structural racism keeps supermarkets out of poor neighborhoods. He said this is true in every city across the country. “The most important thing we can do is support local ownership and local supply chains.”

“What about the cooking factor,” asked FarmsReach Founder Melanie Cheng. This Sunday’s New York Times magazine feature article by Michael Pollan, Out of the Kitchen, Onto the Couch, drives this point home. Betcher told the group that there are cooking classes being offered in BVHP, but more are needed. Hai Vo, who worked on UC Irvine’s Real Food Challenge, stressed the importance of youth engagement.

The importance of commercial kitchens was brought up and Betcher told the group the BVHP mainstay Eclectic Cookery was considering shutting its doors. Susan Coss, Kitchen Table Talks co-founder and catalyst for bringing this conversation on community organizing together, stressed that a commercial kitchen must pay for itself to survive.

Betcher offered, “While other sectors of the economy are bleeding, social entrepreneurship is alive and well. BVHP really needs businesses committed workforce development.”

Despite the progress Quesada Gardens has made, Betcher stresses that the organization is in the “infrastructure building phase” and that while the project is mitigating climate change and health issues, the real focus of the initiative is community building. “We need people, especially funders, who get community building,” said Betcher.

Quesada Gardens is an inspiration, not just for other blocks in BVHP, but for all urban dwellers everywhere, starving for community in the neighborhoods where they live. Even if a community garden isn’t possible in your neighborhood, the simple act of spending a little time with your neighbors can yield fruit.

Things you can do:

• Learn more about the people working to make fresh, healthy food more accessible to underserved neighborhoods:
  • Quesada Gardens Initiative
  • The City’s Southeast Food Access Workgroup
  • The Oakland HOPE Collaborative
  • People’s Grocery, Oakland
• Get involved in the social media dialog for food accessibility and community development in BVHP at the portal-in-progress www.bayviewfootprints.org
• Volunteer, donate funds or in-kind items for a Quesada Movie Night being planned Sept. 12-13, contact info@QuesadaGardens.org
• In addition to dollars and volunteers, Quesada Gardens is in need of regular in-kind donations such as plants, seeds, lumber, and mulch. Sponsorship from local garden supply and hardware stores would be greatly appreciated. contact info@QuesadaGardens.org
• Start a garden in your yard. Talk to your neighbors who also garden. If you have a community garden, volunteer to help. If you don’t have one yet, talk to your neighbors about starting one
• Support local ownership and local supply chains
  • San Francisco Locally Owned Merchants Alliance
  • Buy Local Berkeley
  • Oakland Merchants’ Leadership Forum
  • Directory of networks beyond immediate SF Bay Area
• Add a comment to this post with a suggestion, resource or idea to keep to conversation going and forward it to friends, family and especially neighbors

In conjunction, Kitchen Table Talks will show a clip from Edible City, a feature-length documentary about the Bay Area food movement which focus on the stories of farmers, cooks, activists and educators who are helping to grow a local revolution around food. Prentice is featured in the film.

Kitchen Table Talks is a joint venture of Civil Eats and 18 Reasons, a non-for-profit which promotes conversation between its San Francisco Mission neighborhood and people who feed us. It is hosted by Sagan-Piechota which created Linden Tree in this same space. The purpose of Kitchen Table Talks is to build a coalition of stakeholders from all segments of society who come together to develop relationships, exchange knowledge and ideas and leave with specific actions they can implement to make meaningful improvements in our food system.  At each meeting, participants are introduced to a different non-profit organization that focuses on one facet of the sustainable food system. The presentation is followed by an open forum, allowing guests to ask the presenter questions and discuss recent food news, pending legislation and opportunities to get active in the sustainable food community.

Last month, at the inaugural Kitchen Table Talks, Food & Water Watch researcher and analyst Elanor Starmer presented a discussion on the U.S. Department of Agriculture. For a summary of Starmer’s presentation, please click here.

Space is limited. Please RSVP to ktt@civileats.com or leave a message at 925.785.0713. $10 suggested donation at the door; no one will be turned away for lack of funds. A portion of the evening’s proceeds will be donated to Edible City. Sustainable food and refreshments will be provided, courtesy of Bi-Rite Market. For those who cannot attend, a summary of the evening’s discussion will be found on this site.