The Conversation

The Conversation: Urban farming incentives

As more people look to grow their own vegetables, cities are trying to figure out how to deal with urban agriculture. Last Sunday’s Conversation asked the question: What measures should cities like Sacramento take to encourage and incentivize urban farming?


Blight doesn’t look like Sunset magazine

Re “Growing the concept of urban agriculture” (Forum, March 9): Sacramento’s existing ordinance includes expensive, gold-plated requirements for official community gardens. Why?

Blight doesn’t look like Sunset magazine. I’ve run into this clean-freak mindset as a participant in the late Franklin Boulevard redevelopment area committee. I still don’t understand why a facade renovation is expected to improve real neighborhood needs such as healthy food and affordable shelter.

Superficial prejudices also contradict what plants like: no bare soil but instead either plants or mulch, not pavement. Hint: Mulch is the stuff carbon-spewing leaf-blowers treat as blight.

– Muriel Strand, Sacramento


Adam Zeciri – For starters, incentives to remove live grass and replace it with food instead of fake grass or stones would be nice, which is the current initiative.

Who pays to water vacant lots currently? Who pays to water them once they become vegetable gardens?

Love the idea. Just curious as to how this fits in with the current drought-related conversations.

Kathryn Jean Stevens – We have done this before, but the city didn’t like it.

Trevor Caulder – Zero taxes, reduced water and electrical fees. Jump start the market like we do with hybrid and electric cars or solar power.