When you think of farmers markets, you think local, transparently sourced produce. But the decisions steering the future of Westwood’s nearly decade-old farmers market are anything but transparent.
In about a month, the Westwood Village Improvement Association’s contract with its current farmers market manager ends, and the association will look to replace Emmanuel Bautista, who assistant-managed the enterprise for a decade before becoming manager at the end of last year.
However, the association has not included the public throughout the search for a replacement manager. That’s an affront to vendors who have worked in Westwood long before the association’s conception in 2011 and a clear disservice to the community.
The association needs to be more communicative with the community members who will ultimately determine the farmers market’s success.
At its February board meeting, association members voted to make its candidate interview meetings private, stating they didn’t want the opposing candidates in the same room. Bautista was one of the candidates.
After a committee meeting, however, the association decided it would not renew Bautista’s contract. Instead, the ad hoc committee opted for two corporate-run farmers markets, Raw Inspirations and Farmer Mark, without giving any reason as to why.
This raises several troubling questions, to say the least. Westwood’s farmers market has experienced no major problems under Bautista’s watch. On the contrary, Bautista has managed to increase the market’s number of merchants and added more on-street entertainment for residents. Local farmers and businessmen have expressed their appreciation for Bautista, and said they strongly favor his management style to the previous manager’s.
Luckily, the association has since chosen to reconsider Bautista as the neighborhood’s market manager, but only after community members protested one of its meetings in April.
It’s clear the association is putting itself in unnecessary controversy, not to mention straining the ties between itself and the community. Throughout the rest of the interview process, it must not only be transparent, but be bold in stating exactly why they are choosing one manager over another.
Certainly, as executive director Andrew Thomas said, it is the association’s responsibility to ensure the public has access to the best vendors, be that for maintenance or services for homeless individuals. However, the committee that chose the corporate managers withheld the public from giving input in the first place. Not only is that a failure of transparency, but it’s also shortsighted.
The association needs to shed its fixation on replacing Bautista behind closed doors. It needs to fix its lack of transparency in making such a decision and face the facts: Bautista has earned the neighborhood’s trust. To replace him without public comment would be a disservice to the very neighborhood the association is trying to improve.
The association would do well to listen. And at the very least, it should explain why it’s going with someone else.