Current position Independent consultant at Mark Winne Associates

1. Organization, Vision, Communication and Leadership: Keys to Effective Food Policy ImplementationMark Winne • Current position • Independent consultant at Mark Winne Associates • Senior Advisor with Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future • Previous positions • Executive Director, Hartford Food System (1979-2003) • Community Food Security Coalition(CFSC), Hartford Food Policy Council, Connecticut Food Policy Council, New Mexico Food & Agriculture Policy Council, Santa Fe Food Policy Council • Author of: • Food Rebels, Guerrilla Gardeners, and Smart-Cookin’ Mamas and Closing the Food Gap • Websites • www.markwinne.com (resource materials: “Doing Food Policy Councils Right…” and Harvard Food Policy Law Clinic guides to local and state food policy) • Email: win5m@aol.com.

2. Food Policy Networks: A Project of Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future TO SEND EMAIL TO THE LIST: send your message to fpn- clf@lists.johnshopkins.edu SUBSCRIBE TO FPN-CLF: https://lists.johnshopkins.edu/sympa/subscribe/fpn-clf UNSUBSCRIBE: https://lists.johnshopkins.edu/sympa/sigrequest/fpn-clf ACCESS FPN-CLF archives: https://lists.johnshopkins.edu/sympa/arc/fpn-clf Food Policy Networks website – description of project, FPC directory, and FPC resource materials: http://www.jhsph.edu/research/centers-and-institutes/johns-hopkins-center-for-a-livable-future/projects/FPN/

3. Expansion of FPC Model • 9% increase from 2012 to 2013 overall; 100% expansion since 2010 Total Food Policy Councils, October 2013 • However, 56 extra Canadian FPCs with limited information listed

6. Capacity Building

7. Our Town’s Food Policy Council:Whither Goest Thou? Our Town Food Policy Council’s 12 government-appointed members worked with their local university to prepare a bold food policy plan for Our Town.

8. It presented the plan containing 20 specific and progressive policy recommendations to the Mayor and City Council. The Plan included: • An aggressive urban agriculture strategy • Curtailment of the availability of unhealthy food • Comprehensive farmland preservation initiatives • New anti-poverty and food security actions

9. Our Town’s overweight but beloved Mayor strongly endorsed the proposal

10. The Our Town Daily Gazette gushed its enthusiasm with feature stories that highlighted the local food pantry’s need for more food donations. Editorials called the FPC members the “Twelve Visionaries.” The articles and editorials were flanked with advertisements for McDonalds and Little Caesar’s Pizza.

11. Our Town’s City Council members virtually tripped over themselves praising the “12 wise ones” and the “far-sighted nature” of the plan. Immediately after their vote to endorse the plan, two members purchased Cokes at the vending machine in Council Chambers

12. Two years later…

13. Nothing has Happened • 5 of the 12 FPC members, including its leader have resigned • The remaining members struggle to get their phone calls returned by the Mayor and City staff • The Gazette has not run a food policy story since the proposal was launched

14. Why?

15. FPC Basics: Shoulds and Maybe Should Nots They should: • Influence policies that promote justice, equity, and sustainability • Coordinate food system stakeholders within area • Focus on local food system issues (systems thinking) from 10,000 feet NOT: • Favor projects over policies* • Take on the oligopolistic forces of multi-national agribusiness

16. Determining Your FPC’s Focus Use Food System Assessments to: • Inform the work and focus of a FPC • Engage the wider community • Develop your community’s food profile • Educate everyone about needs, gaps,resources and features of food system How: • Use existing studies, reports and stats; supplement with original research such as key stakeholder interviews • Conduct public forums and hearings Often leads to: Food Plans, Strategies, and Charters Remember: Don’t over do it! Stay grounded!

17. Equity • Composition of Food Policy Council members: Does it reflect the community? • Commitment to community engagement: Do your food assessment and public consultation processes target lower income communities? • Selection of policy issues: Do your primary public policy interventions address the community’s health, social, and economic disparities? • Do you have balance between policy makers, food system stakeholders, and grass roots? Top down: Mayors. Bottom up: grass roots and private sector stakeholders

18. My Thesis An FPC’s success with policy implementation is directly linked to the strength of its organization, vision, membership, and communication plan

19. Vision… • Was the vision the product of only one or person who assumed leadership? • An adequately understood and shared vision is necessary; it promotes shared leadership and “ownership” of FPC’s work • Was enough time allowed (process) for all members to articulate their individual visions and allow a unified vision to form? Ex. Boulder, CO • Was the vision communicated frequently and consistently?

20. Members’ Relationship and Authority • Are the FPC’s proposals commensurate with the authority of members representing organizations and agencies? Ex. EBT/Farm Mkts. • Has the FPC spelled out the relationships between members with respect to individual v. group (FPC) interests, sharing resources, messaging, conflict resolution? Has attention been paid to developing trust? Connecticut Anti-Hunger Coalition: $75,000 leveraged millions

21. Does It Understand the Different Types of Coalitions and Their Implications? (Life is a partnership – you get out of it what you put into it) • Cooperating: low risk to member; little chance of systems change; can model best practices, test ideas, convene problem-solving sessions • Coordinating: low to moderate risk; better chance of systems change; can push organizational boundaries, engage in activities requiring greater mutual reliance • Collaborating: moderate to high risk; best chance of systems change; has methods to resolve conflict; long-term system creation

22. How Does theOrganizational “Type” Influence Operation and Effectiveness? • Municipality-driven food policy initiative and council: Baltimore • Hybrid model with direct links to government: Hartford • Hybrid model with indirect links to government: Cleveland • FPC linked to government through a secondary agency: San Antonio (City Health Dept.) • Non-profit organization with limited government participation: NM Food & Ag. Policy Council (Farm to Table)

23. External Communication… • Did the council have a communication plan sufficient to garner public support? • Hypothesis: Mayor Bloomberg’s “soda cap” did not have sufficient public backing, and as a mayoral fiat did not rise to the level of public policy, hence the state court’s rejection of his regulation

24. Communication… • Do the members, public, and policymakers “feel” the problem? Is their emotional response intense enough for public action to occur? • Examples: Childhood hunger and obesity elicit strong public reaction: more donations to food banks, Pew Opinion Survey (60% want gov’t to intervene with childhood obesity) • But problem not “felt” sufficiently to impose soda caps, taxes, strong fast food restrictions

25. Communication… • Lukewarm public response to GMO-labeling campaigns as reflected in failed referenda • Loss of farmland was made palpable in Connecticut • Restricting gardens and farm stands evoke strong public response. Ex. Santa Fe, Orlando • Community food assessments and public forums are good gauges of public interest and potential support as well as good organizing tools.

26. Communication… • Is the FPC viewed by the public and policy makers as a credible entity? Has your communication plan built the recognition and profile of the Council? • “3-Fs” – Fact, Fear, and Force versus the “3-Rs” – Reframe, Relate, and Repeat. Reframe the way the issue is viewed; relate to someone’s experience; repeat its importance; • Ex. 3-Fs: 30% of children obese; will die sooner than their parent’s generation; must regulate fast food industry. What would the “3-Rs” look like?

27. Communication… • Field trips increase understanding of food system issues; visualize problems; can make challenges and opportunities more palpable: Ex. CO FPC field trip • Was there relationship building within the Council, between the Council and elected officials, and with those who might oppose the proposals, e.g. soda industry, Big Ag? • CT – Story of Ralph; NM – dairy industry; CO – community that didn’t work with gov’t; “3 cups of coffee”

28. Leadership… • Are the Council’s meetings interesting and engaging? Does leadership do a good job of facilitating and coordinating (non-hierarchical)? • Tips: Everyone’s worth and contribution must be acknowledged; allow space to voice feelings • Is each agenda item “actionable,” e.g. resolution or follow up is clearly defined at the end of discussion • Are agendas fresh and interesting; areoutside speakers invited; do you always bring food?

29. Accomplishments of FPCs (NMFAPC) • Facilitated school nutrition rules for competitive foods • Expanded farm-to-school funding (working on mandatory local buying) • Expanded funding for NMSU Extension support for tribal nations • Working on a new economic development initiative to address rural “food deserts” • Developing network of local FPCs http://www.farmtotablenm.org/policy/

30. Accomplishments of FPCs (CCCFPC) Cleveland/Cuyahoga County FPC • Secured zoning changes to protect community gardens, urban farms, and raising of chickens and bees; • Expanded urban agriculture with city economic development funds, and promoted use of public purchasing for locally grown food • Created the Healthy Cleveland Initiative • Trans-fat Push Back from Food Industry http://cccfoodpolicy.org/home

31. Accomplishments of FPCs (CFAC) Community Food Agriculture Council of Missoula County (Montana) • Directing development away from prime farm and ranchland; • Modified or rejected over 25 subdivision proposals; • Supported chicken and bee regulations; • Mapped prime agricultural soils http://www.missoulacfac.org/

32. San Bernardino Food Hub • Old Grove Orange Food Hub, San Bernardino, Calif. • 28 Growers • Sell to 24 school districts serving 1.5 million students including the Los Angeles Unified School District • 4,000 boxes of produce per week • San Bernardino Food Policy Council assisting hub by working with school districts

33. Accomplishments of FPCs (CT FPC) Connecticut FPC • Conducted public education campaign for state farmland preservation and helped secure $30 million per year for farmland preservation, farm-to-school and farm viability grant programs; • Improved delivery of nutrition education services previously operated by five separate state agencies; • Brought EBT to farmers’ markets; • Addressing lack of livestock slaughter and processing facilities http://www.ct.gov/doag/cwp/view.asp?a=3595&q=423834

34. Accomplishments of FPCs (Hartford FPC) City of Hartford Food Policy Commission • Increased WIC caseload from6,000 to 10,000 • Increased school breakfast participation • Initiated public transportation study that created new bus route to connect low-income residents to supermarkets • Banned trans-fats http://www.farmplate.com/local-food/food-policy-council/city-hartford-food-policy-commission-hartford-ct

35. Accomplishments of FPCs (Boulder Co. FAPC) Boulder County FPC • Developing sustainable agriculture use plan for 25,000 publicly-owned acres of farmland; • Rejected proposal to plant genetically engineered (GE) sugar beet seeds http://www.bouldercounty.org/gov/boards/pages/fapc.aspx

36. Regional Networking • Critical mass of local and state FPCs now exist in some places to promote regional networking • California: 20-plus local FPCs networking under Routes of Change as a state FPC • Ohio: 20 (est.) local FPCs attempting to network to replace Ohio State FPC that was terminated by the Governor • New Mexico and Connecticut: Several local FPCs in each state working with their respective state FPC to identify and mutually support statewide food policy issues: Farm to School; procurement, food system infrastructure

37. First Year • Select organization type, define gov’t relationship, determine membership, develop governing guidelines • Draft vision and mission statements • Develop committees and communication plan • Conduct needs assessment • Stay in touch with key stakeholders and policy makers; develop partners and champions • Prepare a food plan: Link needs identified in assessment to specific policies and action steps; assign responsibility to both public and private sectors; select 1 to 3 priority items • Seek input/endorsement of public & private sectors • Implement and evaluate

38. Conclusions… • Strive for clear vision and mission that express member values and is shared by all • Leadership should be working toward shared leadership emphasizing coordination and facilitation by the leader(s) – members’ competence increases and act more like managers with equal responsibility • Relationship and trust building are necessary and on-going activities, both internally and externally

39. Conclusions… • Patience will be necessary to build a strong FPC and to effectively influence policy • All representatives must have authority determined by their agencies • Work toward MOUs among members that reflect vision/mission, roles, responsibilities, and as clear a perspective on the problems as can be negotiated • Stay in touch with policy makers and community to ascertain their readiness for various policy initiatives • Reframe, Relate, Repeat

40. Sources… Sources: • Rich Pirog, Michigan State University • “Creating Change in the Food System,” Rich Pirog and Corry Bregendahl • Darriel Harris, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health • “2013 Directory of North American Food Policy Councils,” Emily Nink and Ryan Lee, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health • “Networks that Work,” Paul Vandeventer • “Municipal Food Policy Entrepreneurs,” Rod MaCrae, York University, Toronto, CA • “Change or Die,” John Richardson • “Doing Food Policy Councils Right…” Mark Winne and Michael Burgan