A proposal for admission to the Farmers' Market


I've been talking to various people about how new vendors at the Portland Farmers' Market should be added, when space is available. It's a topic that was going to be discussed last night at a city meeting, but was put off until June 21.

City staff, and elected officials, largely want to hand off the responsibility of day-to-day management of the market to the farmers themselves, who - for their part - want that additional responsibility. (They've been exercising it for a while anyway, due to lack of city staff time, but everybody's looking for a formalization of the relationship.)

Most of the issues regarding running the market are pretty non-controversial: the mechanics of setting up selling areas, picking up trash, posting signs for each farm, and so on.

The only real question is who decides, and how, what new vendors can join the market.

Nobody's looking to oust existing vendors, but sometimes people stop attending the Portland market for one reason or another, and when slots available, there certainly is a lot of demand.

At the moment, the process by which new vendors are picked is fairly arbitrary. It's based primarily on what the farmers' market coordinator (who's a farmer, not a city employee) thinks would be best for the market. Everybody involved in this discussion is aware that there needs to be a good variety of items - meat, veggies, cheese, honey, and so on - to attract a good customer base. And there needs to be enough of each type of thing to satisfy demand, without either running out or having so much extra that lots goes to waste.

Right now, that system is mostly working. The farmers' market is very successful, both in terms of how lucrative it is for vendors and in terms of how useful and popular it is for area residents.

But the fact that it's working doesn't make it a fair or transparent system. And, in fact, it's neither. The city takes its lead on whose applications it will approve from the Farmers' Market Association, which holds a vote in its annual meeting about who should be allowed to join. While there's a certain bar for consideration - what items a would-be vendor wants to sell, and where those items are grown or processed - admission is up to the will of the association's members.

As associate city attorney Ann Freeman noted in a March memo, that raises concerns about transparency and fairness - concerns that are even more important when they relate to a private group deciding who gets to use public property to earn a profit.

Right now there seems to be a consensus emerging between the city and the farmers who are already in the market, that under a new licensing regime from the city, they should be allowed to continue their arbitrary system.

But the basic reason behind this consensus seems to be that nobody can think of another method that would be fairer and more transparent, while also allowing the flexibility to manage the market's variety. (Everyone does agree that a straight-up waiting list is a bad idea, because it could end up with a market filled with just veggie growers, and no meat, dairy, honey, or other produce - which would reduce the market's attractiveness to customers, and its viability as a business opportunity.)

In talking to all these people about the issues, I've been able to narrow down a key set of factors that pretty much everybody agrees should be considered when determining who should be new members. (In fact, the Famers' Market Association people say they already take these factors into account when voting.)

I've devised a fairly easy system that provides fairness and transparency, as well as flexibility. So here's my proposal, which is very much open for discussion, debate, revision, and alteration. It's offered here in the spirit of furthering creative thinking and problem-solving around how to allocate public space fairly.


The factors are these:

-How long has a would-be vendor been interested in the market? There is a waiting list of sorts, but its maintenance has fallen off because of uncertainty about how to use it fairly.

-Is the would-be vendor selling something that the market already has a lot of, or doesn't have much of?

-Is the would-be vendor interested in selling at more than one of the markets, or just one day a week (or just in the winter)?

-Is the farm based in Portland, or in another community? (There's a decent argument being made that Portland farmers/producers should have a leg up in their own hometown.)

-When during the season will the would-be vendor have the most product available (early-season and late-season suppliers are needed to supplement as vendors that peak in the mid-season fade in and out)

-Is the quality and quantity of the products to be sold sufficient to meet the market's demand?


I propose a points system, in which I've assigned points for various attributes of an applicant's proposal. Most of these are fairly objective. The last two, quality and quantity, are subjective, but reflect descriptions that reasonable people could probably agree on, and at least give a range of qualifications and scores.


On waiting list less than 6 months

0 pts

On waiting list 6 months-12 months

+1 pt

On waiting list 12-24 months

+2 pts

On waiting list 24+ months

+3 pts

Selling something with 0 existing vendors (see Rules, 6d - Products that may be sold - for categories in which to judge)

+5 pts

Selling something with 1 existing vendor

+4 pts

Selling something with 2 existing vendors

+3 pts

Selling something with 3 existing vendors

+2 pts

Selling something with 4 existing vendors

+1 pt

Selling something with 5+ existing vendors

0 pts

Farm based in Portland?

+1 pt

Selling at just one market (winter/Wed/Sat)

0 pts

Selling at more than one market

+1 pt

Peak availability in early season

+1 pt

Peak availability in mid-season

0 pts

Peak availability in late season

+1 pt


-2=abysmal;-1=below average; 0=average; +1=above average;+2=excellent


-1=way too little/way too much; 0=a bit too little/a bit too much; +1=the right amount


The idea would be that, upon the opening of a slot at one of the markets, every applicant would be scored according to this chart (or whatever this chart is revised into). The highest-scoring vendor would be first admitted. If there were more than one slot available, then the slots would be assigned based on score.

If there were to be a tie in points, then the tie-breaker could be up to a vote of the existing vendors.

What other factors should be included? Should some of those factors be more important than others, and so have their point scores adjusted?


| More

 Friends' Activity   Popular 
All Blogs
Follow the Phoenix
  • newsletter
  • twitter
  • facebook
  • youtube
  • rss
Latest Comments
Search Blogs
Strange Maine - winner, The Best Blog, Portland Phoenix, 2008
Black Bird Legal Collective - A Portland-based legal-activist group
DowneastBlog - You tell us what they think
Local Foodie - Portland-based local-foods blog
Media Nation - A media-watch column by journalism professor and Phoenix contributor Dan Kennedy
Organizing Notes - Comments from Maine peace-and-justice activist Bruce Gagnon
Portland Greens - Updates from Portland's Green Party
Portland on Wikipedia - See what the crowdsourcing crowd is saying
Where There's Wil, There's Always A Way - winner, The Best Blog, Portland Phoenix, 2007
Portland Museum of Art blog -
Have Faith In Worthless Knowledge - The SPACE Gallery blog
Maine Prisoner Advocacy Coalition - Activists for prisoners' rights
About Town Archives