Farmers Branch board hears council hesitation on moving community garden; gardeners want to stay

The Parks and Recreation Board of Farmers Branch discussed whether to move the community garden from its current site and whether the city should transfer it to a nonprofit, and members reported mixed feedback from council representatives and gardeners.

Board member Robert (spoke to Councilman Roger Neal) summarized that Neal did not believe the city was actively trying to move the garden and that, after reviewing budget figures, he did not think eliminating the garden’s roughly $30,000 annual line item would materially affect the city’s finances. The board said that response represented only one council member’s view and that they needed input from the other four members who represent Farmers Branch to have a fuller picture.

The garden’s volunteers told the board they prefer to remain in the current location. "The community garden would love to retain the status quo — they have roots there," said Barbara, a board member who relayed gardeners’ comments about accessibility and attachment to the site. Board members noted the present plot is relatively flat and accessible for some gardeners, while a proposed alternate site near Mansky Library and north of the fire station would be less accessible for people with limited mobility.

Board members discussed practical next steps rather than taking immediate action. They asked staff and board volunteers to gather additional information before the next meeting: (1) ask other council members — including Councilman Richard Jackson and newly elected council member Elizabeth — for their positions; (2) get rough cost estimates for creating a new garden at proposed sites; and (3) check whether the existing agreement with the church that hosts the current garden needs updating if the garden remains.

Safety concerns also shaped the conversation. Board members reported a recent incident at the garden — a person behaving erratically around 4:30 p.m. — and urged volunteers to call police when they encounter safety threats. The board said it had recently added a visible site address on the garden shed so users can give a specific location when reporting problems.

Several board members suggested less disruptive alternatives to relocation: installing a perimeter fence or improving site safety before considering a move, and gathering written feedback from garden members. No formal motion to relocate, change ownership, or remove funding was made; the board left the item for further study and asked staff to return with cost and accessibility information.

Board members said they will continue the discussion at the next scheduled meeting, after collecting responses from additional council members and gardeners and after staffing and budget direction from the city manager.