GreeninG Greater Greenfield A Case Study of Green ... · Larry Bellar Gretchen Foltz Meredith Lewis...

GreeninG Greater GreenfieldA Case Study of Green Community Revitalization in Greenfield, Ohio, 2009-2012

Acknowledgements This case study was produced by Ohio University’s Voinovich School of Leadership and

Public Affairs, but it would not have been possible without members of the Greenfield

community and their partners whose story is told in the case study. There have been over

300 hundred people and organizations involved in Greening Greater Greenfield (G3), Light

Up Greenfield, Greenfield Energy Solutions (GES), Greenfield for Trees (G4T), Greenfield

Initiative for a Tomorrow (GIFT), and Greenway to Recreation. A list of participants and

partners acknowledged by Greening Greater Greenfield is shown on the next page.

The Voinovich School also wishes to acknowledge:

The Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) for supporting the Voinovich School’s

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Assistance Services project, of which this

case study is one part.

The U.S. Economic Development Administration (EDA), Department of Commerce,

for assisting Greenfield through the Voinovich School’s Regional Economic

Advancement Program (REAP).

Voinovich School staff members including Robert Gordon, Zachary Holl, Scott Miller,

Lindsey Siegrist, Robin Stewart and Elissa Welch; and Voinovich School students

Rebecca Cochran, Amanda Janice and Kimberly Olivito.

Greening Greater Greenfield: A Case Study of Green Community Revitalization in Greenfield, Ohio Ohio University’s Voinovich School of Leadership and Public Affairs Page 1

Gary Abernathy Karen Daniels Betty Jackman Payton Pryor Kandy Wilson

Farrell Adams Chris Dodds Branden Jackman Bill Redenbaugh Betty Wise

John Adams Ron Dudley Keith Jackman Bill Requardt Beverly Wise

Joyce Amyx Kyle Duff Mike Jacoby Holly Requardt Julia Wise

Mike Anderson Diane Ely Regina Jeffers Lynn Riggs Kristen Wise Jim Arledge Bernice Epling Melissa Jenkins David Rinebolt Charity Wisecup

Margot Ayers Julia Eselgroth Jackie Johnson Dale Roberts Paul Wisecup

John Baal Jim Estell David Jones Kara Roberts Brenda Woods Bernice Bailey Fred Everhart Jimmie Jones Melissa Robinett Donnie Yates

Bruce Baird Harvey Everhart John Joy Abby Roe Ellie Zint

Sue Ann Baird Jim Everhart John Judkins Larry Roosa Eric Zint

Norman Baisden Lee Ann Everhart Robert Judkins Cliff Rosenberger Adena Greenfield Medical Center

Bonnie Baldridge Meleda Everhart Roberta Karnes Jessica Ross Appalachian Regional Commission

William Barber Pam Everhart Linda Knisley Donita Rowland Big City Pizza

Jim Barnett Jay Fabin Rosemary Kropfelder Shari Royse-Bellar Cob Web Corner

Cleve Bartley Katy Farber Cassie Lafferty Rory Ryan Community Market

Barbara Barton Albert Farrow Bob Lambert Eric Salyers Corporation for Ohio Appalachian Development

Connie Bauman LeLynn Farrow April Leaverton Barbara Sapienza Cruz Thru

Farrah Beatty Todd Flowers Brenda Lester Richard Sapienza Dairy Nook

Peg Beekman George Foltz Marsha Lewis Emily Sautter Dayton Power and Light

Larry Bellar Gretchen Foltz Meredith Lewis Harold Schmidt Domino's

Vernon Bennett Terry Fouch Mark Little Judy Schmidt Great Ohio Bicycle Adventure

Blain Bergstrom Jeff Frantz Danny Long Earlene Scott Green Energy Ohio

Bob Bergstrom Jim Free Mary Long Jerry Scott Greenfield Church of Christ

Betty Bishop Patsy Free Alisha Looney Jennifer Seig Greenfield City Council

Candy Black Phil Free Brenda Losey Jeremy Shaffer Greenfield Exempted Village School District

Wesley Black David Gander Jennifer Lowe Angela Shepherd Greenfield Farmer's Market

Jeff Boester Jackie Gardner Bev Lyons Lee Shirey Greenfield Foundation

Heather Bond Bradley George Margaret Magee Charles Shonkwiler Greenfield Historical Society

Chris Borreson Scott Geyer Geraldine McDonald Joel Sims Greenfield McClain High School

Eric Borsini Beverly Giffin Elizabeth McGuffin James Skaggs Greenfield Merchants Association

Kenneth Bowers Jr Iva Giffin Reece McLanahan Brian Smith Greenfield Subway

Sam Bowers Keith Giffin Tonia McLanahan Patsy Smith Greenfield Village Government

Kathy Bowman Scott Giffin Kelly McManus Sandy Smith Highland County Chamber of Commerce

Marcus Bradley Jeff Gilliland Brian McNeil Bruce Snavely Highland County Community Action Agency

Audra Branham Jason Gillow Lowell McNeil Carolyn Snodgrass Highland County Convention and Visitor's Bureau

Crystal Brigner Brad Goolsby Sandra McNeil Matthew Snyder Highland County Historical Society

Lanny Bryant Robert Gordon Clay McPherson Mike Snyder Highland County Press

Marlena Butcher Madeleine Grandey Paul McPherson Jon Soards Highland County Public Library

Anne Byars Gary Grate Jean McVay John Stanley Johnson's Dairy Bar

Jim Calhoun Skylar Grate Diana Merritt Brian Stapleton Knights of Columbus

Nathan Campbell Jeff Hadley Virgie Merritt Barb Steele McDonald's

Carolyn Chain Charlie Hargrave Becky Meyers Charlie Stevens Ohio Department of Development

Brandy Chandler Stacia Harper Linda Meyers Amy Stonerock Ohio Department of Natural Resources

Larry Chapman Keith Hart Natalie Miller Becky Stuckey Ohio Partners for Affordable Energy

Barbara Clouser Juanita Hawkins Margaret Mobley Wes Surritt Ohio University's Voinovich School of Leadership and Public Affairs

Max Clouser Larry Hayes Amanda Monroe Pierre Sweeney Ohio Valley Regional Development Commission

Phil Clyburn John Hemmings Caleb Mootispaw Otis Taylor Plug Smart

Ron Coffey Marilyn Henry Richard Morris Coy Tite Psalm 151

Thelma Coffey Mackenzie Henson Dyana Mt.Castle Megan Todd Rotary

Dan Coleman Kaylee Hester Tony Mt. Castle Pat Tolbert Save-a-Lot

Blanche Cottrell Tim Hester Derek Nelson Rafael Underwood Scott's Pizza

Eddie Cottrell Jim Hill Sean Ohearn Rick Unger Southern Hills Bank

Debra Crago John Hill Kim Oiler Otis Wagner Southern State Community College

Erin Crago Norma Hitt Pat Ormes Tate Wagner The Times-Gazette

Joyce Cropper Carol Hixson Paul Orr Donald Watkins United States Department of Energy

Elizabeth Crouch Zachary Holl Charlotte Palmer Mike Weeds United States Economic Development Agency

Beverly Croy Maggie Horst Sandy Parker Tammy Wells Visibly Green

Dave Culver Tom Horst Nilla Payne Carol Wend Wal Mart Donna Cunningham

Rich Housch Mike Penn Billy Wertz Weller's Plumbing and Heating

Barbara Current Jeremy Howland Jay Post Michele Wheaton

Mark Current Mark Hunter Beth Pristas Shane Wilkin

Dave Daniels Steve Hunter Katie Pryor Jim Wilson

Greening Greater Greenfield wishes to acknowledge the following individuals and organizations:


Introduction Since 2009, the Village of Greenfield, Ohio has taken a number of bold and ambitious steps to become a greener community. Building on its proud history of innovation, Greenfield has combined strong community leadership, future-oriented thinking, a broad base of support and multiple partnerships to develop and begin implementing a vision for the community’s future. Confronted by a daunting economic downturn like so many other towns in rural Ohio, Greenfield’s leadership acted with courage and optimism to create hope and opportunity out of hardship.

Case Study Overview The purpose of this case study is to provide examples and lessons from Greenfield’s experience for other communities wishing to take control of their energy future and harness the power of community-based solutions. The case study and some of the work described in it was made possible by support provided to Ohio University’s Voinovich School of Leadership and Public Affairs by several sources including the U.S. Economic Development Administration (through the Regional Economic Advancement Program (REAP)) and the Appalachian Regional Commission (through the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Assistance Services project). The end notes include information about resources and models utilized by Greenfield and its partners and selected literature about community engagement and community revitalization.

Greenfield’s story is partly about the technical nuts and bolts of “going green” – such as testing the feasibility of wind power in Greenfield’s industrial park, finding partners to help finance an array of solar panels for the local wastewater treatment plant, and developing the expertise to perform walk-through home energy assessments. Equally important, Greenfield’s story is about leadership and community engagement. This part of the story is harder to define, but four themes seem most important:

A Mix of Action and Planning – action to keep people engaged, make things tangible and respond to opportunities; but also planning to focus on a bigger picture, consider strategic options and chart an overall direction.

Collaboration including an “inside game” of organizing the community and an “outside game” of building external partnerships.

Leaders like Greenfield City Manager Betty Bishop, who looked beyond the immediate to envision the future, pulled many people into decision-making and leadership roles, lifted up the community’s talents and passions, and embraced smart risk-taking.

A Broad Base of Participation – hundreds of Greenfield’s residents and businesses played roles in the story told in this case study.


Following a brief profile of the Greenfield area, this case study provides an overview of the Greenfield story in four sections:

Part One: Getting Started describes a public lighting campaign and wind and solar power projects that launched Greenfield down the path of “going green.”

Part Two: Developing a Broader Base and Vision describes the development of a community-based group called Greening Greater Greenfield (G3), its strategic planning work, and its four-pronged green strategies framework.

Part Three: Expanding Community Engagement describes a group called Greenfield Energy Solutions (GES) launched by G3 to engage Greenfield’s residents in adopting energy efficiency and renewable energy (EE/RE) technologies.

Part Four: Lessons Learned draws upon the first three sections and interviews with local participants to outline lessons that other communities can learn from Greenfield’s experience.

Greenfield Area Profile Founded in 1799, Greenfield is a small village located in one of the most rural parts of Ohio, on the western edge of the Ohio Appalachia region. Like many small towns, Greenfield has been challenged by population and job loss – compounded by the economic downturn of 2008. This section provides some data to help paint a picture of the community’s current conditions. But numbers cannot fully describe the character of a place or its people. Greenfield is also characterized by a proud heritage, an attitude of perseverance, and a compelling confidence in its future. The community’s story is perhaps best summarized by a message prepared for Earth Day, 2011 and posted on the village website:

The community of Greenfield has been celebrating its greenness since long before “green energy” became a hot topic. When the early settlers of Greenfield walked over the hill overlooking Paint Creek and saw all of the beautiful green fields, their dreams for Greenfield began a legacy of working to fulfill those dreams. That legacy still exists today.

Agriculture has played an important role in Greenfield’s history and continues to this day. Area farmers have worked in harmony with nature, trusting that the changing seasons will bring a bountiful harvest in the fullness of time.

Greenfield also has a proud history of innovation. Edward Lee McClain developed horse collar pads


that made him wealthy, provided for many jobs and gave the community a beautiful one-of-a-kind high school. An African-American, Fred Patterson, built cars, buses and other vehicles in Greenfield at a time when such an accomplishment seemed impossible. Local entrepreneurs have manufactured oil cans, life-saving nets and display cases for national and international distribution.

Times change and businesses come and go, but the spirit of innovation remains. Matching up needs with creative solutions still provides opportunities for success. One of our nation’s greatest needs is for energy. Our technological age demands energy, and common sense tells us that traditional sources of energy can be exhausted.1

This spirit of innovation and creativity, combined with common sense, is among the most revealing descriptions that can be provided about the Greenfield community. Location The Village of Greenfield is located in southwestern Ohio about 85 miles west of Cincinnati, 60 miles south of Columbus, and 90 miles southeast of Dayton. Greenfield’s village limits overlap three counties – Highland, Fayette, and Ross – but most of the village is located in Highland County. Data are shown in this section for all three counties because many of Greenfield’s residents and workers commute to and from other locations and because Greenfield’s leaders are focused on the well-being of their broader region.

Metropolitan Statistical Area

Micropolitan Statistical Area

Other Locations

Source: Google Maps, 2010

Columbus

Dayton

Wilmington

Chillicothe

Hillsboro

Cincinnati

Piketon

Washington CH

GREENFIELD

HIGHLAND COUNTY

ROSS COUNTY

FAYETTE COUNTY

OHIO


Demographic Overview As shown in Table 1, Greenfield’s population dropped by 5.4%, to 4,639 residents between 2000 and 2010, while population increased in all three counties between 2000 and 2010. As illustrated by five-year average data for the years 2006-2010, median household income and the median value of owner-occupied homes were lower in all three counties than in Ohio as a whole during these years. The poverty and unemployment rates were higher in all three counties compared to Ohio as a whole. High school and college graduates were a lower percentage of workers age 25 and over in all three counties compared to the state.

Table 1. Selected Greenfield Area Demographic Data

Source: U.S. Census2

Employment by Industry As shown in Table 2, the employment base in the Greenfield area differs from that of the state as a whole in several ways. As a percentage of total employment, manufacturing is a larger sector in the three counties than it is statewide – almost one fifth of all employment in Fayette and Highland Counties. The trade, transportation and utilities sector is about the same in Highland and Ross Counties as it is in the state, but is substantially higher in Fayette County (34.4%). The professional and business services sector is substantially smaller, and the public sector is larger, in all three counties compared to the state.

Land Cover As shown in Table 3, three types of land cover – cropland, pasture, and forest – comprise 96-98% of all land cover in the three counties, compared to 89% statewide – a difference explained largely by the much higher percentage of urban land in the state (9.17%) compared to the three counties (1.49%, 1.75%, and 2.91%, respectively). Over half of the land area in each of the three counties is agricultural – cropland or pasture. Fayette County’s percentage is the highest (93%), followed by Highland County (67%) and Ross County (51%), compared to 51% in the State of Ohio as a whole. Among the three counties, on a percentage basis, Fayette County has the most cropland (85%) and Highland County has the most pasture (14%). Ross County and Highland County also have high percentages of forest (44% and 30%, respectively), while this percentage is much lower in Fayette County (7%) – compared to 37% statewide.

Greenfield Fayette Co. Highland Co. Ross Co. Ohio

Total Population, 2010 4,639 29,030 43,589 78,064 11,536,504

Total Population, 2000 4,906 28,433 40,875 73,345 11,353,140

Population Change, 2000-2010 -5.4% 2.1% 6.6% 6.4% 1.6%

Total Households, 2006-2010 11,597 19,166 31,875 5,107,273

Homeownership Rate, 2006-2010 64.60% 73.80% 73.30% 69.20%

Median Value, owner-occupied units, 2006-2010 $112,200 $106,200 $111,800 $136,400

Median Household Income, 2006-2010 $39,599 $39,844 $42,626 $47,358

Poverty Rate, 2006-2010 17.4% 16.2% 17.3% 14.2%

Unemployment Rate, 2006-2010 10.3% 12.1% 11.4% 8.60%

High School Graduate % (age 25 and over) 82.2% 80.0% 82.3% 87.4%

Bachelor or higher % (age 25 and over) 13.1% 9.7% 13.1% 24.1%


Table 2. Greenfield Area Employment by Sector, 2010

Source: Ohio Department of Development County Profiles3

Table 3. Greenfield Area Land Cover

Source: Ohio Department of Development County Profiles4

Fayette Co. Highland Co. Ross Co. Ohio

Total Employment 11,841 11,023 26,217 5,235,972

Private Sector 85.2% 75.3% 75.4% 85.7%

Goods-producing 21.9% 22.5% 17.9% 18.6%

Natural Resources and Mining 0.1% 0.7% 0.3% 0.5%

Construction 2.5% 2.7% 3.2% 4.0%

Manufacturing 19.3% 19.1% 14.4% 14.1%

Service-Providing 63.3% 52.8% 57.6% 67.0%

Trade,Transportation, and Utilities 34.4% 19.2% 18.8% 19.6%

Information 0.5% 2.9% 1.5% 1.6%

Financial Services 4.4% 4.7% 2.5% 5.4%

Professional and Business Services 3.9% 3.7% 6.2% 12.7%

Education and Health Services 8.5% 11.0% 16.2% 15.2%

Leisure and Hospitality 10.0% 8.9% 10.1% 9.4%

Other Services 1.6% 2.4% 2.2% 3.0%

Public Sector 14.8% 24.7% 24.6% 14.3%

Federal Government 0.5% 1.0% 5.6% 1.5%

State Government 0.4% 1.2% 6.3% 2.5%

Local Government 13.9% 22.5% 12.7% 10.4%

Fayette Co. Highland Co. Ross Co. Ohio

Urban 1.49% 1.75% 2.91% 9.17%

Cropland 84.98% 52.81% 38.20% 43.53%

Pasture 6.29% 14.49% 13.86% 7.81%

Forest 6.88% 29.64% 44.06% 37.12%

Open Water 0.33% 1.22% 0.94% 0.92%

Wetlands 0.01% 0.00% 0.00% 1.30%

Bare/Mines 0.03% 0.10% 0.00% 0.16%


Part One: Getting Started

Creating Hope and Direction: “Light Up Greenfield” Betty Bishop became Greenfield’s City Manager in late 2009 and immediately had to grapple with the profound impacts of the national economic downturn: job losses in the private sector, cuts in public services that many viewed as drastic, and a series of newspaper articles reporting the unhappy trends throughout the region. The struggling economy and shrinking municipal budget had led to the elimination of the fire department, an understaffed police department, an escalating crime rate, and frustration among the general public and the municipal workforce.

For Bishop, the challenge was clear. Not only did she have to address daunting problems with shrinking resources. She also had to find reasons for hope and help chart a new direction for the community. Over the next few months, Bishop developed an approach to public safety that was inexpensive, involved most households in the community, and also helped move Greenfield in the direction of energy efficiency and renewable energy.

While riding along on nighttime police patrols, Bishop was astounded by how dark the community was. “It was dark as pitch,” she remembers. She challenged a group of village staff to help come up with a solution to the lighting problem that would engage and excite the community. The group came up with a “Light Up Greenfield” concept and asked the area utility, Dayton Power and Light (DP&L), to contribute 8,000 energy-efficient light bulbs – more than enough for front and back porches throughout the community’s 2,500 households. After the idea was advertised on radio and in local newspapers, 75 volunteers distributed light bulbs to residents along with information from DP&L about the lower energy costs of the light bulbs.

Since the effort was launched, hundreds of community residents have helped light up Greenfield, turning their porch lights on each night and off each morning. Comparing crime data in September 2012 to that of September 2009, just before "Light up Greenfield" was launched, property theft had decreased by 71%, vandalism had decreased by 131%, traffic accidents had decreased by 19%, and arrests had increased by 31% in Greenfield.

“Light Up Greenfield was probably, to me, the very beginning of when Greenfield started thinking green. That was in energy, and that turned into dollars, and that was money saved by people because of crime being reduced. It also meant that people were looking out for each other, and that turned into people saying there are other things in our homes that need to be looked at energy-wise.” – Debra Crago, Greenfield small business owner

“When you see a community that was hit as hard as Greenfield was, it was very important for me to try something to give them a reason to live forward and a reason to hope, and this has gone further than I ever dreamed and for that I am very thankful.” – Betty Bishop, Greenfield City Manager


The Greenfield Alternative Energy Resource Center With “Light Up Greenfield” underway, Betty Bishop turned her attention to the Greenfield Industrial Park – 220 acres of village-owned land. While walking in the industrial park one day, Bishop was overwhelmed by the strength of the wind. “All I could see was windmills,” she later recalled. After sketching out some initial ideas, she convened her “inner circle” of village officials and they brainstormed ideas for producing energy and also for creating a renewable energy education center in the industrial park. They discussed not just wind energy, but other energy ideas as well, including solar, piezoelectricity, bloom boxes, thermal heat pumps and battery technology.5 They agreed to further explore these ideas and to reach out to local educational institutions for advice. When Bishop approached Southern State Community College with a challenge to “either encourage me or call me crazy,” the school encouraged her and also agreed to help. But, Bishop worried, “how in the world am I ever going to get these things accomplished? I know nothing.”

With support from her inner circle, Bishop began sharing the new ideas and seeking help within the community. She learned about a young graduate of Greenfield’s McClain High School, Paul McPherson, who had gone on to Purdue University to become an engineer with a focus on renewable energy. She arranged a meeting with McPherson at which he said that he was more than willing to help and that he had dreamed about wind turbines on the top of the hill in the industrial park, which he could see through his high school classroom window. While McPherson helped develop a more detailed wind energy concept, Bishop also reached out to another McClain graduate who had gone on to become an engineer, Mark Hunter, to develop some solar energy ideas.

The proposed Greenfield Alternative Energy Resource Center envisions up to eight utility-scale wind turbines along with several solar arrays across an 87-acre portion of the industrial park. In addition, the plan calls for a partnership with Southern State Community College-Highland County to develop an educational facility to promote and invest in green energy. Finally, the project includes a public engagement component through which the village would reach out to area farmers for contract leases to install additional turbines and solar arrays across the area. Greenfield plans to seek project financing from third-party investors to support this aspect of the plan.

On April 22, 2010 (Earth Day), Bishop convened a meeting of about 15 “movers and shakers” in the community. With help from McPherson and Hunter, she shared the proposal with the group and asked whether Greenfield should proceed with it. Every person in the group said yes. She then asked each person to give her the names of three other people she should ask. After asking these people – and additional people they recommended – Bishop ultimately spoke with 85 people, all of whom encouraged her to move ahead. Many people spoke about Greenfield’s proud history of innovation and regarded the wind and solar concepts as the most innovative ideas they had heard in years.


With this community support, Greenfield applied for the Ohio Department of Development’s Ohio Anemometer Loan Program (ALP), administered by the Columbus-based non-profit organization Green Energy Ohio (GEO).6 The ALP provides capital and technical expertise to non-profit organizations, public agencies, landowners and businesses to conduct pre-development tasks for wind energy projects. Greenfield’s ALP application for $60,000 was approved based on several factors including $7,500 in matching funds, organized stakeholders, a strong education and outreach plan, and the need for comprehensive wind speed data at utility-scale turbine hub heights in this region of Ohio.

In December 2010, an ALP-funded meteorological tower (“met tower”) was constructed to test wind speeds at 40, 50 and 60-meter heights in a portion of the Greenfield Industrial Park for a 12-month period. The location was viewed as promising due to its high elevation, few barriers to wind speed, projected 50-meter wind speeds of 13.4-14.5 mph, and the potential to connect the turbines to the electrical grid via a nearby DP&L substation.

The ALP grant also supported a feasibility study conducted by GEO to determine the financial viability of moving forward with Phase One of the plan, which proposes three GE 1.5-MW model turbines at the site (GE 1.5-77 at 118.5 meters; GE 1.6-82.5 at 121.25 m; and GE 1.6-100 at 150 m). Financial feasibility will depend largely upon the capability of the turbine-generated energy to earn the Village enough revenue to cover the installation costs of $1.5 million for each turbine.

“I come from the old school. We didn’t recycle, we didn’t do a lot of the things that people are doing today, and the green thing today is not only a buzz word, I think, but a way of life we’ve got to get to…This is very new to a lot of people, but I think that 20 years from now, we’ll probably see a lot of our electricity made by wind, I don’t know how we can keep from it. We pumped water with wind for years, and I think a lot of people forget that.” – Tom Horst, Highland County Commissioner

Workers installing the “met tower” used by Green Energy

Ohio to conduct the wind turbine feasibility study.


Completed in August 2012, the feasibility study consists of multiple components including wind speed data; evaluation of several turbine options; production estimates; financial analysis; assessment of a potential connection to the nearby DP&L substation; topographic maps; wildlife analysis of the surrounding area; clearance from the Federal Aviation Administration; public awareness/perception; and a historical summary. Data regarding production and revenue estimates were entered into a financial analysis program to determine projected return on investment and payback period. The study found that a wind energy project in the evaluated location is feasible and would generate a 13% profit for the Village of Greenfield over the course of 20 years.7

Results from the feasibility study will be placed on a public wind database, accessible with an administrative fee.8

Greenfield officials are now exploring options for moving ahead with the wind energy project as a first phase in making the Greenfield Alternative Energy Resource Center a reality. Greenfield hopes its wind development project will aid in delivering economic recovery to the area and also help promote an “atmosphere of energy growth” in its neighboring towns including Washington Court House to the north, Wilmington to the west, Portsmouth to the south and Chillicothe to the east. “We had to do something to create an atmosphere of hope for the community, and that’s what we have done with this project,” says Bishop.

Solar-Powered Wastewater Treatment In 2010, the Village of Greenfield began discussions with a solar and energy services company about building a 1.17-MW solar array to provide energy for the Greenfield Wastewater Treatment Facility. The proposed system would consist of over 13,000 ground-mounted solar panels on six acres adjacent to the wastewater treatment facility.

The proposed approach is to develop a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) whereby a private company would design, build, own and maintain the solar facility and charge the Village of Greenfield for power at a negotiated 20-year monthly rate. This approach depends upon tax credits and depreciation benefits that would accrue to the private company. A proposal has been presented to the Greenfield City Council and conversations to determine next steps have been ongoing since that time. Project details and decisions have not been finalized.

“Based on our calculations, the most feasible turbines with the best return on investment are three, third-party owned, GE 1.6-100s on 109 meter towers; with a profit of $1,926,263 at the end of 20 years and a return on investment of 13.0%.” – Wind Turbine Feasibility Study Report, Village of Greenfield, Green Energy Ohio (GEO), August 2012


Part Two: Developing a Broader Base and Vision While encouraged by the initial projects, many community leaders saw a need for a “bigger picture” plan for the community’s future and more community members engaged in taking action. To achieve this, Betty Bishop requested help from Ohio University’s Voinovich School of Leadership and Public Affairs, which provided assistance through the Regional Economic Advancement Program (REAP), supported by the United States Economic Development Administration, Department of Commerce (EDA).

Forming a Group and Identifying Priorities The planning process got underway in early 2010 when Bishop invited about a dozen community leaders to an initial meeting to discuss economic development and community revitalization. The leaders included business people, village officials, county-level organizations, and concerned citizens.

To start developing a focus, the process began with a brainstorming session to identify the most critical economic development issues facing Greenfield and key strengths to build upon. The issues were then grouped into categories in order to identify related issues that could be addressed together.

The group identified four priority issue areas – agriculture, business and entrepreneurship, greening Greenfield, and tourism – and formed committees to focus more deeply on each issue area. The committees then held a joint meeting to share and compare their ideas and identified five priority goals for the overall group to work on:

Make Greenfield green and clean Develop a business readiness plan Develop a tourism plan Develop a brand for Greenfield Develop funding partnerships

“The most important thing is getting that core group of people that really is excited and are concerned, and if you don’t start with a really good core group, it’s not going to go anywhere.” – Brenda Losey, Greenfield City Councilwoman

“I think sometimes when a community decides they want to do something they go to the same five leaders who were involved in the last ten projects, and that base of activism is quite small, and this effort has been much broader-based and I think that’s why it’s been such a success and as sustainable as it has been.” – Sandy Smith, CEO/Administrator, Adena Greenfield Medical Center

“My original hope was to set goals that were measurable and featured plenty of low-hanging fruit, so that we could enjoy the momentum that comes from small victories. Thus far we have generated much good will and helped our citizens feel better about their community.” – Ron Coffey, G3 Chair


Strategy Development Once the group established goals, they faced the much more challenging task of developing strategies for reaching those goals. There are many different definitions for “strategy,” but most of them are based on the realities of limited resources, limited time, competition for resources, and choice-making. Because time, money, and other resources are limited, people and organizations need to make choices about how to best use these resources. Developing strategies helps identify the mix of actions and resources that is most likely to achieve the desired goals and achieve competitive advantage.

To guide its strategy development, the group used a set of seven criteria to evaluate potential strategies. These criteria were developed by the Voinovich School based on experience with other community-based efforts as well as community engagement research.9 By addressing several key factors – including broad community engagement opportunities, resource availability, and proof of success in other communities – these criteria helped the group develop strategies with the greatest potential.

What is a Strategy? “A careful plan or method.” -merriam-webster.com “A plan of action designed to achieve a vision…As there is always an element of uncertainty about the future, strategy is more about a set of options (‘strategic choices’) than a fixed plan.” -wikapedia.com “The thinking aspect of planning a change, organizing something, or planning…Strategy lays out the goals that need to be accomplished and the ideas for achieving those goals.” -wisegeek.com “A clear decision and statement about a chosen course of action for obtaining a specific goal or result…An actionable strategy is a comprehensively scrutinized decision about the most effective and efficient use of specific resources for systematically increasing competitive advantage.” -actionablestrategicplanning.com

Criteria for Evaluating Strategies

1. Community Support. Is it likely to be

supported within the local

community?

2. Community Engagement. Is it likely

to generate participation from local

residents, businesses, and other

stakeholders?

3. Evidence of Success. Has it succeeded

in other places?

4. Build from Strength. Does it build

upon one of Greenfield’s key

strengths?

5. Build from What is Already

Happening. Does it build on or

support other activities already

underway or planned?

6. Partner Interests. Does it align with

priorities of potential partners?

7. Funding Availability. Is there a

specific funding agency or program

that is a potential funding source?


Vision, Mission, Identity Vision and mission statements are often developed at the beginning of a strategic planning process because they can establish clarity about “the big picture” before a group focuses on the details. But the Greenfield group chose an equally valid approach: they focused on specifics – like goals and strategies – before developing the group’s mission and vision.

This approach was chosen for two key reasons. First, the group had been convened in the first place to discuss economic development, so it was not necessary to develop mission or vision statements in order to define the general purpose of the group. Second, the group was brand new and the first priority was to keep people engaged in it. By identifying tangible things that people actually wanted to spend time working on, the group found it easier to transition into broader issues such as mission and vision.

The planning group took a similar approach to developing a name. While a brand new group can adopt a name as a first step, the Greenfield experience illustrates how valuable it can be to focus on what the group wants to do before deciding what its name should be. In Greenfield’s case, this approach enabled the group to identify strong linkages between their marketing, tourism, and green energy goals before they tried to develop a name. Based on these linkages, the group developed a name – Greening Greater Greenfield (G3) – along with mission and vision statements that were all tied together by the word “green.”

G3 members include:

Greenfield area businesses

Greenfield area residents

Greenfield Exempted Village School

District

Greenfield Farmer’s Market

Greenfield Historical Society

Greenfield Merchants Association

Greenfield Village Government

Highland County Chamber of Commerce

Highland County Community Action

Agency

Highland County Convention and

Visitor’s Bureau

Highland County Historical Society

Highland County Press

Highland County Public Library

Knights of Columbus

Ohio Department of Natural Resources

Ohio University’s Voinovich School of

Leadership and Public Affairs

Rotary

Southern State Community College

The Times-Gazette

Greening Greater Greenfield (G3)

Vision:

Greenfield = a Great

Rural

Economical and

Environmental

Neighbor to all.

Mission:

Greenfield, Ohio: A historic community preserving the past while moving forward in an innovative way; developing “green” technology to enhance business, education, and recreation; creating a harmonious living environment for both residents and visitors.


Defining Green The “Greening Greater Greenfield” name made a lot of sense from a marketing and communications perspective, but it also made defining “green” more critical since the group’s purpose was now directly tied to that word. The goal of making Greenfield a “green and clean” place, for example, could have multiple interpretations. It could mean planting trees, ensuring litter-free streets, developing renewable energy projects, creating green jobs, protecting and conserving the area’s water supply, or promoting sustainable agriculture.

Since each of these versions of “green and clean” would require very different resources and approaches, it was important to be as clear as possible about what the group wanted to accomplish in order to translate its vision into clear strategies and an action plan. To assist, the Voinovich School presented information about approaches used successfully in other communities.10 After several group discussions, G3 developed a four-pronged green strategy framework:

Beautification

Environment

Innovation

Health and Lifestyle

G3 has worked to identify key strategies under each of these categories that now clearly illustrate the ways in which G3 aims to make Greenfield a greener community.

G3’s Green Strategies

Beautification strategies to enhance the appearance of Greenfield through:

community clean-ups tree and flower plantings improvements to residential and

commercial properties

Environmental strategies to protect and enhance Greenfield’s natural environment through:

reducing waste and increasing recycling protecting water quality reducing energy consumption adopting renewable energy technologies educating Greenfield’s youth about

environmental issues

Innovation strategies to drive economic development through:

attracting green-related businesses to Greenfield

developing and attracting a skilled workforce that is prepared for green jobs

driving down energy costs for residents and businesses

supporting local businesses and farmers retaining and attracting residents with

strong environmental values

Health and Lifestyle strategies focus on the Greenfield area’s natural, recreational, agricultural and heritage assets through:

enhancing and promoting the area’s parks, recreational amenities and heritage for area residents and visitors

promoting healthy eating and exercise supporting Greenfield’s farmer’s market


Part Three: Expanding Community Engagement

Greenfield had made remarkable progress In less than 18 months. “Light Up Greenfield” had improved public safety while promoting energy-efficient light bulbs in a highly-visible manner. Wind and solar energy projects had attracted passionate community support and were being explored with assistance from partner organizations. G3 had been established as a group to pull together public, private and community leaders around a shared strategic vision. And G3 had developed priorities and a four-pronged green strategies framework to guide its work going forward.

But that is not all. Since the establishment of Greening Greater Greenfield, the group has:

Brought back the “Greene Countrie Towne” label.

Engaged the Greenfield Foundation as a fiscal agent.

Held the first G3 Greenfield Oktoberfest in 2011.

Organized a Greenfield Clean-up Day, planted flowers and arranged for banners in downtown Greenfield.

Expanded the concept of “Light-Up Greenfield” to the holiday season and to “Light Up City Hall.”

Top: volunteers at a flower-planting in downtown

Greenfield. Middle: bicycles outside Greenfield

McClain High School where riders in the Great Ohio

Bike Adventure (GOBA) stopped for a tour. Bottom:

G3’s first Greenfield Oktoberfest.


In addition, G3 has formed several new groups to advance specific aspects of the G3 vision:

Greenfield Energy Solutions (GES) focuses on educating residents and businesses about, and helping them adopt, energy efficiency and renewable energy measures.

Greenfield For Trees (G4T) is a proposed tree commission to aid in Greenfield’s efforts to become a “Tree City USA” community.

Greenfield Initiative for Tomorrow (GIFT) is a group dedicated to creating a better community for tomorrow’s generation through volunteer community service projects such as park and playground renovations and activities for youth.

Greenway to Recreation is a group dedicated to showcasing Greenfield’s history, hospitality, and recreational assets – for example, by recently hosting a stop on the 24th Annual Great Ohio Bicycle Adventure (GOBA).

Launching Greenfield Energy Solutions (GES) In early 2011, Ohio University’s Voinovich School of Leadership and Public Affairs approached G3 about participating in a case study regarding community engagement for energy efficiency and renewable energy (EE/RE) – one part of the Voinovich School’s Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Assistance Services project, supported by the Appalachian Regional Commission. This would provide an opportunity for G3 to learn more about these issues and successful efforts in other places while getting more residents and businesses involved.

In response to this opportunity, G3 created a new committee to focus on encouraging and promoting EE/RE. After selecting a chair and vice chair and reviewing models and research findings from other communities, the group adopted a name – Greenfield Energy Solutions (GES) – and five goals.11

As GES was getting started, Ohio Partners for Affordable Energy (OPAE) approached the Village of Greenfield and G3 about being one of three pilot communities in OPAE’s Weatherize Ohio Pilot Program, which would assist Greenfield in meeting its EE/RE goals. After G3 and GES both approved this partnership, it became GES’ main focus, with months of preparation leading up to the launch of free home energy assessments in the community in 2012. The project’s targets are to provide energy efficiency information to 330 residents and perform 167 walk-through home energy assessments.

Greenfield Energy Solutions (GES)

Goals:

1. Develop and support community leadership on energy efficiency and renewable energy (EE/RE) in greater Greenfield.

2. Educate the greater Greenfield community about EE/RE.

3. Reduce energy consumption in greater Greenfield.

4. Reduce carbon emissions in greater Greenfield.

5. Reduce the amount of money spent on energy in greater Greenfield.

6. Use EE/RE home improvements to market homes.


Since late 2011, GES has:

Partnered with Highland County Community Action Agency (HCCAA) and OPAE to conduct home energy assessments using the U.S. Department of Energy’s SCORE system.12

Completed “Energy Ambassador” training to prepare for community outreach and site assessment and energy auditing training to prepare for home energy assessments (training provided by OPAE and the Corporation for Ohio Appalachian Development (COAD)).

Raised initial funding and engaged the Greenfield Foundation as a fiscal agent.

Created a database of community organizations and developed a community outreach plan.

Held a contest for high school students to develop a GES logo.

Developed a brochure and distributed it in the community to get the word out about GES and home energy assessments.

Provided EE/RE information to over 330 residents through door-to-door outreach, group presentations, and information booths at community events.

Completed over 150 home energy assessments (about 90% of the 167 goal) as of October 2012.

While working with other members of Greenfield Energy Solutions (GES) to promote and conduct home energy assessments in the community, GES Chair Sam Bowers also built a windmill on his own property. Bowers is using some of the energy produced by the windmill – about 15-18 volts – for lighting, and is also storing energy in batteries which he plans to connect to an inverter to provide power to his home. The total project cost was $325 for materials plus Bowers’ own labor and help from some friends. Bower’s “ingredients” for making a windmill:

$85 for a 2.5-hp DC motor $60 for the blades on eBay a case of beer for a friend to turn down the

steel hub $20 for the recycled TV tower and some

primer $160 for a yard of concrete six deep cycle batteries from an old golf cart

provided by a local golf course other parts fabricated by Bowers

“We need to look toward the future and make changes now! If we don't make changes to reduce the carbon footprint, there will not be a future to look forward to. It is as simple as that.” – Sam Bowers, GES Chair


Part Four: Lessons Learned Throughout this case study are quotations from those involved in or aware of Greenfield’s efforts to “go green.” These quotations, drawn from interviews conducted by Ohio University’s Voinovich School of Leadership and Public Affairs in August 2012, shed light on what these greening efforts have meant to the Greenfield community and what lessons other communities can take away from the Greenfield experience. Among those interviewed were participants in Greening Greater Greenfield (G3) and other G3-related initiatives including Greenfield Energy Solutions (GES), Greenfield Initiative for Tomorrow (GIFT), Greenfield for Trees (G4T), Greenfield Oktoberfest, Greenway to Recreation and Light Up Greenfield, among others.

This section of the case study summarizes the key themes highlighted in these interviews, which are consistent with key principles of community revitalization and with documented successes in other communities.13

Those interviewed were asked to talk about:

The impacts that green initiatives have had on the Greenfield community;

The importance of “going green” for Greenfield;

Constructive criticism about Greenfield’s community engagement efforts;

Advice for other communities wishing to pursue green initiatives; and

Ideas about how the Greenfield community should focus its efforts going forward.

Key Themes: Lessons Drawn from Participant Interviews

1. Use Pride and Hope to Pull People Together All of the individuals interviewed emphasized the power of community pride and hope in pulling people together to develop and address common goals. These comments emphasized, first, the importance of creating enjoyable opportunities for community members to come together; second, the community pride and hopeful spirit created by these activities; and third, the importance of such activities in building strong relationships that can grow into community activism.

“Greenfield has really gone through some

very depressing times, and once people

realized that there was a group that wanted

to bring vitality back to this community…

the enjoyment, the camaraderie, the events

to bring people out and socialize …the

community was so improved. I just feel like

a town this small goes through bad times,

and they come together and they start

reaping the benefits of good times and

they’re just enjoying themselves to know

that people care.” – Debra Crago, Greenfield

small business owner


2. Focus on a Sustainable Future While organizing around community hope and pride is critical to the Greenfield story, it is also clear that “going green” has struck a chord among community members who are concerned about the community and environment their children will inherit. This suggests that simply bringing people together for positive community activities – as powerful as that can be in its own right – is not enough to spark an effective approach to community revitalization. By focusing on the social, environmental, and economic sustainability of the Greenfield community, Greenfield’s leaders

have imbued their work with a compelling “higher purpose” and long-term commitment.14

3. Focus on Innovation and New Thinking Community organizers in many communities have confronted the challenge of people being “set in their ways,” skeptical about new ideas, or apathetic. Several of those interviewed talked about this challenge in Greenfield. They attribute Greenfield’s success in promoting new ideas and overcoming this challenge to four key approaches: developing a message that links the future to the community’s history; creating a process that allowed for new voices and ideas to be heard; focusing on “pocketbook” benefits like lower energy costs and job growth; and emphasizing the community’s responsibilities to future generations.

4. Link the Future to the Past The links between community engagement, leadership, and story-telling have long been recognized. People trying to inspire others to take action need to tell a story that connects where people have come from to a shared future vision. G3 members have grounded their goals for an innovative future in Greenfield’s proud history of innovation. As one participant put it, those involved have “used this pride in the past for visioning what this community could look like.”

“It’s really created a nice focus for the community to pull together and create a vision for a different Greenfield…Sometimes in the past the groups I’ve worked with have focused more on ‘the good old days,’ and that’s important, I respect history, but if you spend too much time gazing at the past, your future slips away from you.” – Sandy Smith, CEO/Administrator, Adena Greenfield Medical Center

“I’ve got five daughters, I’ve got six grandkids, and I think a lot about the world they’re going to be living in…We’ve always been big on organic and recycling, things like that, but I think about their quality of life in particular, and what that’s going to mean to them, and I think we all need to be good stewards of where we live.” – Brenda Losey, Greenfield City Councilwoman

“As our economy continues to see ups and downs in energy prices, it is important for cities large and small to recognize the importance of becoming as self-sustaining as possible…Cities that have developed green initiatives have traditionally seen a growing interest in companies moving to the areas as many companies are interested in being a part of the going green movement.” – Paul McPherson, Instructor of Technology, Berea College


5. Develop Many Leaders Virtually all of those interviewed highlighted two points that may seem contradictory – first, that the Greenfield story would not have been possible

without key leaders who were willing to push an agenda of innovation; and second, that none of the accomplishments to date would have been possible with just a small handful of leaders.

In fact, the Greenfield story clearly shows that these two points go hand-in-hand: Greenfield’s leaders have been so effective because of the kind of leadership they practice – they constantly work to engage new people and allow new groups to branch off and establish their own initiatives.

6. Take the Time to Dream, Explore, and Evaluate The Greenfield story illustrates the value of taking the time to discuss a range of possible ideas before deciding what to do or how to do it. This enabled many voices to be heard and ensured that the process was not rushed toward any convenient or pre-determined outcome. Several of those interviewed described this process as difficult and sometimes discouraging because it was not clear where the group was headed, but these individuals and others also noted how valuable it was to do the hard work of thinking through different possibilities before making decisions.

“At the beginning, it was tough, I’ll admit that,” recalled one participant, who added that “it has completely changed our thinking” and recommended that other communities “don’t give up, don’t get frustrated.”

“We probably started with 15 people,” said another participant, “and the overwhelming part is, whose ideas do you go with, how do you work through that process? But it was worth it.”

“It’s exciting to see it happen, and it’s other people making it happen. You know, we can come up with ideas all day long, but if somebody doesn’t put feet on those ideas, nothing happens.” – Betty Bishop, Greenfield City Manager

“I would advise any other community to take a broader focus and don’t just get stuck on one thing because you disenfranchise some of your participants when you do that.” – Sandy Smith, CEO/Administrator, Adena Greenfield Medical Center

“I really am very excited to see all of the volunteerism. Things are just at an all-time high. In all the time I’ve lived in Greenfield, I think the volunteerism right now is probably as high as I’ve seen it.” – Brenda Losey, Greenfield City Councilwoman

“If you come in with a pre-conceived notion about things, then you’re kind of going to get a prefab result, but letting us dream and go on different tangents has been very helpful…People need to brainstorm and dream and find some opportunities that have been overlooked, and if you get some creative minds together, you never know what might happen.” – Ron Coffey, G3 Chair

“Whoever tries this, don’t try to do it from the top down. Get the people involved.” – Paul Orr, retired school teacher/principal


7. Unify People Those interviewed consistently mentioned how important it has been for Greenfield to build a broad base of participation. These comments highlight two equally important ways to unify people: one approach starts with a leader who works to build support for an idea; the other approach starts with a group that develops and implements its own ideas. Both approaches can lead to the same result – unified people – and both require leaders who work to support other leaders.

For example, the Greenfield Alternative Energy Resource Center proposal was not initially the result of a group decision-making process. It was an idea shared by one person with several others who in turn helped develop the idea and then shared it for feedback from dozens of other community members. By the time the village applied for a grant to move the idea forward, it had become a community-based plan.

But the Greenfield story also shows how new ideas can grow from unpredictable group decisions. G3 began with a blank slate and went through a series of meetings – including some difficult ones – before the group decided what to focus on. As a result of this process, everyone in the group became a champion for the group’s shared priorities.

This outcome illustrates the community organizing principle of allowing a group to be what it wants to be. A pre-determined agenda is likely to push away participants, while an agenda that is based on the group’s priorities is likely to keep a group strong, active, and unified.

What is G3? – Views from Greenfield

“It functions as a sort of informal think tank where a wide range of ideas are considered in the context of G3's stated goals…G3 attempts to marry projects to those who are most passionate about each project. The members have thus far checked their egos at the door, being content with results rather than seeking credit as a committee or as individuals.” – Ron Coffey, G3 Chair “It is common everyday folks who want to make their community a better place to live.” – Sam Bowers, GES Chair “It gives people another avenue to step up and get involved. I think it’s a great way to get more people, different people, involved in helping the community because sometimes it’s a lot of the same people that do a lot of the things and in this initiative it looks like they’ve brought in some new faces, some new names, and I think that’s been a really positive thing.” – Ellie Zint, Greenfield Farmer’s Market “It has had a very beneficent sort of leadership and included people as they’ve wished to be included. They’ve not pushed people beyond their comfort level to the point where they would disengage…The people involved in all of these efforts have sort of gravitated toward what’s comfortable for them and what they have a passion for, and that’s been a good thing.” – Sandy Smith, CEO/Administrator, Adena Greenfield Medical Center “I think it’s got people actually recognizing that there is an energy solution in this country and in this world. You know, everybody thinks energy is free and they don’t realize that we are using our own natural resources when we can use natural environments to create energy also.” – Mark Hunter, Weller’s Plumbing and Heating


8. Unify Issues In addition to unifying people, G3 has unified many different issues under the umbrella concept of “going green.” Clearly, the village’s name suggests “going green” as a promising message, but the group did not settle for just a simple play on words or a marketing angle. Instead, they spent considerable time discussing the meaning of “green,” how to communicate it, and how to achieve it. The result was G3’s four-pronged greening framework, which explains G3’s definition of “green” and provides a road map for action.

9. Communicate, Communicate, Communicate Among those interviewed, the most common criticisms of G3 focused on communication. While G3’s communications have obviously been highly effective in engaging many people, a “greening” umbrella does present communication challenges. Since “green” has so many different definitions, it can be hard to convey those many meanings. Some ideas, such as proposed wind turbines, have met with some skepticism simply because the ideas seem so new and unproven to many people.

In reality, communication challenges will never go away or be “solved” – they simply shine light on the importance of always keeping communication at the top of any community engagement “to do” list.

“When G3 chose their name and then went into the aspect of defining green, that was an experience all on its own, because they just took the word green and said, ‘what do I think of,’ and it was all kinds of things.” – Betty Bishop, Greenfield City Manager

"When it first started, I think people were a little confused and said, ‘Wait, what is this?’ It was a new thing our community hasn’t seen and so I think it took a while for people to wrap their arms around what is the initiative all about, because it is broad, it’s not just special to one kind of greening, but I think once that groundwork was laid, it’s been great.” – Ellie Zint, Greenfield Farmer’s Market

While G3 was working

to define its greening

framework, City

Manager Betty Bishop

made a sketch which

was later turned into

the image to the right.

The megaphone image

clearly illustrates

communication as G3’s

main purpose and

challenge in pursuing a

“Go Green” agenda.


Wish List for the Future Those interviewed were asked to identify what direction or projects should be next for the community if resources were available. These are their responses:

Strengthen efforts to communicate Greenfield’s green identity.

Work on the proposed wind turbines as a first step in creating the Greenfield Alternative Energy Resource Center.

Promote local renewable energy end energy efficiency success stories.

Emphasize renewable energy education with a particular focus on Greenfield McClain High School.

Focus on downtown Greenfield, including beautification work and efforts to utilize vacant buildings for new uses.

Promote tourism and recreation in the Greenfield area.

Improve and expand utilization of the village-owned railroad lines.

Create more ways to bring both adults and children together for fun and celebration.

Keep Greenfield a safe, attractive and inviting place to live and visit.

Conclusion At the time this case study was completed, the Village of Greenfield and Greening Greater Greenfield were experiencing a great deal of positive momentum. The wind turbine feasibility study had found that the proposed project would be feasible and profitable, and village officials were developing a plan for moving forward. Greenfield Energy Solutions had conducted outreach throughout the community, providing information to over 330 residents and completing over 150 home energy assessments. Other groups spawned by G3 were active and growing, including Greenfield For Trees (G4T), Greenfield Initiative for Tomorrow (GIFT), and Greenway to Recreation. The “Light up Greenfield” concept that had initially launched the community onto a green pathway had been expanded to encompass other similar efforts. The G3 committee had held its second annual Greenfield Oktoberfest. And perhaps most important of all, G3 was a strong and growing community-based organization continuing to turn its vision for Greenfield’s future into a reality.

“I would love to have enough money just to do something fun every weekend that people could bring their kids to and it doesn’t cost anything, and I think things like that help build the morale of the town, too.” – Brenda Lester, G3 Social Media Administrator

“For a small town community, if we can be one of the first to get a nice big wind farm, or something that will get a lot of talk, a lot of people to come to the community...Let’s say we get these wind turbines up and then we have education programs and we can have our kids start to learn about energy and be interested in it...I think it’s just a movement that would help many people.” – Mark Hunter, Weller’s Plumbing and Heating


End Notes

1. http://www.greenfieldohio.net/go-green.html.

2. http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml; and http://censusviewer.com/city/OH/Greenfield.

3. http://www.development.ohio.gov/research/files/s0.htm.

4. http://www.development.ohio.gov/research/files/s0.htm.

5. Piezoelectricity is the charge that accumulates in certain solid materials in response to applied mechanical stress (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piezoelectricity. A Bloom Box is a solid oxide fuel cell made by a California-based company, Bloom Energy, that can use a variety of inputs (including liquid or gaseous hydrocarbons produced from biological resources) to generate electricity on the site where it will be used (see http://www.bloomenergy.com/).

6. http://www.greenenergyohio.org/page.cfm?pageID=2193.

7. Green Energy Ohio. Wind Turbine Feasibility Study Report, Village of Greenfield, Aug. 2012, p. 5.

8. http://www.greenenergyohio.org/page.cfm?pageID=78.

9. See end note 13.

10. These included examples of “going green” such as Greensburg Greentown (Greensburg, Kansas), (see http://www.greensburggreentown.org/) and Greening Greenfield (Greenfield, Massachusetts) (see http://www.greeninggreenfield.org/); as well as an example of the Home Town Competitiveness approach to rural small town revitalization from Ord, Nebraska (see http://www.energizingentrepreneurs.org/content/Builders.pdf.).

11. Examples include Greater Cincinnati Energy Alliance ( http://www.greatercea.org); Home Energy Efficiency Teams ( http://www.heetma.com), and Baltimore Neighborhood Energy Challenge (http://cleanergreenerbaltimore.org/uploads/files/BNEC%20Pilot%20Results%20Report.pdf. Research findings were reviewed from Driving Demand for Home Energy Improvements, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2010 (see http://drivingdemand.lbl.gov.).

12. See http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/residential/hes_research.html.

13. The lessons described in this section are consistent with key principles of community revitalization and documented successes in other communities. Good resources include:

Community Organizing

Marshall Ganz, “Organizing,” Encyclopedia of Leadership, Vol. 3, edited by George R. Goethels, Georgia J. Sorenson and James MacGregor Burns (Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2004, 1134-44). Dave Beckwith with Cristina Lopez. “Community Organizing: People Power from the Grassroots” COMM-ORG. http://comm-org.wisc.edu/papers97/beckwith.htm.

http://www.greenfieldohio.net/go-green.html

http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml

http://censusviewer.com/city/OH/Greenfield

http://www.development.ohio.gov/research/files/s0.htm

http://www.development.ohio.gov/research/files/s0.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piezoelectricity

http://www.bloomenergy.com/

http://www.greenenergyohio.org/page.cfm?pageID=2193

http://www.greenenergyohio.org/page.cfm?pageID=78

http://www.greensburggreentown.org/

http://www.greeninggreenfield.org/

http://www.energizingentrepreneurs.org/content/Builders.pdf

http://www.greatercea.org/

http://www.heetma.com/

http://cleanergreenerbaltimore.org/uploads/files/BNEC%20Pilot%20Results%20Report.pdf

http://drivingdemand.lbl.gov/

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/residential/hes_research.html

http://comm-org.wisc.edu/papers97/beckwith.htm


Joe Szakos, “Practical Lessons in Community Organizing in Appalachia: What We’ve Learned at Kentuckians for the Commonwealth,” Appalachia: Social Context Past and Present , 4th ed., ed. by Philip J. Obermiller and Michael E. Maloney (Dubuque: 1993). Rev. Louise Green, “Sustainable Action: Planting the Seeds of Relational Organizing,” http://www.uua.org/documents/greenlouise/seeds_relationalorg.pdf. Social Capital and Community Capitals

Cornelia Butler Flora and Jan L. Flora, “Generating Community Change,” Rural Communities: Legacy and Change (Boulder: Westview Press, 2008, 345-375).

Mary Emery and Cornelia Flora, “Spiraling-Up: Mapping Community Transformation with Community Capitals Framework,” Community Development: Journal of the Community Development Society 37(1), 2006, 19-35, http://www.ncrcrd.iastate.edu/pubs/flora/articles/spiralingup-37.1.2-Emery-Flora-2006.pdf.

Jan L. Flora, Jeff Sharp, Cornelia Flora, and Bonnie Newman, “Entrepreneurial Social Infrastructure and Locally Initiated Economic Development in the Non-Metropolitan United States,” The Sociological Quarterly 38(4), 1997, 623-645, http://www.ncrcrd.iastate.edu/pubs/flora/articles/entresocinfranonmetrous.pdf. Asset-Based Community Development

Gary P. Green and Anna L. Haines, Asset Building and Community Development, (Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2002). John McKnight, “Regenerating Community,” http://www.cpn.org/topics/community/regenerating.html.

John P. Kretzmann and John L. McKnight, “Introduction,” Building Communities from the Inside Out: A Path Toward Finding and Mobilizing a Community’s Assets (Chicago: ACTA Publications, 1993, 1-11), http://www.ctassets.org/catesimages/14a%20Intro%20to%20ABCD.pdf.

Joseph McNeely, “Community Building,” Journal of Community Psychology 27(6), 1999, 741-750. Mary Emery, Reggie Carlson and Craig Schrodeder, “A Formula for Community Builders: How to Retain and Attract Families,” Vanguard, Fall 2004, http://www.ncrcrd.iastate.edu/pubs/presentations/emery/vanguardFall2004.pdf.

14. For overviews of social, economic and environmental sustainability, see Citizens Network for Sustainable Development, http://www.citnet.org/projects/Whatis.aspx; and Robert W. Kates, Thomas M. Parris, and Anthony A. Leiserowitz, “What is Sustainable Development? Goals, Indicators, Values, and Practice.” Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development 47(3), 2005, pp. 8-21, http://www.hks.harvard.edu/sustsci/ists/docs/whatisSD_env_kates_0504.pdf.

http://www.uua.org/documents/greenlouise/seeds_relationalorg.pdf

http://www.ncrcrd.iastate.edu/pubs/flora/articles/spiralingup-37.1.2-Emery-Flora-2006.pdf

http://www.ncrcrd.iastate.edu/pubs/flora/articles/entresocinfranonmetrous.pdf

http://www.cpn.org/topics/community/regenerating.html

http://www.ctassets.org/catesimages/14a%20Intro%20to%20ABCD.pdf

http://www.ncrcrd.iastate.edu/pubs/presentations/emery/vanguardFall2004.pdf

http://www.citnet.org/projects/Whatis.aspx

http://www.hks.harvard.edu/sustsci/ists/docs/whatisSD_env_kates_0504.pdf

GreeninG Greater Greenfield A Case Study of Green ... · Larry Bellar Gretchen Foltz Meredith Lewis...

Documents

Transcript of GreeninG Greater Greenfield A Case Study of Green ... · Larry Bellar Gretchen Foltz Meredith Lewis...