I'm part of a group who started a community garden this spring, despite opposition from some of the neighbors. Let me say first that the vast majority of the neighbors have been very supportive. However, a number of the people who lived directly across the street from the plot were very vocal in their opposition. Before we got started, I canvased the neighborhood, door-to-door. Thier stated reason was that they LIKED the trash and weed infested lot, and that they did not want the noise associated with a garden. Since they had no more constructive ideas on how to use the property than leave it as a dump, and the noise business was just ridiculous, we went ahead with our plans. We've made really good progress in a few months, and right now the garden looks great. Opposition is still there, though under the surface. What it really seems to be about is old-time residents hating (really) new people in the 'hood, even if they are trying to do something positive. I've had some decent, if rather careful, direct conversations with some of the opponents, but our local newspaper is still carrying negative articles about it. Most recently, it was an old timer who said "to those of you who just moved here 10 or 5 years ago, forgive us our attitudes. To us, you are like visitors from another planet." We are still trying...

Thanks for you reply. In discussing the problem of opposition to community garden and greening projects with a veteran gardener, I was told that the only time opposition arised was when locals were extensively consulted. When he was involved in "guerilla gardens" i.e. vacant lots were quickly and quietly made into gardens without consulting neighbors, opposition did not arise and people tended to come on board. This poses an interesting dilema. How do you affect positive environmental and social change while mainting a commitment to community participation and decision making. Is the ability of one or two people to prevent a community garden from being established any more democratic than establishing a guerilla garden.

You make and interesting point, Jonah. In our case, the neighbors were resentful of the lot on school district property. They charged ahead about ten years age and obtained a permit from the school district to establish a joint shool/community-type garden. They ran out of funding and the place became a weed and rat-infested mess, incapably managed by a nutty psychiatrist. I entered the picture as a teacher at the school, in need of a great summer school project. Just about at that time, the neighbors once again started making noises about the mess. The psychiatrist had had the city dump about 5 truckloads of manure, then done nothing with it. If I were a neighbor, I would have complained, too! I was largely unaware of anything, being involved with the Pond Project (our summer school creation) until the nest year, when the school received a citation addressing the unsanitary conditions. It was at that point that the neighborhood came in again and "took over." UGH! From one mismanager to another. Here's the rub: there were not enough neighbors to fill the lots, so a bunch of "outsiders" came in. Although they signed the contract, all they want to do is dig a little hole and plant a couple of things. Reclaiming the Community Garden from the weeds and rats is evidently not part of their program. Even though I am technically an outsider, I am considered part of the neighborhood because I teach at the school and am very active with the neighborhood association. I can make an argument for the neighbors NOT wanting "outside" people in. They don't have the same vested interest in the community as do the neighbors. They come in, pay some money, do their thing, then go away.
I can't, however, make a case for the neighbors wanting to keep their weedy, vacant lots, as you have mentioned!
If you're still interested in the topic, I've much more to say :) Hope the weather's great in Quebec! KarinK