Opinion: New York needs food co-ops, not government groceries

When Democratic mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani recently proposed that New York City spend $60 million to open government-run grocery stores to address food deserts, he put his finger on a very real problem: too many New Yorkers lack access to affordable, nutritious food.

But too often, the left favors strategies that focus on large, centralized government solutions, while the right seeks solutions only in the private sector. That leaves out a range of proven approaches that already exist in our neighborhoods. Instead of creating a new bureaucracy, New York should invest in food cooperatives – community-rooted institutions that have worked here before and could work again.

Rather than devoting $60 million to a city-run grocery chain, why not allocate just 10% of that sum ($6 million) to create a network of co-ops tailored to reflect the cultural and culinary range found in New York’s boroughs? A cooperative rooted in each neighborhood could reflect those differences while ensuring affordability and quality. A Bangladeshi family in Jackson Heights, a Dominican household in Washington Heights and a Jewish family in Borough Park each cook differently, with distinct spices, cuts of meat, grains and dairy alternatives. 

The city could catalyze this sector with three practical steps. First, establish a revolving loan and seed capital fund with an open call for proposals. Second, provide capital to help existing co-ops expand, financing that private banks rarely offer. Third, invite unions, faith groups, mutual aid networks and neighborhood associations to apply. These organizations already have members, trust and roots – key ingredients that no bureaucracy can manufacture.

This would not be new for New York. Mutualist institutions such as cooperatives, unions and faith groups once formed the backbone of civic life. They share three principles: they are built on solidarity, they recycle their income back into the organization for members’ benefit and they pass governance and wisdom across generations. When unions like the clothing workers and electricians realized their members’ needs extended beyond wages, they built cooperative housing: Amalgamated Houses in the Bronx in the 1920s and Electchester in Queens after World War II. These projects were not fringe experiments – they were ambitious, durable solutions to real problems.

Food cooperatives could become anchor institutions for a broader renewal. Once established, they could spur housing co-ops and credit unions and even revive mutual banks and insurance companies. New York pioneered many of these social innovations which prospered under both Republican and Democratic leadership. But as regulatory support waned in the late 20th century, many of these institutions withered, leaving us with fragile, profit-driven alternatives.

Reviving this mutualist tradition would not only address food insecurity but also strengthen civic life. A food co-op is more than a store. It is a training ground where people learn how to run meetings, balance budgets, mediate disagreements and identify future leaders. At a moment when so many Americans feel alienated from politics and distrustful of institutions, the humble act of governing a local co-op could rebuild civic confidence from the ground up.

And New York already has credibility here. The Park Slope Food Coop, founded in 1973, has endured for half a century. Its radical simplicity of requiring every member to contribute the same number of hours of labor, regardless of profession or income, remains a great equalizer in a way that asking people to pay the same amount for dues alone does not. Unions and faith communities have long pioneered cooperative housing, health centers, home-care worker co-ops and credit unions. These groups are not starting from scratch; they have the expertise and long-term focus to succeed. Government does have a role: to regulate, set standards and provide support. Markets play a role too: cooperatives are businesses, and revenues must exceed expenses. This brings market discipline with a longer time horizon and a built-in commitment to the communities they serve.

Some may argue that this initiative is too small to tackle such a big problem. But it would create space to pilot solutions and nurture the ones that work. A $6 million fund wouldn’t just launch new cooperatives; it would seed institutions capable of sustaining themselves for generations. Others may claim that only government has the scale to build stores quickly. But speed to market doesn’t guarantee success simply because the price tag is higher. The real question is whether we want to start big with a top-down strategy or begin in communities, building from the ground up.

Building food co-ops is neither a leftist fantasy nor a market fundamentalist dream. It is a pragmatic, historically grounded approach that marries local initiative with modest public support. At a time when so many debates collapse into stale binaries, this is the kind of innovation the city should champion. It’s not just pragmatic – it’s ideological: rejecting both subservience to capital and reliance on fickle government, and instead advancing community empowerment through cooperatives with their own popular economic logic.

In this time of political turmoil and social fragmentation, perhaps the most radical act our city government could take is to invest in institutions that return to the fundamentals: enabling us to feed ourselves with food that sustains us and brings conviviality to our lives. Building co-ops around the food we need offers not only nourishment but also a shared project that teaches us how to build together and govern ourselves.