Notes from Oregon Meeting

From the Corvallis Meeting to Discuss the
Possible National Marketing Checkoff
June 19, 2008

Forty to forty five people met Thursday at the Corvallis meeting. The meeting was opened by Betty Malone, Marketing Order Task Force Chair and Oregon grower who presented the beginning of the power point presentation. She introduced Hugh Whaley of Osborn and Barr, who did the rest of the presentation and answered questions. This first session lasted over 2 hours
Several people left at the break between the power point and the breakouts. The group divided into two sections to discuss Board Membership, Exemptions, Assessments and Referenda. The second session lasted over 2 hours.
At the end of the meeting Betty passed around sign up sheets for people who wanted the results of the meeting and one for people who would be willing to help with small research projects.
Friday at the general session Betty gave a summary of the chart below. The 15 minute time slot was extended to 35, because one of the earlier speakers didn’t get any questions. She was able to tie in the checkoff possibility of state monies being collected with the reports earlier that morning that only 20 people contributed to the Northwest marketing program in 2007 and the report that donations to the Research Committee were down 50%. There were only a few questions asked. The one that generated the most interested concerned whether national checkoff monies could be spent on expanding the market into Mexico.
At lunch time the local Extension agent asked Betty why she had not done the power point presentation. So when an afternoon speaker finished early, Betty presented the power point program to ten people who had not seen it Thursday while the rest took an early break.
This meeting in the northwest was one of the smallest in 15 years.
The conclusions from the breakouts were as follows.

Board Membership

1. What size should the board be?
Recommended a Nine member board. Smaller board meant lower
administration costs: 25% less for a 9 member board (in 4 areas) than a 12.
2. Should alternate directors be allowed?
No. But web conferencing and poly conferencing should be allowed. No proxy
votes should be allowed.
3. Should each state be represented or should there be regional representation?
regional
4. If the representation is regional, which map does the group prefer?
4 areas with 9 members to the board.
5. Should there be a limit on the amount spent on administration?
Yes. 10% after the USDA fees are paid. The group wanted more information
about the percentage spent by comparable industries.
Should the checkoff board have the discretion to hire their own staff or should they be mandated to contract with existing trade associations?
Checkoff Board should have discretion to hire their own staff.
Exemptions:
1. Should any trees be exempt from the assessment?
Yes. Are participants public record? How would it work to be sure people paid
in, but still have what people paid be private? How can that be enforced?
2. If so, what would the limit look like?
To talk about the limit the group discussed different ways to make the
assessment:5 acres or less, 1500 to 1000 trees, but assessment should be on
the gross sales because it is fairer. Acreage can fluctuate. Recommend
$10,000.00 be where the assessment begins. First Handler is the person who
cuts the tree. (Trees sold on the stump)
3. Should greens and wreaths be included in the assessment?
No, neither should potted trees.
Should the marketing order have a provision for spending money on research?
Split decision. More people felt that this is primarily a marketing order. But
maybe we should review the decision after 5 years.
Should the checkoff board have the authority to set aside funds for a multi-year project?
Yes
Assessments:
1. Should imports be included in the assessment?
Yes, as well as exports. Could monies be used for export issues or markets?
Not to be used for research.
2. How should the assessment be made? Mixed results
A. By the tree? 6 people
B. By seedlings planted? 3 people
C. By gross sales? 3 people addresses fairness issue: LG trees versus table tops
D. By truck load
E. Acre 2 people
F. Stumpage value 1 person
3. What form would be used to calculate the assessment?
4. Should the state associations be allowed to collect funds for state programs with this national checkoff?
Keep the national program separate. Don’t include the states.
5. Should the checkoff board be allowed to raise the amount levied from the initial rate within specified guidelines?
Give flexibility to the Board to adjust the rates, but put limits on how much a
Board can raise it.
Referenda:
1. Should there be an up front referenda or a delayed referenda?
Up front referenda
2. How often and under what conditions should subsequent referenda take place?
4 years.
3. How should the marketing order be approved? Voted for option “C”
A. Majority of those eligible to vote
B. Majority of those eligible to vote who represent a majority of the volume of production
C. Majority of those eligible to vote and that represent a majority of production
4. Should the vote be in person or by mail or either? Vote by mail