Questions from the Pacific Northwest

Q - Aren't NW growers better served by the Market Expansion idea for the Calif. market ?

A - Several states have good promotional programs in place. A checkoff would not replace them, but enhance them. If a national checkoff includes a provision to have some of the funds be eligible for use by the state/regional associations, it would reduce or eliminate the need for the state/regional associations to have to collect voluntary donations for these programs.

Q - How many geographic areas would be created by the national check-off?

A - The task force has looked at several options. The current thinking is that a small board ( 9 - 12 directors ) would help keep administrative costs low, so the task force is looking at options with 3 or 4 regions and 9 to 12 directors. A couple of options are shown here:

Q - Why not just a NW check-off?

A - Some industries have state checkoff programs in addition to -- or instead of -- a national program. However, if everyone works together:

• Programs could be funded by the entire industry, not just one area
• The industry would only have to fund one effort to get a checkoff program approved
• Only one checkoff board (administrative costs) would be needed -- not one for each state or region
• The national Checkoff board could help to coordinate consistent messaging to consumers
• State/regional associations could receive a proportionate share of the funds to increase promotion in target areas and fund additional promotional programs

Q - Do all national areas benefit the same?

A - The Checkoff board would have to decide how and where the available funds are spent. They would likely take a look at target audiences and consider how to best reach the demographics most likely to be receptive to positive Real Tree messages, as well as geographic locations.

Q -How have similarly sized commodity check-offs performed? Can we get the results of similar check-off commodity groups and see if they have all benefited, or at least at what level?

A - Checkoffs are required to make periodic reports to USDA. We'll see if we can compile a list of "results" or at least add links to some of those reports.

Q - Have any commodities abandoned the check-off and why?

A - Not that we're aware of, but we will ask USDA and post a more definitive answer here.

Q - How do you reverse out of a check-off and at what cost?

A - The Marketing Order that establishes the Checkoff program will include the "rules" for a recall. It can set up a periodic referendum (vote) and/or allow for producers to call for a vote by means of a petition. In either case, the checkoff is responsible for covering the costs of the voting process. We'll try to get an estimate from USDA, but they will want to know how many producers we are talking about (which depends of whether or not those who produce fewer trees are exempt).

Q - Is there a check-off consultant that could help evaluate?

A - There is help available from USDA and a lawyer who has been involved with a lot of checkoff programs. Others like Hugh Whaley are also available.

Q - Some growers would be concerned about "Big Brother" looking over their shoulder and getting into their books.

A - There are laws protecting privacy. IRS is not allowed to look at Checkoff reports. However, in most programs, the Checkoff auditor randomly selects some of the growers and has a compliance team verify the numbers submitted.

Many farmers have had this concern since checkoffs began. If there were problems along these lines, it's likely that they would be widely known throughout the farming community.

Q - I assume we have a task force from the NW working on these ideas. Who are they?

A - Betty Malone and Jim Heater are on the National Checkoff Task Force.

Q - Do we have a general consensus of opinion, How do the big growers sit?

A - The big growers requested that a national task force be formed and charged with working through the details. They are asking for a report in August that tells them whether, and if so, how, the task force thinks a checkoff could work for the Christmas Tree industry. They have asked to see what the task force thinks a workable checkoff program would look like, so that necessitates making some recommendations on the details.

While the task force is trying to put together key elements that they think would work for the industry, this is a working document. The task force wants to stress that NO DECISIONS have been made yet. Your input is helpful and encouraged.