Cranberry Stressline

Criticism of the Cranberry Marketing Committee on the Stressline Forum

Banana Republic

Posted by L. Rinta on June 1, 2002, 8:43 am

I heard something funny the other day. I heard that USDA was pretty disgusted that more growers didn’t turn out for the hearings in Massachusetts. It shows just how out of touch our government really is, huh? They have allowed and maybe even encouraged Ocean Spray to set up a Banana Republic on the Marketing Committee with just enough dissention to look legit, but not enough to over-ride what ever agenda OS has at the moment. The first amendment if passed,( and USDA has selected it for a “fast track”), would further disenfranchise any grower that joined or formed a co-op other then Ocean Spray and give their production vote to the unelected company reps from Ocean Spray. Will it pass? Of course it will. Ocean Spray can block vote it! They can block vote anything they want.

According to the amendment, when co-op sales are over 50% then THE co-op is given a swing seat on the CMC. Those seats are currently appointed and not elected by Ocean Spray. Co-op sales would include sales not only from Ocean Spray but also by the Wisconsin Co-op or any future co-op. Conceivably, Ocean Spray sales could be 30%, three other co-ops could be 10% each, total co-op sales totaling 60% and the majority of the seats on the CMC be appointed by the Ocean Spray Board. The other co-op growers would have no representation and the Independents would hold a minority position on the CMC, even though Ocean Spray sales may only be 30%.

Today, more then half of the members are appointed by the Ocean Spray Board of Directors who themselves are NOT nominated through a democratic process. These members therefore only represent the unelected board and management of Ocean Spray and not necessarily growers. The Ocean Spray majority also retains the right to vote as a block, consequently eliminating any meaningful negotiation and compromise. I participated in a little of this exercise on the amendments subcommittee and it was silly. We go through the motions and make believe we have a process when in truth everything is filtered through Ocean Spray management. Nothing moves through any committee that they don’t approve and the result is more control, not less.

The statutory law that established the Marketing Order allows this. It allows THE co-op to appoint and not elect its members and it allows those representatives to block vote. This is with the full blessing of USDA. These hearings are a little like a tribunal in Cuba. The outcome is predictable, law supports the status quo, people can’t vote and then they blame you for not showing up.

Posted by Doanne Andresen on June 1, 2002, 9:40 am , in reply to "Banana Republic"

Good Morning Linda,
I can't believe that the USDA really expected growers to show up. I requested months ago that the hearing be held on a weekend so that growers with two jobs could participate.

Of course, that is not of concern to the USDA. They decided to hold the meetings on a weekday in the middle of frost season when growers are likely to be working day and night, seven days a week. These meetings were delayed for a reason. They have not explained why they were not held during the winter months, so we can only speculate as to their reasons.

Notice that the grower referendum will also be held in May 2003. At least, so far it hasn't been postponed again.

I did attend the meeting and was surprised that even Jeff Carlson, our Independent Alternative Representative, was not there. On June 20th, we have the opportunity to vote for our independent representatives for the next two years. But even this process will not be corrected by these new amendment proposals. This year, only growers that attend this meeting on Thursday, June 20th, will be allowed to nominate a representative and vote.
Under the new amendment, if passed, growers will be allowed to vote by mail. But the law does not provide for anyone wishing to run, to contact growers. The amendment proposes that an independent-at-large member can be elected by growers in all states participating in the CMC, but the candidate has no means of contacting the growers. When I asked if a candidate would have access to grower addresses, the response was "only by applying through the Freedom of Information Act." It will be up to the USDA when scheduling the vote to allow time for a candidate to obtain this information before the election. As we have seen this year, the USDA does not consider grower participation when they schedule these meetings. I doubt that they will consider grower participation when they schedule the vote. Furthermore, it was stated that write-in candidates will not be recognized.
Fair Representation on the committee is a problem for both Ocean Spray growers and Independent growers. Serving on a subcommittee, did not have any impact on the committee's final decisions. As seen by last August's vote, the committee does not have to accept the recommendation of a subcommittee. Participating in this process has been very frustrating.

Nomination meeting tomorrow.

Posted by Kelly Rudd on June 1, 2002, 11:12 am , in reply to "Re: Banana Republic"

You girls don't feel alone. The independent growers of WI. are also puzzled as to the timing of important , nomination elections, and hearings on proposed amendments, etc. Maybe there is a great reason why but so far no one has been able to tell me a logical one. Mainly because that's the way it's always been done. Well with all of the changes in this industry why not accommodate for the growers as much as possible. As far as the amendment process coming up in WI. Monday morning at 9:00 A.M. at the Mead Inn in Wisconsin Rapids WI. Some of the topics should have been a little more researched, and material distributed to the growers. Just one topic, Vaccinium Oxycoccus for instance. The topic is assumed to be known all about by growers. I personally talked to many growers, of which, at least 90% have no idea what it even is. How are they to object or recommend something when they have no knowledge of what it is. I used the internet to learn more about it. I also called several more knowledgeable individuals to learn more. Just the embarrassment factor, at the hearings, keeps growers from speaking up for fear of feeling dumb about a subject . I hope that the WI. growers will be able to make it to the CMC nomination meeting for voting member and alternate member at 1:00 at the Mead Inn, in Wisconsin Rapids tomorrow Sunday June 2. Your participation in this nomination process really can make a big difference.

Posted by demonjd on June 1, 2002, 12:46 pm , in reply to "Nomination meeting tomorrow."

It would be better to disrupt this sham
of a meeting.

Freedom of Information

Posted by demonjd on June 1, 2002, 11:14 am , in reply to "Re: Banana Republic"

The USDA has a webpage that tells you how
to make freedom of information requests:

http://www.usda.gov/news/foia/main.htm Link: USDA Freedom of Information Homepage

Posted by demonjd on June 1, 2002, 12:03 pm , in reply to "Banana Republic"

These hearings are a little like a tribunal
in Cuba. The outcome is predictable, law
supports the status quo, people can’t vote
and then they blame you for not showing up.

You deserve a lot of credit for trying to work
within the system. When you get tired of
beating your head against a wall, what are
the alternatives?

Bypass the USDA and the CMC. Take your
case directly to the consuming public. Why
not utilize your credibility among growers to
organize a protest? Do you doubt that it
would be effective?

So True

Posted by John Harker on June 2, 2002, 5:52 am , in reply to "Banana Republic"

I attended the meeting in Maine. The CMC was very discourteous to our farmers and elected representatives. The farm bureau made the point that in other Federal Marketing Orders the growers in the State that was to be added to the order had a chance to vote whether they wanted to be in or not, while in the case of the CMC, Maine growers will not have that chance.

When asked about representation, Dave Farrimond said that Maine growers would have lots of chances to participate in subcommittees and have their voices heard.....I guess that is not very accurate eh?

When asked about competition from Canada negating the impact of the CMC regulation, Mr. Hiller and Mr. Lawton had smirky smiles.....I wonder why!

So, I have to agree that the CMC has big problems and, while Maine growers want to support collaboration with other U.S. Growers, they feel that the CMC is not the way to do so.

It is very discouraging to hear you comments as well. It sounds like our negative impressions of the CMC at that hearing are well founded.

Where are your elected congressional representatives on this issue? Don't they have any pull, or are they in bed with OS also?

Re: So True

Posted by demonjd on June 2, 2002, 12:20 pm , in reply to " So True"

I attended the meeting in Maine. The CMC
was very discourteous to our farmers and
elected representatives.

Next time, tell the committee to go to hell.
Don't be afraid to raise your voice to them.

Re: So True

Posted by Ma. grower on June 2, 2002, 12:41 pm , in reply to "Re: So True"

At the Ma. meeting CMC was even discourteous to the judge, just to show you how the outcome of the process is predetermined. What if they had an election and no one voted? What if they asked for contributions and no one paid? What if growers stopped seeing the CMC as an agency they had to abide by? Would they sue us all? This could be a free country again.
Another joke: CMC announced it was ok to add all the possible coops crops together "because after all they are coops so they will cooperate" this is very close to a quote, AND THIS AFTER THE PUBLIC AVOWAL OF OS TO DESTROY COMPETITION! Give me a Break!

Re: Nomination meeting tomorrow.

Posted by grower on June 2, 2002, 8:52 pm , in reply to "Re: Nomination meeting tomorrow."

There were three nominations for the alternate position. One was nominated from WI. today and two by mail from out of state. For voting member there were two candidates nominated from WI. and I believe two candidates from out of state. There are so far three independent alternate candidates and four voting member candidates.

Re: Nomination meeting tomorrow.

Posted by Thanks on June 3, 2002, 7:27 am , in reply to "Re: Nomination meeting tomorrow."

Kelly (grower) you really should know that you are a candidate not a canidate.

Why not identify yourself

Posted by John Harker on June 3, 2002, 6:46 am , in reply to "Re: So True"

Lets see, there were only two out of state growers there, Mr. Hiller and Mr. Lawton. So how about identifying yourself so that we can have an intelligent discussion here. Why do you hide behind lawyers and false id's.

We were prepared and the arguements put forth to not include Maine were very clear and convincing.

If the CMC lawyer's action is any indication of the type of conduct the CMC committee engages in, let me ask WHY would anyone want to join that type of organization.

You speak cooperation, you act confrontation and competition.

Upon hearing the discussion here, it is clear that the CMC is in need of repair before any other state joins. Get your glass house in order.

Concerning promotion....yes, everyone can agree that promotion is needed. However, who does the promoting and what is promoted is in question.

National generic promotion or overseas generic promotion only works if you have millions to work with, not thousands, as the CMC has, or probably will ever have. AND, the promotions need to be constant....not dependant on questionable grants from a federal agency. Our grower's money can better be spent promoting our own products.

Maine and Maine businesses help the industry in general by going after new markets where cranberries have not been sold previously, and putting cranberries into new products that have not been touched by OS previously and we build out the existing markets.....we help move MORE berries. We are not part of the problem, we are part of the solution.

For those who were not there, Maine handlers sell all the berries Maine produces, and buy in more berries from out of State to service our products.

Re: Why not identify yourself

Posted by grower on June 3, 2002, 7:22 am , in reply to "Why not identify yourself"

I am a Maine grower John

respnse to Ma.grower

Posted by grower on June 3, 2002, 4:54 pm , in reply to "Re: So True"

Ocean Spray growers do not vote for its representatives, the dues (assessments) are paid by Ocean Spray and Ocean Spray only takes deliveries up to the marketable quantity in a volume regulated crop year. The growers' hands are truly tied. Independent growers are the only group that "Votes" on their representatives.

Front Page