FACTS

“An Organic Check-Off program would strengthen the voice of the organic sector and allow us to get our message to the American consumer in a clear, transparent way. It would enable the entire sector to benefit from promotion and research programs that provide consumer education, on-farm and regional research solutions, and ultimately, increase the number of organic farmers. It would be a game changer for organic, for our children and our planet.”

Gary Hirshberg, Chairman, Stonyfield Farm & Just Label

From January – April 2017, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) sought public comments on the GRO Organic Check-off proposal. The period for submitting public comments in response to the proposal for an organic research and promotion check-off program is over. The Organic Trade Association submitted comments with 1,358 public endorsers named, including over 1,230 certified organic operators. These organic farmers, ranchers and business stakeholders were joined by over 11,000 supporters who commented directly on the proposal. The complete text of the proposal is available for review on the Federal Register, or you can find a summary of the program and an excerpt of the proposed regulation here.

Now it is the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s duty to cull through the thousands of comments received, and to determine which ones are substantive and which ones reflect input from organic stakeholders. The next step will be the publication of USDA’s final proposal, followed by a vote on the proposed program by the organic sector. It’s time for organic stakeholders to cast their vote, and to decide for themselves if they want to implement an organic check-off. We urge USDA to advance the process.

FUNDING

Organic producers and handlers would pay one-tenth of one percent of Net Organic Sales. The assessment would be based on total gross sales minus the cost of certified organic goods. For example, there would be a $100 assessment at $100,000 Net Organic Sales and a $1,000 assessment at $1,000,000 Net Organic Sales.

GOVERNANCE

An industry-governed board, appointed by the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture with input from the organic sector, would direct an Organic Check-Off program. This board would be responsible for allocating funds and approving organic research, promotion plans and programs. The composition of the board would reflect the diversity of sectors paying into the check-off, in addition to having balanced regional participation and strong producer representation. Producers would hold at least 50 percent of the seats on the board and directly choose their regional representatives. Producers will directly select their regional representatives through a simple nomination and balloting process.

MISCONCEPTIONS

An organic check-off would be unlike any other check-off program in American agriculture. Nothing like it has ever been tried, so the idea has understandably raised some questions. OTA has talked to lots of organic stakeholders over the past three years, and has found there’s a core group of concerns that keep coming up. We’ve also found that most of these concerns are based on perceptions of older check-offs, and we’ve addressed these issues. Here’s how:

Concern: Producers won’t be adequately represented and will get overshadowed by large corporate interests.

Solution: The composition of the check-off board has been designed with the key objective to give producers a strong voice. Organic producers will hold least half of the voting seats on the check-off board. Those producers will represent different regions, and will be directly elected by producers in their region. Producers are the backbone of the organic industry, and their needs and interests will not be overlooked or diminished.

Concern: Smaller-scale producers and handlers wouldn’t have a say in the program.

Solution: The check-off has been crafted so that producers and handlers with revenue under $250,000 could choose to be assessed. If they chose to participate and pay into the program, they’d have full voting rights.

Concern: It would be too expensive for the smaller operations.

The assessment rate is broad and shallow; everybody pays a little into the program and everyone benefits. The assessment rate would be 1/10 of 1 percent of Net Organic Sales. Only those organic farmers and businesses with sales over $250,000 would be mandated to contribute.

Concern: Not enough of the check-off funds would go into research.

Solution: An absolutely paramount objective of the GRO Organic program is to increase research for organic in order to help organic farmers deal with everyday problems, accelerate the adoption of organic practices and boost organic production. At least 50 to 75 percent of the check-off funds have been earmarked specifically for research or for activities that work hand-in-hand with research, such as technical assistance and widespread information dissemination of research findings. Also, because organic producers have identified local and regional research as a critical need, a board sub-committee of regional producer seat holders would be established to recommend to the full board just how those research funds should be spent.

Concern: Too much of the check-off money would be spent on salaries and administrative costs, and other questionable activities.

Solution: A number of common-sense prohibitions are written into the check-off: First, a tight maximum cap of 15 percent of assessments has been established for administrative expenses; second, no check-off dollars could be used for lobbying; third, no check-off dollars could be used to promote individual brands.

Concern: Once this is in place, it won’t be able to be terminated.

Solution: A referendum is required every seven years to decide whether or not to continue the program. The organic check-off has been crafted to be accountable and transparent. If organic stakeholders are not satisfied with the program, they can vote to end it.

Calling all organic farmers, food makers, and eaters: NOW is the time!

Tell USDA you support the Organic Check-off proposal