As
an organic consumer and employee at an organic farmers co-operative I
became concerned with conventional/gmo food industry influence of OTA
policies and initiatives. Therefore, I wrote the following letter to the
OTA Board and received the following response [see below and link to PDF versions above].

It’s
clear that the only viable solution to bring organic integrity back to
OTA is to seize the democratic initiative and vote in candidates that
work for 100% organic companies and organizations. Luckily a number of
100% Organic companies and organizations will be fielding candidates for
the upcoming OTA election. There is a real opportunity to take back the
board and fulfill a true agenda of protecting and promoting organics.
But this only happens if we get the vote out. Only 20% of OTA members
voted in the last OTA board elections, yet 60% of OTA members are from
small organic businesses. So the vote to bring back organic integrity to
OTA is well within our reach. Check back with OCA in the coming weeks
to see a full slate of the 100%ers who are running for the board. In the
meantime if you have any questions please feel free to email me: jason[a]farmerdirect.coop

Jason Freeman

Farmer Direct Co-operative Ltd

Regina, SK   S4P 0P5   Canada
www.farmerdirect.coop

 

March 31, 2011

Organic Trade Association Board of Directors

Re: Organic Integrity and Democratic Renewal at OTA

Dear Board,

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to voice my concerns regarding organic integrity and democratic renewal at OTA.

The latest industry infighting, regarding policy positions on GE Alfalfa, can be prevented if OTA engages in a process of democratic renewal. This process of democratic renewal will provide all members with a greater voice and a democratic consensus based decision making process to follow when discussing and voting on OTA policy. If a member does not take advantage of this process, yet complains after the fact, OTA can stand by the process and marginalize uninformed dissent. Thereby we can end the infighting. But the infighting will only stop when decisions are made consensually and if the system put in place after renewal is trusted.

The systems of democracy we have inherited, whether they are parliamentary, a repulic or an association with a president and a board of directors are well over 500 years old. As evidenced by the protests from Eygpt to Madison and the ongoing infighting and dissent within our own industry/community these systems are not serving us and need to evolve. We need to evolve and innovate so that all voices have access to a trusted process.

The most significant democratic change OTA could adopt is a bottom up decision making process. Using the Domestic Fair Trade Association (www.thedfta.org) as an example, the board does not vote to accept or adopt policy positions. The membership votes to adopt policy positions. The board manages a consensus based decision making process to bring policy and wording of that policy to a point where a vote can be taken. This is significant, as language is extremely important and such a process could have prevented the current division within the organic industry/community with the use of the term ‘co-existence’in relation to GE alfalfa. The point is not to place blame but acknowledge that our governance systems failed us, if our goal is harmony.

It also helps to acknowledge that, in the eyes of government and others, OTA is in a position to speak for the industry and this even means for non-members. Therefore, with democratic renewal, it is also important to give non-members the opportunity to comment, without a vote, on proposed OTA policy positions. This can easily be done with current computer technology, through the OTA website or survey monkey. Of course, nonmembers will not have the right to vote. However, if one takes a co-operative approach this reaching out for diverse organic opinions will only strengthen OTA and lead to future membership. The goal is industry and

community wide co-operation so that the infighting stops.

So to summarize thus far the following are my suggestions:

1. OTA’s board agrees to undertake a processes of democratic renewal which will engage membership in the following:

– development of a consensus based decision making process for policy and other important OTA deliverables

– determine the form of democratic decision making: consensus based, consensus minus one, 2/3 majority

It is important that from the beginning the process is open, transparent, membership is kept informed and that member participation is straight forward and accesible.

Furthermore, democratic renewal provides the OTA with the opportunity to be an innovator among national associations. Our actions will have far reaching positive effects beyond the organic community.

But democratic renewal will be difficult without a practical commitment to organic integrity. OTA must deal with two issues impacting organic integrity.

1. Implication of board member companies in ongoing USDA organic fraud investigations

2. The appearance of a conflict of interest with some board members in relation to ownership of organic, ‘natural’, conventional/GE brands.

OTA has a number of board members whos companies have been implicated in the Promiseland dairy decertification. The NOP is investigating these board members in relation to this organic fraud. Until the NOP investigation is concluded and made public these board members should recuse themselves from the board of OTA. If they don’t OTA should censore these board members and force them to step aside. Its unconscionable that the largest Organic trade association in North America should have board members that are under investigation for organic fraud. It weakens the organic industries claims of integrity.

Additionally, with many OTA board members there is the appearance of a conflict of interest as these members own organic, natural and conventional food brands. The grass roots is questioning these companies’ focus and commitment to organics, let alone their commitment to American or Canadian organic family farms. The actions of some of these companies appears to support this questioning. For example, one of the board member’s category leading organic soymilk brands, went from soymilk made from American organic soybeans, to soymilk made with Chinese ‘organic’ soybeans, to eliminating all but three organic soybeans SKUs and relaunching their soymilk as ‘natural’. Again, I am not saying this business strategy is wrong or right but it does make one question this company’s commitment to organic agriculture. Additionally, profits from the sale of organic brands maybe invested into this company’s or parent company’s natural or conventional brands. Thus part of the conflict.

Further more, there are questions as to GMO in these natural and conventional brands. Therefore, we have the conflict of companies who sit on the OTA board and who are marketing organic brands and also marketing natural and conventional food brands that may contain GMO.

In order for OTA to fix this integrity gap I have the following suggestions. Again these are suggestions, as OTA begins its process of democratic renewal membership must be provided the opportunity to comment and make suggestions themselves.

1. OTA board seats must come from companies or co-ops that derive 95% of their sales through the marketing of organic products.

2. All members running for OTA board elections must provide a transparency disclosure to inform OTA members who their company is owned by and any natural, conventional or GMO interests or brands owned by them or their parent company.

3. OTA move towards a consensus based policy decision making process. 6500 heads are better than 15.

4. A minimum of at least 1 permanent board seat for an organic family farmer with expenses paid for travel, lodging and other related board expenses.

5. A minimum of at least 1 permanent board seat for an organic farm worker with expenses paid for travel, lodging and other related board expenses.

I’d appreciate if the board could get back to me after ExpoWest. My ideal resolution to this situation is that OTA send out a press release engaging membership in democratic renewal. I can work with the board to develop the process. If I don’t hear back from OTA within a reasonable time frame I would like to go to OTA members and the greater community to see how they feel about this proposal.

Best Regards,

Jason Freeman

Mr. Freeman has been an organic consumer since 1994 and has worked managing a co-operative of organic family grain farmers on the Canadian prairies since 2002.

 

Position	Name	Company	Organic Only	Natural Products	Comments
President	Julia Sabin	Smucker Natural Foods Inc	No	Yes	SantCruz drinks offer Natural as do all Smuckers brands.
Vice President	Sarah Bird	Annie’s Homegrown	No	Yes	Their website says macoron is made from real chees and 100% organic pasta. In otherword is not organic cheese.
Vice President Canada	Gunta Vitins	SunOpta	No	Yes	IP soy etc and Natural products
Treasurer	Chuck Marcy	Healthy Food Holdings	No	Yes	http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/healthy-food-holdings-to-acquire-breyersr-yogurt-business-53291202.html
Secretary	Matt McLean	Uncle Matt’s Organic Inc	Yes
	Tony Bedard	Frontier Natural Products Cooperative	No	Yes
	Tom Cowell	Growers International Organic Sales	No		Parent Company sells conventional crop inputs (Paterson Gobal Foods)
	Nicole Dawes	Late July Organic Scacks	Yes
	Chris Ely	Applegate Farms Inc	No	Yes	One of the larger Natural meat companies.
	Kristen Holt	Quality Assuance International	Yes		Does the Organic certification of most of the companies who do Natural on the board.
	Todd Linsky	Cal Organic / Grimmway Farms	Yes		Grimmway Farms (not sure but appears not to be Organic)
	Melody Myer	Alberts Organics	No	Yes	UNFI owns them and they sell Natural mostly.
	Kelly Shea	White Wave Foods	No	Yes	Dean Foods is the parent company, have Natural and Organic under same brand names.
	Craig Weakely	Small Planet Foods	No	Yes	General Mills
	Leslie Zuck	Pennsylvania Certified Organic	Yes