![](media/image1.jpeg){width="1.2986111111111112in"
height="0.9222222222222223in"}STATEMENT OF ROBERT B. MARQUSEE

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HORTICULTURE AND ORGANIC AGRICULTURE

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 18, 2007 -- 10:00 AM - LONGWORTH HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING -- RM 1300

Economic Development Impacts of Organic Production & Processing

To the Honorable Committee:

The future of our agricultural land, rural communities, the nation's
economic vitality, and the health of our citizens are at stake with the
considerations that are before you today. As Director of Rural Economic
Development for Woodbury County, State of Iowa, I can testify that
federal farm subsidies over many decades, together with the development
of petroleum-based chemical farming techniques, have had the unintended
consequence of gutting rural communities of their economic life. The
continued industrialization of farming will certainly have the impacts
predicted by the Des Moines Register: fewer owners of land, faster
decline in rural population, less income in rural areas, and more strain
on the environment. (Des Moines Register, July 17 and July 24, 2005).

A portrait of our current rural landscape would require an additional
preliminary factual backdrop: fifty percent of Iowa's farmland will
transfer ownership in the next ten years; twenty-five percent of Iowa
farmland is presently owned by individuals who are age 75 and older; the
average age of an Iowa farmer is over 55; and the great majority of
working farmers are farming on a cash-rent basis (i.e., are not
landowners). In other words, America's heartland is in a tenuous and
tumultuous situation that requires the immediate attention of our
policy-makers.

Woodbury County, Iowa has enacted two key local policies to confront the
causes of rural decline and reverse the fortunes of small to mid-sized
family farms within its jurisdiction:

-   The Organics Conversion Policy: June 28, 2005: Provides 100% real
    property tax rebate for five years to anyone who converts from
    conventional to organic farming practices; and

-   Local Food Purchase Policy: January 10, 2006: County required to
    purchase locally grown organic food when available for County Jail,
    Juvenile Detention Center, and Work Release Program.

The remainder of this Statement shall provide the factual support and
rationale behind the Woodbury County policies and their applicability to
national policy-making considerations now before this subcommittee.

Historically, rural communities were initially founded on agricultural
production from nearby small family farms. Economies were highly
localized. Rural schools were established to educate the large number of
children that were born to these families -- quality teachers usually
came from farm families. There was significant diversity of crops and
livestock that was produced on these farms; most farms having
biologically diverse and dependent production of both crops and
livestock. At its peak, barns, silos, grain elevators, school busses,
and county fairs were indicators of a thriving rural economy. That happy
reality has since left the landscape, and Woodbury County's experience
is not unlike that found in most, if not all, rural communities in
America's heartland:

-   Sales of Livestock & Livestock Products: 1969: \$358M vs. 2003:
    \$80M\
    A 78 percent decline in sales over 35 years.

-   Sales of Crops & Livestock: From 1998-2003: \$145M loss from crops &
    livestock.

-   Farms & Average Farm Sizes (Farms/Acreage): 1975: 1,930/268 vs.
    2004: 1,140/387\
    78% Increase in Number of Farms 1000 Acres+ over the same period.

-   Average annual loss to Woodbury County farmers (over last 10 year
    period): \$24M\
    (Statistics Provided By: Ken, Meter, Crossroads Resource Center, &
    U.S. Census)

Similarly, population in rural communities has decreased since the early
1980s. If a community is not located near a major highway, or an urban
area, the population has decreased by an average of 25%, and the
residents remaining in those communities are aging. Thus, it is
inevitable that many of these communities will cease to exist over the
next 10 to 20 years (i.e., some are presently near extinction in
Woodbury County).

Let us now review the extent of Federal farm subsidies and the role they
have played in creating the described circumstances in rural America.
The U.S. Government has paid out, between 1995-2004, \$274,353,383,635
in farm subsidies for a variety of specific crops; \$54,879,723, 492
just for corn and soybean subsidies. Wheat subsidies have amounted to
\$19,834,815,250 over the same period. The fact is 10% of farmers
receive between 72% and 80% of all subsidies paid by the Federal
Government. Therefore, most farmers are actually losing money since the
cost of growing the products is more than the return it brings on the
commodity exchange. Most farm families must obtain a job outside the
farm to make ends meet. The economic pressure is to consolidate farms to
provide large economies of scale necessary to reap razor thin margins on
high volume production -- after considering all Federal farm subsidy
options. Thus, farms get bigger (and get better playing the subsidy
game), while small farm operations are quickly vanishing from the rural
scene.

By necessity, subsidy programs are having a major impact on those rural
areas involved in producing crops that are subsidized. A few examples
may be provided: Pottawattamie County, Iowa farmers received
\$37,294,007 in subsides just in 2005, Monona County, Iowa farmers
received \$160,268,816 over a ten year period, Woodbury County, Iowa
farmers received an average of \$23,000,000 in farm subsidies each year
over a ten year period. The two crops that are the subject of these
subsidies: corn and soybean.

The historic effect of the subsidies has been to create a
"non-localized" cheap food system in the United States, as follows:
money flows from the Federal Government to farmers to grow crops at a
loss (cost of production is greater than the price paid). Large outside
agricultural interests buys the raw product at a low price; they make
the lion's share of profit on finished food products. In effect: the
Federal Government provides indirect subsidy of large corporate
agricultural interests. The impacts are not only economic, but also may
have adverse health effects on the general population. For example, it
is now cheaper to add high fructose corn syrup as sweeteners to many
foods rather than use the more expensive raw cane sugar.

Non-local agriculture interests also have a financial stake in the
production techniques employed on these new larger farms. Farmers are
pressured to use high-cost inputs such as patented seed, use of
petroleum-based herbicides and fertilizers, and the like. The result of
these farming techniques is to produce as high a yield as possible
without the need of significant labor inputs. However, there is pressure
to buy expensive equipment and incur debt to finance these large farming
operations. These input costs, together with the increased value of the
land, make it next to impossible for young beginning farmers to enter
into this industrial food system.

The rural picture now consists of large farm interests, cash renting to
a relatively few working farmers, and producing a crop that is
specifically designated and supported by the Federal Government. The
cost of inputs, and the bulk of profits on finished food products, goes
to those who live outside the area that is producing the raw
ingredients. Meanwhile, because of the expanding consumer demand for
organically or naturally raised foods, we are importing a large
percentage of these high-margin foods from foreign producers.

In summary, primary focus on industrial farming operations has created
the following situation in rural America: encouragement of larger
corporate farms, producing less diversified crops, with less labor,
higher input and environmental costs, fewer rural residents, with most
of the profits going to outside "non-local" business interests.

There is another major impact that our modern agricultural system has
had on mindset of those who are involved in economic development at the
state and local levels: they tend to see economic development in terms
of involving only industrial, commercial, or residential growth as a
legitimate object of focus. The loss of small family farms does not
enter the equation in their efforts for business retention. The
financial assistance these groups provide is based on wage/benefit
criteria (e.g., how many jobs are being created at what wage scale).

State and local governments provide economic "incentives" (e.g., tax
abatements, infrastructure costs, or outright payments in cash) in their
efforts to recruit outside businesses to move into their area. Retaining
small farming operations is not in their radar for business retention
efforts. Rural economic development efforts at the state and local level
are fixated on transforming once thriving agricultural centers into
"call centers" or "service areas" that do not conform to the very reason
for community's existence. In other words, state and local economic
development practices do not address the causes of rural economic
decline.

The disparity in mindset may be witnessed by a couple common examples:
recently the State of Iowa provided \$535K in benefits to add between
four to nine jobs for expansion of a bio-diesel facility. Many counties
in Iowa have provided millions of dollars in tax abatement to would-be
ethanol producers. It is not unheard of for a county to provide 15-20
year 100% tax abatements in order to land one of these facilities. David
Swenson, economist at Iowa State University, calculated 70 cents for
every gallon of ethanol is subsidized in one form or another (including
federal, state, and local subsidies). On just one typical 100 million
gallon facility, this equals \$70M in subsidies -- most of which is
provided to non-local interests (e.g., blenders). The public generally
is not well informed of the costs associated with these subsidies.

Economic development efforts lately focus on establishing ethanol
production facilities. The rise in ethanol production, and resulting
increase in corn prices, does nothing to resolve the issues related to
industrial farming. To the contrary, while alternative fuel development
is vital, the push for ethanol will further strengthen industrial
farming practices with the same negative impacts on the rural
environment. Balance is needed in agricultural practices: the wholesale
drive to ethanol will entice conventional farmers to end standard crop
rotations (i.e., use more chemicals), farm CRP lands, and encourage
further farm consolidations. While subsidy payments may be decreased,
the price of corn (and land) is still driven by non-local policy
decisions promoting ethanol energy.

The combined effect of federal and state policies and practices produces
the following results: local farms rely on large economies of
scale/small margin practices, while economic development organizations
focus on recruiting wage-based employment opportunities from outside the
area, providing little incentive for entrepreneurship, with the
resulting loss of rural population and farm labor. The combined system
provides no incentive for small farms and promotes loss of farm related
jobs. Meanwhile, outside interests reap the bulk of the profit, receive
financial incentives, and dictate standards of production to local
wage-based workers.

To respond to the forces causing economic havoc in the rural
communities, Woodbury County, Iowa has enacted policies that address the
need for a multi-faceted approach to rural economic development. There
is not one silver bullet policy that will make our rural communities
thrive once again. The economic dependencies of producer, markets,
distribution, storage, and transportation have to be recreated and
supported through a network of mentors, financial assistance, and market
tools that have since been all but obliterated by reason of the current
industrial system. Luckily, the general public is increasingly demanding
high-quality healthful food -- and preferably food from a local
producer. What follows are the economic policies and practices enacted
by one county in Iowa, Woodbury County, to reverse the fortunes of small
and mid-sized farming operations and, as a consequence, reviving the
economy of its rural communities.

Woodbury County, Iowa has taken direct steps to address the root causes
of rural decline by first passing the "Organics Conversion Policy". The
policy provides a 100% rebate of real property taxes associated with
land that has been converted from conventional farming to organic
farming. The rebate will be provided for 5 years to anyone that converts
to organic farming techniques that comply with the USDA National Organic
Program Standards and Guidelines (NOP). An application for the rebate is
required and must set forth a description of the land converted, planned
markets for products during organic transition and after certification,
planned conservation techniques, and other relevant information
necessary to promote success of the applicant. Certification is required
after the third year (for crops) of conversion; failure to obtain
certification, or reversion to conventional farming at any time during
that 5 years, will require a return to the county of all tax benefits
received under the policy. The policy provides up to a total of \$50,000
per year for five years in a tax rebate pool for all participants; the
total potential cost to the county over a five-year period is \$250,000.
The policy is but one incentive to those seeking to establish an
agri-business in Woodbury County; other programs provide benefits to a
producer or processor who add to the job base in Woodbury County.

The Policy provides incentives for young farmers to engage in
high-margin organic farming businesses on smaller farm acreages,
supporting small family farm operations - thus encouraging the
re-emergence of local agri-based economies. The policy was the only
logical way to address the production side of agriculture as an object
of economic development - and it had to be enacted at the local
governmental level since there is no other financial assistance for
small farm agricultural production.

Organic producers receive higher margins in a market that is growing by
approximately 20% a year. Since lower acreage organic farming can be
lucrative (as compared with federally subsidized commodity farming), and
since organic farming is localized and is viable, the only real option
open to the county was to promote organic agriculture by offering a
rebate of real property taxes for those desiring to convert to organic
farming. There are few tools available to a county that wants to revive
its rural communities; offering a direct grant is the most obvious tool.
Grants can only be provided for programs that benefit the entire
community of taxpayers. It is rational, therefore, that the promotion of
higher incomes to more family farmers (which will revive rural
communities), and the development of local small to mid-sized processing
facilities, is in the overall county\'s best interest.

The economic benefits to a county from organic farming has been
documented by Luanne Lohr, Department of Agriculture and Applied
Economics, University of Georgia, in her study, "Benefits of U.S.
Organic Agriculture", dated November 2002. An upcoming study by David
Swenson, of Iowa State University, also confirms that there are
significant benefits to a county that promotes organic agriculture as a
means of economic development.

As stated earlier, the county needed to take a multi-faceted approach to
the revival of small to mid-sized farms -- one tool was to develop an
initial local market for locally produced food. On January 10, 2006,
Woodbury County enacted its mandatory Local Food Purchase Policy. This
policy mandates that when the county was obligated to procure food for
its jail, juvenile detention center, and work release program, the
county's food service contractor would be required to buy locally grown
organic food when available. The policy provides that all local food
purchases must be procured from a single source local foods broker.
These provisions were used to jump start a demand cycle for locally
grown foods and encourage its production. The plan is set forth in the
graphic provided below:

![](media/image2.pct){width="6.475in" height="3.982638888888889in"}

The object of the policy and plan is to create a sustainable local food
system providing multiple outlets for locally grown food -- including
even a national market for a newly developed food brand. The positive
results of this plan can be judged by the following developments within
the community:

-   Western Iowa Tech Community College (WIT) now provides courses in
    organic farming

-   Woodbury County provided 15 acres of farmland to be used by WIT as
    an organic farm lab

-   A relationship with Whole Foods Market of Omaha has been established
    for local products

-   A local foods broker has been established as a single point supplier
    for about 50 producers

-   A local organic food restaurant has been established and is rated a
    top restaurant in the area

-   A local foods education center has been established

-   An "Organic Farmer Network" of mentoring has been established

-   The "Annual Organic Growers Conference" has drawn farmers from
    around the globe

-   Woodbury County is working with the Siouxland Chamber of Commerce to
    field business opportunities related to organic food processing from
    around the U.S.

-   The neighboring county of Cherokee has enacted a similar Organics
    Conversion Policy

-   Two other neighboring counties are now considering passage of a
    similar policy

-   Woodbury County has enacted its unique Northwest Iowa Farm/Farmer
    Exchange Board

-   Woodbury County Department of Planning & Zoning is working on farm
    preservation through innovative policies addressing transfer of
    development rights and density rules

-   Woodbury County is developing a local food brand that will act as
    catalyst for commercial production with local and national
    distribution

-   A regional "Local Organic Foods Marketing Group" is forming between
    Woodbury, Cherokee, Monona, and Plymouth Counties in Iowa

-   Organic farm tours have provided numerous groups from around the
    nation with insight and support for the organic farming option and
    its role in economic development

-   The organic local foods restaurant, broker, and food market now
    employs 14 people -- compared with just volunteer workers 2 years
    ago.

-   A local bakery, that now offers an organic biscotti cookie product,
    has increased its employee count from 3 to 10.

The potential of income from local food sales is significant. Woodbury
County residents purchase approximately \$203,000,000 of food a year.
The goal is to supply 10% of these purchases from local suppliers over
the next 10 years. Plans are in the making to begin "Farm to School",
"Farm to Hospital", and "Farm to Restaurant" sales once local supply is
increased to meet that demand.

There are substantial barriers to obtaining a larger supply of locally
grown food. Aging conventional farmers are extremely hesitant to
undertake a change in farming practices, especially when they can hedge
their bets with [federal subsidy dollars]{.underline}, have the
availability of [crop insurance]{.underline}, and have a [commodities
market]{.underline}. Furthermore, "marketing" of products from a small
farm requires a significant time commitment and marketing savy. Since
most federal dollars are bound to the conventional food system, organic
farming is seen as an "alternative" that is not on equal par with large
economics of scale farming. If the Federal Government continues to
perceive organic farming in this light, Americans can expect to see a
shrinking indigenous food supply, while international agricultural trade
deficits continue to mount.

Of particular note, public awareness of food safety is on the rise.
Organic agriculture, and support of local food systems, is critical for
assuring a safe local food supply in times of possible contamination
that may occur in more centralized behemoth food systems. Local food
systems reduce the use of petroleum to transport the food to its final
destination, and organic farming practices are less petroleum
dependent - the environment and consumers are better served.

There are significant reliable resources to support the proposition that
it would be in the national interest, both from an economic and public
health perspective, to create a more indigenous and expansive organic
and local food policy at the federal level. A multi-faceted approach to
the development of local organic food production would increase supply,
and would provide higher margins to farmers necessary to support smaller
farm operations. New brands of quality, high-margin, food would be born
that would contribute to local character, community, and recognition on
the international trade market.

Woodbury County, Iowa can only do so much from the local perspective --
a county alone cannot fight against a tsunami of national policy that
works to eliminate the bedrock of American values, the small farm, and
the traditional rural way of life. United States lawmakers should
embrace diversity in agricultural policy, recognize those policies that
diminish that diversity, and promote the health, safety, and welfare of
its population through a comprehensive local organic food development
policy. There are means and appropriations available to accomplish an
economic boom to rural America -- if only the need be recognized.

Thank you very much for this opportunity to speak before this honorable
committee.

Robert B. Marqusee

I hereby do certify that:

I, Robert B. Marqusee, am a government employee. I am the Director of
Rural Economic Development for Woodbury County, Iowa. I am employed
directly by the county. Although not required by U.S. House of
Representative Rules related to non-government employees, I am
submitting a resume & disclosure to the committee for the purpose of
providing both a disclosure and personal information.

Dated: April 12, 2007

Robert B. Marqusee.

Committee on Agriculture

U.S. House of Representatives

Required Witness Disclosure Form

**House Rules\* require nongovernmental witnesses to disclose the amount
and source of Federal grants received since October 1, 2004.**

# Name: Robert B. Marqusee

# Address: 7^th^ & Douglas Streets, Woodbury County Courthouse, 6^th^ Fl, Sioux City, IA 51101

# Telephone: 712.279.6609

**Organization you represent (if any): Woodbury County, Iowa**

1\. Please list any federal grants or contracts (including subgrants and
subcontracts) [you]{.underline} have received since October 1, 2004, as
well as the source and the amount of each grant or contract. House Rules
do [NOT]{.underline} require disclosure of federal payments to
individuals, such as Social Security or Medicare benefits, farm program
payments, or assistance to agricultural producers:

The Rural Economic Development Department of Woodbury County, IA has not
received any federal grant or contracts in the entire time of its
existence (department created March 21, 2005).

Source:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Amount:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Source:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Amount:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2\. If you are appearing on behalf of an organization, please list any
federal grants or contracts (including subgrants and subcontracts) [the
organization]{.underline} has received since October 1, 2004, as well as
the source and the amount of each grant or contract:

Source:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Amount:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Source:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Amount:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Please check here if this form is NOT applicable to you: X

![](media/image3.png){width="1.636111111111111in"
height="0.5902777777777778in"}Signature:

\* Rule XI, clause 2(g)(4) of the U.S. House of Representatives
provides: Each committee shall, to the greatest extent practicable,
require witnesses who appear before it to submit in advance written
statements of proposed testimony and to limit their initial
presentations to the committee to brief summaries thereof. In the case
of a witness appearing in a nongovernmental capacity, a written
statement of proposed testimony shall include a curriculum vitae and a
disclosure of the amount and source (by agency and program) of each
Federal grant (or subgrant thereof) or contract (or subcontract thereof)
received during the current fiscal year or either of the two previous
fiscal years by the witness or by any entity represented by the witness.

**ROBERT B. MARQUSEE**

*4455 Perry Way • Sioux City, IA 51104 • (712) 239-8177 • E-mail:
<rob@marqusee.com>*

# 

# PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE

## Woodbury County, Iowa

Sioux City, Iowa. March 2005 - Present

##### Director -- Rural Economic Development

Woodbury County is located in the northwest section of the State of
Iowa. Establishment of unique farm policies designed to revitalize rural
America were enacted. Localized incentives to create smaller farm sizes,
increase income and population, and promote public health received
national recognition. The Woodbury County Health Initiative was enacted
to promote local foods and diet information to the schools and rural
communities.

## 

## National Scholarship Providers Association

Sioux City, Iowa. 2002 - 2004

##### Interim Executive Director

The National Scholarship Providers Association is the only national
organization devoted solely to serving the scholarship provider
community; including private foundations, universities, and corporate
philanthropy. Duties include fundraising, membership programs,
conference productions, research, and Web site development and database
administration.

## Waitt Family Foundation

North Sioux City, South Dakota. 1999 - 2002

The Waitt Family Foundation is a private non-profit foundation
established by Ted and Joan Waitt, founders of Gateway Computer Company.
The foundation develops and supports national education, domestic
violence, and community initiatives.

#### Director, Education

• Responsible for complete creation and administration of six
scholarship programs providing over \$1 million in benefits to 110
graduating high school seniors, single parents, and foster children.
Responsible for the development of scholarship criteria, processes for
determining selected scholars, organization of community-based selection
committees, administration of funds, scholar databases, and third-party
vendor relationships.

• Originated and produced *From Star Wars to Star Students* in
partnership with The George Lucas Educational Foundation. This program
inspired 12,000 middle-high school students, 4,000 teachers, and parents
to consider a future in a technology-related career, the possible
integration of technology into elementary and secondary education, and
the use of technology in the home.

• Developed and administered the *Technology in Early Education
Initiative*: a public-private partnership with U.S. Senator Tom Harkin
(D. IA) and the United States Department of Education. Responsible for
the administration of \$500,000 in grant funds designed to integrate
technology into the early education curriculum of two school districts
in southwest Iowa.

• Coordinated Local Site Development for PowerUP -- a partnership
between The Waitt Family Foundation, AOL Time Warner, and The Case
Foundation to bridge the digital divide. The Waitt Family Foundation is
committed to providing 50,000 Gateway computers to the venture.

• Originated public and private partnerships for the development of
community initiatives such as the
[www.siouxcityhistory.org](http://www.siouxcityhistory.org/) Web site.
Foundation representative on board that administers a \$1 million
endowment related to the historic Orpheum Theatre restoration in Sioux
City, Iowa.

## Gateway Computer Company

North Sioux City, South Dakota. 1994-1999

-   *Executive Offices -* Initiated, organized and managed global
    corporate Intranet.

-   *Manager, Global Marketing -* Initiated the Internet Media Project.
    Produced *Direct Marketing Model & The Internet*; a project which
    was, in part, responsible for the 'online ordering' system used by
    Gateway.

-   *Sr. Contract Administrator, Major Account Sales -* Initiated and
    developed the Tax Nexus & State Contracting Project. Developed major
    accounts contracting practices and procedures.

+------------------------------------------------------------+---------+
| ## Robert B. Marqusee, Attorney at Law                     | 2005    |
|                                                            |         |
| Santa Barbara, California. 1982-1994                       | 1982    |
|                                                            |         |
| Iowa Bar Admission                                         | 1979    |
|                                                            |         |
| California Bar Admission                                   |         |
|                                                            |         |
| Colorado Bar Admission                                     |         |
+------------------------------------------------------------+---------+

# EDUCATION

  ------------------------------------------------------------ -----------
  University of Denver -- LL.M. Taxation                       1981-1982

  University of Puget Sound -- Juris Doctor                    1975-1978

  University of Notre Dame (Sabbatical -- Theology)            1975

  University of Denver -- B.A. Philosophy                      1972-1974

  Phi Beta Kappa & 4.0 Club                                    
  ------------------------------------------------------------ -----------

# PROFESSIONAL CONTRIBUTIONS

*Numerous Presentations on Organic Farming As Economic Development* 2005
to Present

Throughout United States & Canada

U.S. Rep. Collin Peterson's, Home Grown Economy Conference, Morris, MN

Iowa State University -- Guest Lecturer

Outlook Conference 2006 -- Toronto, Canada

Upper Midwest Organic Conference -- La Crosse, WI

20+ Regional Local Foods Associations

Upcoming: Organic Trade Association, All Things Organic, Chicago, IL

*Numerous Publications & Organization Membership* 2005 to Present

Member: ISU Leopold Center's "Regional Food Systems Working Group"

Organic Trade Association Magazine, End Piece, Sept. 2006

Organic Consumers Association, Breaking the Chains Interview, Sept. 2005

Subject: The Land Stewardship Letter, Jan/Feb/March 2006; April/May/June
2006

*National Scholarship Providers Association (NSPA)* 2001 to 2004

Member of Board of Directors

Chicago, IL

NSPA Conference Participation

• *Presentation Speaker -- National Conference 2000* - The Underserved
Population

### • Presentation Speaker -- National Conference 2001*- Model Applications 2001*

NSPA Publication Materials

• *Model Scholarship Application*

• *Standard Scholarship Process Documentation*

*Sioux City History Web Project -* Sioux City, IA 2001 to 2003

*Orpheum Theatre Endowment Committee -* Sioux City, IA 2001 to Present

*Boys Club of Siouxland* - Sioux City, IA 2000 to 2003

Member of Board of Directors

*Northwest Iowa Center for Teaching & Learning* 2001 to Present

*Advisory Board - Morningside College* - Sioux City, IA

*School District Advisory Committees* 1999 to 2000

Sioux City & Council Bluffs, IA

Participatory Development of Technology Plans/Grants

# PERSONAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS

*Family*: Father of 5 children: Daniel (21), Jason (20), Megan (16),
Matthew (13), and Katherine (12)

*Travel Experience:* Extensive European Living & Travel Experience.

Mid-East Archeological Participation Program through Notre Dame
University