NODPA’s Mission

To enable organic dairy family farmers, situated across an extensive area, to have informed 

discussion about matters critical to the well-being of the organic dairy industry as a whole.

30 Keets Rd, Deerfield, MA 01342 Tel: 413-772-0444 Fax: 866-554-94863 Email: ednodpa@comcast.net

 Website: www.nodpa.com

Northeast Organic Dairy Producers Alliance

July 18th 2015

Organic Promotion, Research, and Information Order; 

Room 3071-S, STOP 0201; 

Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA; 

1400 Independence Avenue, SW.; 

Washington, D.C. 20250-0201; 

Telephone number: (202) 720-5115.

Submitted by email: amsadministratoroffice@ams.usda.gov

Please accept this partial proposal on a new industry-funded promotion, research 

and information order for organic products, which would be developed under the 

Commodity Promotion, Research, and Information Act of 1996 (1996 Act).

I am submitting this proposal on behalf of NODPA which is the largest organic 

dairy producer organization in the country with a membership of eight hundred 

and thirty six organic dairy producers in the Eastern USA. NODPA’s mission is 

to “enable organic dairy family farmers, situated across an extensive area, to 

have informed discussion about matters critical to the well-being of the 

organic dairy industry as a whole.” NODPA is not aligned with any one 

processor or cooperative and therefore is able to represent the views and needs of 

many different farmers.

Our farmer-members do not think that a mandatory USDA checkoff program is 

the correct vehicle to address the needed organic marketing, research, nor support 

for increased domestic organic production. While our members feel all of these 

areas are important for the future of a strong organic agriculture in the USA, a 

USDA Generic Research and Promotion Order for Organic would not be the 

vehicle of choice. That being said, because the Organic Trade Association (OTA)

has applied to establish such a program, albeit falsely claiming broad farmer 

support, we would like to outline the areas of the proposal that would need to be 

addressed to fairly propose such an idea to the organic agricultural community. 

We believe that it is a fundamentally democratic right that all organic certificate 

holders have a vote as to whether a Generic Research and Promotion Order for 

Organic is established. A federally mandated program is designed to affect every 

level of the organic marketplace and every certificate holder should have the 

right to vote on establishing one and letting one continue. Our partial proposal 

outlines an assessment where small entities will be assessed at rates low enough 

not to cause financial hardship. 

 

 

Liz Bawden, President, NY

Dave Johnson, Vice President, PA 

Steve Morrison, Secretary, ME

George Wright, Treasurer, NY

Henry Perkins, Past President ME 

Craig Russell, VT

Rick Segalla CT

Steven Russell, ME

Morvan Allen, MA

Ed Zimba, MI

Darlene Coehorn, WI

Bruce Drinkman, WI

Andrew Dystrka, OR

State Reps:

Siobhan Griffin, NY

Arden Landis, PA

Cindy-Lou Amey, NH

Robert Moore, NY

Bonnie and Tom Boutin, VT

Jeep Madison, VT

Aaron Bell, ME

John Gould, NY

John Stolzfus, NY

Dana Sgrecci, NY

Rodney Martin, VA

Roman Stolzfoos, PA

Policy Committee

Kathie Arnold, NY

Executive Director

Ed Maltby

Webmaster/Newsletter layout

Chris Hill

Media Editor, Membership and 

Event Coordinator

Nora Owens
2

As an organization of organic producers we tried and failed to become involved with the Organic Trade Association’s 

committee to investigate and develop a proposal to make certified organic production which is a production system into a 

commodity. When it was obvious that this committee was more interested in scripted town meetings and webinars where 

it was impossible to comment on the proposal, we decided to stop any involvement as we became part of the numbers 

game that OTA could quote as being involved in their proposal. We therefore thank the administrator for allowing the

opportunity for those groups not aligned with the trade association for the “organic commodity” to put forward their ideas 

on the best way to develop the certified organic production to the benefit of all stakeholders.

Thank you for your consideration. Please contact Ed Maltby if you require any more information.

Sincerely

NODPA Board Chair and New York organic dairy farmer

NODPA Executive Director
3

R&P Program Partial Proposal Application 

Industry Overview

The Northeast Organic Dairy Producers Association (NODPA) hereby submits this partial proposal for the 

Generic Research and Promotion Order for Organic (“GRO Organic”) pursuant to the Commodity Promotion, 

Research and Information Act of 1996.

I. Industry Analysis

The Organic Trade Association (OTA) did a fine job of providing the USDA with a comprehensive history of 

the organic agricultural movement and market growth. One area that was minimized in their summary was an 

emphasis on the intention and meaning of organic agriculture and the organic label. Organic agriculture was 

created in this country by small to mid-scale family farmers who wanted to create a farming system and market 

based on production values that embraces the environment, social justice, and economic viability. Small to 

mid-size family farmers built the organic label in this country at a grassroots level, and the current success of 

the organic market has them to thank for this. Currently the majority of organic operations in the US are 

independent farmers and the OTA outlines that over 60% are small farmers, grossing less than $250,000 per 

year. 

The Northeast Organic Dairy Producers Association (NODPA) is the largest organic dairy producer 

organization in the country with a membership of eight hundred and thirty six organic dairy producers in the 

Eastern US. NODPA’s mission is to “enable organic dairy family farmers, situated across an extensive area, to 

have informed discussion about matters critical to the well-being of the organic dairy industry as a whole.” 

NODPA is not aligned with any one processor or cooperative and therefore is able to represent the views and 

needs of many different farmers. Our farmer-members do not think a mandatory USDA checkoff program 

is the correct vehicle to address the needed organic marketing, research, nor support for increased 

domestic organic production. While our members feel all of these areas are important for the future of a 

strong organic agriculture in the US, a USDA Generic Research and Promotion Order for Organic would 

not be the vehicle of choice. That being said, because the OTA has applied to establish such a program, 

albeit falsely claiming broad farmer support, we would like to outline the areas of the proposal that 

would need to be addressed to fairly propose such an idea to the organic agricultural community. 

II. Program Justification

a. What research and marketing problems exist?

The rapid growth of the U.S. organic industry has given rise to unique challenges that need to be addressed in 

order for the industry to sustain and continue its current growth. The overarching purpose of a Generic Research 

and Marketing Program is defined by USDA as to increase demand without placing one sector at a competitive 

disadvantage and as such any program dollars cannot be spent only to promote domestic organic production. 

NODPA believes that in order to address the lack of supply to meet the rapid increase in US demand, we need a 

program that will support the growth of US supply by encouraging non-organic growers to transition more acres 

to organic, certified organic producers to expand their certified organic acreage, a fair, equitable, and profitable 

farm gate price for all segments of organic production, and new farmers to begin farming using certified organic 

methods. 
4 

There is a three year transition period to convert non-organic farmland into organic farmland and the transition 

period can be challenging because the farm internalizes the increased production cost of an organic farm 

without receiving the price premium and, depending of the size and existing practices of the farm, may need to 

make dramatic changes to farming techniques. While current USDA programs do exist to help some farmers 

through this process, most farmers are utilizing and seeking out programs offered by non-profit farmer-based 

organizations like NODPA, the Northeast Organic Farming Association (NOFA), Midwest Organic and 

Sustainable Education Services (MOSES), Florida Organic Growers (FOG), Oregon Tilth, National Center for 

Appropriate Technology (NCAT), Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE), Organic Farmers’ 

Agency for Relationship Marketing (OFARM), Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association (MOFGA), 

Ohio Ecological Food and Farm Association (OEFFA), etc. These organizations provide the on-farm technical 

assistance to farmers during the transition process in a way that is best tailored to help them through a 

successful transition in their particular market and region. Furthermore, these organizations emphasize farmerto-farmer information exchange as the best technique to educate farmers, as much research has proven that 

farmers learn best from other farmers. Their ability to do more technical assistance to farmers is often limited 

by the capital needed to provide those services.

III. Program Objectives

Because the organic market has grown so quickly in the United States with market demand for organic products 

far outreaching the domestic supply, the program objectives should first and foremost focus on bringing new 

farmers into organic production through information and technical assistance. The secondary program objective 

should support farm-gate production research to ensure that organic farmers maintain a competitive edge among 

a growing international organic market. Once domestic organic supply catches up with our domestic demand, 

the program should also focus on broader marketing and promotion goals such as educating consumers about 

what organic is and its benefits and distinguishing organic from other claims and unregulated seals like 

“natural.” Our recommended outline of priority program objectives is rooted in decades of direct independent 

farmer representation, and would most address the current needs of the majority of organic certificate holders 

(small to mid-size independent producers). For a more detailed account of the program objectives addressed by 

this proposal see Section II(a).

IV. Impact on Small Business

NODPA feels strongly that an organic research and promotion order should not impose arduous compliance 

requirements on small businesses: that any assessments are progressive, having a greater impact on those 

entities that have a higher gross organic income and that assessment ae paid by first handlers and producer 

handlers not producers as prescribed by the 1996 Act . In order to prevent any burden, our proposal does not 

propose to assess certified entities on net producer income nor do we propose to exclude a significant portion of 

the organic community (See Section 12XX.52 Assessments). Our partial proposal recommends that all organic 

certificate holders should be assessed; thus, all organic certification holders should be included in the GRO 

Organic Program decisions, referendums, and leadership. There are various problems with excluding organic 

producers, producer-handlers, handlers, product processors, and importers with Gross Organic Revenue of less 

than $250,000 in the last fiscal year and giving them the option to voluntarily be assessed and then pay into the 

program for seven years. At the onset of the program, those who do qualify for assessment are not locked into 

being assessed for the next seven years, even if their gross revenue dips below $250,000 the year following the 

referendum. Likewise, if a certificate holder is excluded at the onset of the program and thus does not get a 

vote in the initial referendum but then reaches the gross sales threshold the following year, they will be paying 
5

into a program which they were not entitled to vote on. Furthermore, a plan for assessment must be fair across 

commodities. Dairy farmers have a high gross sales number, but typically low net profit, while other 

commodities like high-value fruits and vegetables typically have a lower gross sales but higher net profit. It is 

estimated from our membership that most small dairies would meet the gross organic sales level of $250,000. 

Because of the disparities present in an assessment based on excluding producers grossing under $250,000, we 

feel strongly that all organic certificate holders should be assessed and that the assessment should be made on 

Gross Organic Sales, rather than net profit as net profit is complex for small businesses that typically produce 

all their own farm inputs. Small to mid-size producers may rent or own more acreage to grow their own organic 

inputs, a strategy necessary in many parts of the country to maintain access to these organic inputs. 

Furthermore, small to mid-size organic farms have high labor costs, an expense typical of farms who have not 

reached the scale requiring more mechanization--these costs would not be included in the some definitions of 

net organic sales. Generating net profit numbers for the purposes of the GRO Organic Program will be overly 

onerous for small businesses and expose them to increased risk for financial audits by the Board. The fairest 

method for assessment and to measure everyone’s interest in a GRO Organic Program is to equally assess small 

businesses (producers and producer-handlers) at an assessment of one-hundredth of one percent of their Gross 

Organic Sales (.001%) and organic handlers, product processors, and organic importers at a progressive

assessment of reflecting their ability to pay, which will allow all certificate holders the right to vote in any 

program referendums. Our producer members and producers who have been polled tell us that this level of 

assessment would not be burdensome.

We anticipate that the GRO Organic Program will impact small businesses with annual receipts less than 

$750,000. We do not know how many organic producers, producer-handlers, handlers, product processors, and 

importers meet the regulatory threshold as set forth by the SBA and are subject to assessment, however we do 

know that a majority of organic certificate holders are small to mid-size organic producers that would likely 

qualify under this definition. Requiring quarterly assessment reports is overly onerous as it is unlikely that many 

small to mid-size farms have bookkeeping employees or “staff to operate and manage their computer system.” 

Assessing producers, producer-handlers, handlers, and product processors on their Gross Organic Sales would 

make the assessment reports straight forward, equitable across different types of certificate holders, and less 

complicated, and would reduce the need for bookkeeping staff or specialized contract labor to meet the 

assessment requirements. We estimate that this method could be completed by the accounting staff or farmer in 

one hour of work or none if the assessment is taken out by the first handler. 

V. Industry Support

The Organic Trade Association and the GRO Organic Core Committee facilitated preliminary discussions in the 

organic sector to determine whether there is a need for an organic promotion and research order as outlined in 

their proposal, but they did not accurately reflect the farmer feedback from those discussions. From member 

participation and attendance in the majority of the OTA town halls and webinars, we can attest that there was 

much farmer opposition to the proposed OTA and GRO Organic Committee’s proposal of an organic checkoff 

program. Because of this disparity, we recommend that the USDA offer a Comment Period of Inquiry, 

similarly as it did for the recent beef checkoff proposal, before publishing any proposal to the federal register 

for comment to first measure whether there is industry support for a Generic Research and Promotion Order for 

Organic. Alternatively or in addition to a comment period of inquiry, the USDA National Organic Program 

should host an independent outside survey of all organic certificate holders to obtain objective and neutral thirdparty data on whether a Generic Research and Promotion Order for Organic program is supported by the 
6

organic industry. The ‘Organic commodity’ is unique in so far as the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service has 

a database of all those that are within the commodity and could use that to measure support for the proposed 

program. Our membership and the farmer-membership of many other organic-farming based organizations 

strongly demonstrate producer opposition to any organic checkoff proposal (see www.noorganiccheckoff.com

where testimonials from hundreds of organic producers and consumers oppose an organic checkoff and over 

680 people have signed a petition to end the checkoff proposal (See Attachment 1). 

VI. Text of the Proposal

PART 12XX— Generic Research and Promotion Order for Organic

Subpart A— Generic Research and Promotion Order for Organic

From Agriculture Reform, Food, and Jobs Act of 2013:

SEC. 10012. ORGANIC PRODUCT PROMOTION ORDERS.

(b) Organic Commodity Promotion Order- Section 501 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and 

Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7401) (as amended by subsection (a)) is amended by adding at the end the 

following:

`(f) Organic Commodity Promotion Order-

`(1) DEFINITIONS- In this subsection:

`(A) CERTIFIED ORGANIC FARM- The term `certified organic farm' has the meaning 

given the term in section 2103 of the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 

6502).

`(B) COVERED PERSON- The term `covered person' means a producer, handler, 

marketer, or importer of an organic agricultural commodity.’

DEFINITIONS

Our partial proposal does not require definitions for the following because they are obsolete in our partial 

proposal: 

● §12XX.4 Certificate of exemption.

● §12XX.13 Net organic sales.

● §12XX.23 Producer net profit.

● §12XX.33 Voluntarily assessed entity.

Subpart A— Generic Research and Promotion Order for Organic

DEFINITIONS

 

§12XX.22 Person. 

Person means any individual, group of individuals, partnership, corporation, association, cooperative, or 

any other legal entity.

§12XX.15 Organic certificate holder.
7

Organic certificate holder means a person who is not exempt or excluded from certification pursuant to 7 

CFR 205.101 and who holds a valid organic certificate pursuant to 7 CFR 205.400 through 7 CFR 205.406.

§12XX.16 Organic handler.

Organic handler means a person who is handling certified organic products in accordance with the

requirements specified in 7 CFR 205.101 or 7 CFR 205.270 through 7 CFR 205.272 and all other applicable

requirements of this part 205 and receives, sell, consign, deliver, or transport certified organic products into the 

current of commerce in the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any 

territory or possession of the United States.

§12XX.17 Organic importer.

Organic importer means any organic producer, organic producer-handler, organic handler with gross 

organic revenue person who imports certified organic products from outside the United States for sale in the 

United States.

§12XX.18 Organic producer.

Organic producer means a person who has produced certified organic products in accordance with the 

requirements specified in 7 CFR 205.101 or 7 CFR 205.202 through 7 CFR 205.207 or 7 CFR 205.236 

through 7 CFR 205.240 and all other applicable requirements of part 205.

NODPA recommends including a definition of organic producer-handler under the proposed generic research 

and promotion program that defines the small- to mid-size producer who markets organic products directly to 

the consumer. This type of handler operates at a much smaller scale than the typical handler, which is often a 

large processing facility marketing at the wholesale level. Our proposed definition for Organic ProducerHandler is as follows:

§12XX.19 Organic producer-handler.

Organic producer-handler means a person who is an organic producer who markets organic products direct to 

the consumer. 

§12XX.20 Organic product processor.

Organic product processor means a person who has cooked, baked, heated, dried, mixed, and grinded, 

churned, separated, extracted, cut, fermented, eviscerated, preserved, dehydrated, frozen, or otherwise 

manufactured organic products, and includes the packaging, canning, jarring, or otherwise enclosing organic 

food in a container.

§12XX.21 Organic products.

Organic products means products produced under the authority of the Organic Foods Production Act of 

1990 (7 U.S.C. 6501-6522), and any amendments thereto.
8

NODPA recommends a definition of organic research under the proposed generic research and promotion 

program that focuses on the real research needs of independent producers which would help to close the gap 

between national supply and demand as well as keep US producers competitive with a growing international 

organic market. Our proposed definition for §12XX.27 Research is as follows:

§12XX.27 Research.

Research means any type of investigation, study, evaluation, or analysis (including related 

education, extension, and outreach activities) designed to improve organic farm production systems and 

practices, increase farm profitability and productivity, expand organic farming opportunities, and enhance 

quality of life for farm families and their communities; enhance plant and animal breeding and varietal 

development for organic systems and improve the availability of other production inputs; optimize natural 

resource conservation, biodiversity, and environmental outcomes of organic agriculture; advance organic farm 

and food safety objectives; enhance or increase the consumption, image, desirability, use, marketability, or 

production of organic products; or to do studies on nutrition, market data, processing, environmental and human 

health benefits, quality of organic products, including research directed to organic product characteristics and 

product development, including new uses of existing organic products, new organic products or improved 

technology in the production, processing and packaging of organic products.

GENERIC RESEARCH AND PROMOTION ORDER FOR ORGANIC BOARD

§12XX.40 Establishment and membership.

(a) Establishment of the Board. There is hereby established a Generic Research and Promotion Program 

for Organic Board to administer the terms and provisions of this Order. Seats on the Board shall be 

apportioned as set forth in paragraph (b) of this section. There shall be no alternate Board members. 

(b) The Board shall be composed of 25 members and shall be established as follows:

(1) Sixteen organic producers representing equitable diversity in geography, commodity, and 

size of operation. None of these producer members may hold additional organic certificates (no 

producer-handlers, organic handlers or product processors). 

(2) Two organic producer-handler members;

(3) Three organic handler members;

(4) Two organic product processor members;

(5) One organic importer member; and,

(6) One at-large public member, who shall be a non-voting member.

(c) Any changes in Board composition shall be implemented by the Secretary through rulemaking.

(d) At least once in every five-year period, but not more frequently than once in every three-year period, 

the Board will review the geographical distribution, commodity representation, and sizes of operations 

of certified organic operations in the United States with respect to the organic producer Board members 

to ensure that equitable representation is achieved. The review will be conducted using the NOP’s list of 

certified organic operations and, if available, other reliable reports from the industry. If warranted, the 

Board will recommend to the Secretary that certain factors be prioritized to achieve greater 
9

representation in future producer board member seats. Any changes in Board composition shall be 

implemented by the Secretary through rulemaking.

§12XX.41 Nominations and appointments.

(a) Nominees must be organic producers, organic producer-handlers, organic handlers, organic product 

processors, or organic importers who produce, handle or import organic products in the marketing year.

(b) Initial nominations shall be submitted to the Secretary. Before considering any nominations, the 

Secretary shall publicize the nomination process, using trade press or other means deemed appropriate, and 

shall conduct outreach to all known organic producers, organic producer-handlers, organic handlers, organic 

product processors, and organic importers to generate nominees that reflect the range of operations within the 

organic industry. The Department may use local, state, or regional entities, mail or other methods to elicit 

potential nominees. The Department shall ensure that all eligible candidates are aware of the opportunity to 

serve on the Board. The Secretary shall select the members of the Board from the nominations submitted.

(c) Subsequent nominations shall be conducted as follows:

(1) The Board shall conduct outreach to all known organic producers, organic producer-handlers, 

organic handlers, organic product processors and organic importers by mailings to all certified 

entities on the USDA AMS list; by requesting that certifiers send information to all their certified 

entities; by using all the resources available to USDA including the Organic Insider and by any 

other means it seems appropriate. Organic producers, organic producer-handlers, organic 

handlers, organic product processors, organic importers, and non-voting at large candidates may 

submit nominations to the Secretary;

(2) Organic producer, organic producer-handler, organic handler, organic importer, organic 

product processor, and non-voting at large nominees shall provide the Secretary with a short 

background statement outlining their qualifications to serve on the Board. For the organic 

producer Board seats, nominees must specify where they farm, acreage farmed, gross organic 

sales, and the commodities grown on their farm; 

(3) Nominees for organic producer seats may not hold multiple organic certificates (for handling 

and/or importing). Organic producer-handler, organic handler, organic importer, organic product 

processor, and non-voting at large nominees may hold multiple organic certificates (for 

production, handling, and/or importing) and may seek nomination to the Board for any nonproducer seat for which they are qualified;

(5) For the Board seats allocated to organic producers, organic producer-handlers, organic 

handlers, organic product processors, the organic importer, and the non-voting at-large, 

nominees will submit applications directly to the Secretary;

(6) Any person nominated to serve on the Board shall file with the Secretary at the time of the 

nomination a background questionnaire;
10

(7) From the nominations made pursuant to this section, the Secretary shall appoint the members 

of the Board on the basis of representation provided in §12XX.40;

(8) No two members of the Board shall be employed by a single corporation, company, 

partnership or any other legal entity;

(9) The Board may recommend to the Secretary modifications to its nomination procedures as it 

deems appropriate. Any such modifications shall be implemented through rulemaking by the 

Secretary; and,

(10) The Board shall strive for diversity in its membership. This includes diversity that meets 

Equal Employment Opportunity requirements, as well as diversity among organic products based 

on the proportions of assessments paid, diversity among crop type, diversity among geographic 

regions, diversity among the segments represented in the supply chain, diversity in the size of 

operations, diversity in marketing expertise, and diversity in research experience.

§12XX.44 Procedure.

(a) A majority of the Board members shall constitute a quorum as long as at least 12 producer members 

are present.

(b) Each voting member of the Board shall be entitled to one vote on any matter put to the Board and the 

motion will carry only if supported by a majority of Board members, except for recommendations to change the 

assessment rate, change the Board composition, or to adopt a budget, both of which require affirmation by twothirds of the total number of voting Board members.

(c) At an assembled meeting, all votes shall be cast in person.

(d) In lieu of voting at an assembled meeting and, when in the opinion of the chairperson of the Board 

such action is considered necessary, the Board may take action only if supported by a majority of members 

(unless two-thirds is required under the Order) by mail, telephone, electronic mail, facsimile, or any other 

means of communication. In that event, all members must be notified and provided the opportunity to vote. Any 

action so taken shall have the same force and effect as though such action had been taken at an assembled 

meeting. All votes shall be recorded in Board minutes.

(e) There shall be no proxy voting.

(f) Board meetings and any sub-committee meetings will be open to the public and all minutes from the 

meetings will be posted on the web within 15 business days. All Board meeting will have time allowed 

for public comment.

§12XX.45 Reimbursement and attendance.

Board members shall serve without compensation, but shall be reimbursed for reasonable travel expenses, 

which may include a per diem allowance or actual subsistence allowance while working for the Board away 

from their homes or regular places of business as approved by the Board, which they incur when performing 
11

Board business. For producer members, reimbursed reasonable travel expenses will include compensation for 

the hiring of temporary help to cover their work on the farm when performing Board business.

EXPENSES AND ASSESSMENTS

§12XX.50 Budget and expenses.

(a) At least 60 calendar days prior to the beginning of each fiscal year, and as may be necessary 

thereafter, the Board shall prepare and submit to the Department a budget for the fiscal year covering its 

anticipated expenses and disbursements in administering this part. The budget for research, promotion or 

information may not be implemented prior to approval by the Secretary. Each such budget shall include:

(1) A statement of objectives and strategy for each program, plan or project;

(2) A summary of anticipated revenue, with comparative data for at least one preceding fiscal 

year, which shall not include the initial budget;

(3) A summary of proposed expenditures for each program, plan or project. This shall include 

the following allocation of expenditures:

(i) The funds shall be allocated as follows: 65 percent for research, 20 percent for 

information, 10 percent for promotion, and 5 percent for discretionary funds; and

(ii) Of the funds allocated to research, no less than half shall be allocated to 

producer/farmer/ranchers who want to carryout organic research, demonstration, 

and education projects on their farms either individually or in groups. This 

research should take into account regional differences and priorities for produceroriented research. Funds should be allocated equitably to reflect regional 

producer research needs.

(iii) Any expenditures designated for the categories set forth in (i) and (ii) of this 

section that are not spent in a fiscal year shall carry over for the same category for 

the following fiscal year.

(4) Staff and administrative expense breakdowns, with comparative data for at least one preceding fiscal 

year, except for the initial budget. 

(a) Each budget shall provide adequate funds to defray its proposed expenditures and to provide for a 

reserve as set forth in this Order.

(b) Subject to this section, any amendment or addition to an approved budget must be approved by the 

Department, including shifting funds from one program, plan or project to another. Shifts of funds that 

do not result in an increase in the Board's approved budget and are consistent with governing bylaws 

need not have prior approval by the Department.

(c) The Board is authorized to incur such expenses, including provision for a reserve, as the Secretary

finds reasonable and likely to be incurred by the Board for its maintenance and functioning, and to 
12

enable it to exercise its powers and perform its duties in accordance with the provisions of this subpart. 

Such expenses shall be paid from funds received by the Board.

(d) With approval of the Department, the Board may borrow money for the payment of startup expenses 

subject to the same fiscal, budget, and audit controls as other funds of the Board. Any funds borrowed 

shall be expended only for startup costs and capital outlays and are limited to the first year of operation

by the Board.

(e) The Board will not accept voluntary contributions.

(f) The Board may also receive other funds provided through the Department with the approval of 

the Secretary, for authorized activities.

(g) The Board shall reimburse the Secretary for all expenses incurred by the Secretary in the 

implementation, administration, enforcement and supervision of the Order, including all referendum 

costs in connection with the Order.

(h) For fiscal years beginning three years after the date of the establishment of the Board, the Board may 

not expend for administration, maintenance, and the functioning of the Board an amount that is greater 

than 10 percent of the assessment and other income received by and available to the Board for the 

fiscal year. For purposes of this limitation, reimbursements to the Secretary shall not be considered 

administrative costs.

(i) Any program, plan or project receiving funds under this section shall not expend for administration

an amount that is greater than 10 percent of the total funds allocated to the program, plan or project.

(j) The Board may establish an operating monetary reserve and may carry over to subsequent fiscal

years excess funds in any reserve so established: Provided, that, the funds in the reserve do not exceed

one fiscal year's budget of expenses. Subject to approval by the Secretary, such reserve funds may be 

used to defray any expenses authorized under this subpart.

(k) Pending disbursement of assessments and all other revenue under a budget approved by the 

Secretary, the Board may invest assessments and all other revenues collected under this part in: 

(1) Obligations of the United States or any agency of the United States;

(2) General obligations of any State or any political subdivision of a State;

(3) Interest bearing accounts or certificates of deposit of financial institutions that are members 

of the Federal Reserve System;

(4) Obligations fully guaranteed as to principal interest by the United States; or

(5) Other investments as authorized by the Secretary.

§12XX.52 Assessments.

(a) The Board's programs and expenses shall be paid by assessments on assessed entities, other income

of the Board, and other funds available to the Board.
13

(b) Subject to the offset specified in §12XX.54 each organic producer, organic producer-handler, 

organic handler and organic importer with gross organic revenue shall pay the following assessments to the 

Board. For organic producers that assessment will be paid by the organic handler from information they have on 

the Gross Organic Sales of the producer as prescribed in the 1996 Act:

(1) Organic producers and organic producer-handlers shall pay one-hundredth of one percent 

(.001%) of Gross Organic Sales. 

(2) Organic handlers and product processors, shall pay an assessment starting at 0.01 % for those 

companies under $1 million in gross organic sales, 0.1% for those companies between $1-5 

million, 1% for those between $10 to 20 million and increasing to two percent (2%) for those 

over $20 million in Gross Organic Sales of products that are certified to the “100% organic” or 

“organic” standard pursuant to 7 CFR § 205.301(a) and (b). Organic handlers and product 

processors shall pay an assessment of 70% of two percent (2%) of Gross Organic Sales of 

products that are certified to the “made with organic” standard pursuant to CFR § 205.301(c).

(3) Organic importers shall pay an assessment to the Board through Customs on organic products 

imported for marketing in the United States. Organic importers shall pay an assessment of two 

percent (2%) of Gross Organic Sales of products that are certified to the “100% organic” or 

“organic” standard pursuant to 7 CFR § 205.301(a) and (b). Organic importers shall pay an 

assessment of 70% of two percent (2%) of Gross Organic Sales of products that are certified to 

the “made with organic” standard pursuant to 7 CFR § 205.301(c). If Customs does not collect 

an assessment for the organic product from an organic importer, the organic importer is 

responsible for paying the assessment directly to the Board within 90 calendar days after the end 

of the quarter in which the organic products were imported.

OR (note two options for importers, subject to determination in consultation with Customs)

(3) Each importer of organic products shall pay through Customs to the Board an assessment of 

two percent (2%) of Gross Organic Sales on the organic product imported into the United States 

identified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS) numbers. The HTS is 

updated biannually and any updates published by the U.S. International Trade Commission will 

be considered effective immediately upon publication. Organic importers shall pay an 

assessment of 70% of two percent (2%) of Gross Organic Sales of products that are certified to 

the “made with organic” standard pursuant to 7 CFR § 205.301(c). The assessment on imported 

organic products shall be paid by the organic importer to Customs at the time of entry into the 

United States and shall be remitted by Customs to the Board. Importation occurs when organic 

products originating outside the United States are released from custody of Customs and 

introduced into the stream of commerce within the United States. Organic importers include 

persons who hold title to foreign organic products immediately upon release by Customs, as well 

as any persons who act on behalf of others, as agents, brokers, or consignees, to secure the 

release of organic product from Customs and the introduction of the released organic products 

into the current of commerce. If Customs does not collect an assessment from an organic 

importer, the organic importer is responsible for paying the assessment directly to the Board 

within 90 calendar days after the end of the quarter in which the organic products were imported.
14

(c) Each organic producer-handler, organic handler, and organic product processor shall remit to the 

Board the amount due no later than 60 days following the end of the year in which the organic product was 

produced or handled. Quarterly payments may be accepted.

(d) At least 24 months after the Order becomes effective and periodically thereafter, the Board shall 

review and may recommend to the Secretary, upon an affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the voting 

members of the Board, a change in the assessment rate. A change in the assessment rate is subject to 

rulemaking by the Secretary.

(e) When an organic producer-handler, organic handler, organic product processor or organic importer 

fails to pay the assessment within 60 calendar days of the date it is due, the Board may impose a late payment 

charge and interest. The late payment charge and rate of interest shall be prescribed in regulations issued by the 

Secretary. All late assessments shall be subject to the specified late payment charge and interest. Persons

failing to remit total assessments due in a timely manner may also be subject to actions under federal debt 

collection procedures.

(f) The Board may accept advance payment of assessments from any organic producer-handler, organic 

handler, organic product processor or organic importer that will be credited toward any amount for which that 

person may become liable. The Board may not pay interest on any advance payment.

(g) If the Board is not in place by the date the first assessments are to be collected, the Secretary shall 

receive assessments and shall pay such assessments and any interest earned to the Board when it is formed.

§12XX.53 Voluntarily assessed entities.

We propose to eliminate voluntarily assessed entities. Every organic certificate holder should have the right to 

and be required to participate in and have representation in a mandatory research and promotion order. A 

federally mandated program is designed to affect every level of the organic marketplace and every certificate 

holder should have the right to vote on establishing one and letting one continue. Our partial proposal outlines 

an assessment where small entities will be assessed at rates low enough not to cause financial hardship. Basing 

every assessment on Gross Organic Sales, reduces the administrative time and expertise required to meet the 

research and promotion order reporting requirements. 

REPORTS, BOOKS, AND RECORDS

§12XX.70 Reports.

(a) Organic producer-handlers, organic handlers, organic product processors and organic importers will 

be required to provide periodically to the Board such information as the Board, with the approval of the 

Secretary, may require. Such information will include:

(1) For organic producer-handlers, organic handlers, and organic product processors:

(i) The name, address and telephone number of the assessed organic producer and/or 

producer-handler and/or organic handler and/or organic product processor and (ii) The 

value of Gross Organic Sales of the organic products.

(2) For organic importers:
15

(i) The name, address and telephone number of the organic importer;

(ii) The value of the gross organic sales of the organic products imported by type; and

(iii) The country/countries of export.

(b) For organic producer-handlers, organic handlers, and organic product processors, such information 

shall be reported to the Board no later than 60 days following the end of the calendar year. 

(c) For organic importers who pay their assessments directly to the Board, such information shall 

accompany the payment of collected assessments within 60 calendar days after the end of the year or the end of 

the quarter in which the organic product was imported specified in §12XX.XX.

MISCELLANEOUS

§12XX.80 Right of the Secretary.

All fiscal matters, programs, plans or projects, contracts, rules or regulations, reports, or other substantive 

actions proposed and prepared by the Board shall be submitted to the Secretary for approval.

§12XX.81 Referenda.

(a) Initial referendum. The Order shall not become effective unless the Order is approved by a majority 

of eligible voters voting in the referendum. A single eligible voter may cast one vote in the referendum. Bloc 

voting shall be prohibited.

(b) Subsequent referenda. Every seven years, the Department shall hold a referendum to determine 

whether assessed entities favor the continuation, suspension, or termination of the Order. The Order shall 

continue if it is favored by a majority of the assessed entities voting. The Department will also conduct a 

referendum if 10 percent or more of all assessed entities request the Department to hold a referendum. Bloc 

voting shall be prohibited.

 

Subpart B—Referendum Procedures

§12XX.100 General.

Referenda to determine whether eligible organic producers, organic producer-handlers, organic handlers, 

organic product processors and organic importers favor the issuance, continuance, amendment, suspension, or 

termination of the Generic Research and Promotion Order for Organic shall be conducted in accordance with 

this subpart.

§12XX.101 Definitions.

For the purposes of this subpart:
16

(a) Administrator means the Administrator of the Agricultural Marketing Service, with power to 

delegate, or any officer or employee of the U.S. Department of Agriculture to whom authority has been 

delegated or may hereafter be delegated to act in the Administrator's stead.

(b) Organic product means any product produced under the authority of the Organic Foods Production

Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 6501-6522), and any amendments thereto.

(c) Customs or CBP means the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, an agency of the U.S. Department 

of Homeland Security.

(d) Department means the U.S. Department of Agriculture or any officer or employee of the 

Department to whom authority has heretofore been delegated, or to whom authority may hereafter be delegated, 

to act in the Secretary's stead.

(e) Eligible voter means any person who is currently (i) an organic producer, organic producer-handler, 

organic handler, organic product processor, or organic importer that either has gross organic revenue in organic 

products during the representative period. Any person that holds multiple organic certificates (i.e. for both 

production and handling) will be allowed only one vote.

(f) Eligible importer means any person who is currently an organic importer with gross organic revenue 

of organic products during the representative period as a principal or as an agent, broker, or consignee of any 

person who produced or handled organic products outside of the United States for sale in the United States, and 

who is listed as the importer of record for such organic products. Importation occurs when organic products 

outside of the United States is released from custody by Customs and introduced into the stream of commerce in 

the United States. Included are persons who hold title to foreign-manufactured organic products immediately 

upon release by Customs, as well as any persons who act on behalf of others, as agents or brokers, to secure the 

release of organic products from Customs when such organic products is entered or withdrawn for use in the 

United States.

(g) Order means the Generic Research and Promotion Order for Organic.

(h) Person means any individual, group of individuals, partnership, corporation, association, 

cooperative, or any other legal entity. For the purpose of this definition, the term “partnership” includes, but is 

not limited to:

(1) A husband and a wife who have title to, or leasehold interest in organic production, organic 

handling or organic import entity as tenants in common, joint tenants, tenants by the entirety, or, 

under community property laws, as community property; and

(2) So called “joint ventures” wherein one or more parties to an agreement, informal or 

otherwise, contributed land, facilities, capital, labor, management, equipment, or other services, 

or any variation of such contributions by two or more parties, so that it results in the production, 

handling or importation of organic products and the authority to transfer title to the organic 

products.

(i) Referendum agent or agent means the individual or individuals designated by the 

Secretary to conduct the referendum.
17

(j) Representative period means the period designated by the Department.

(k) United States means collectively the 50 states of the United States, the District of Columbia, the 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the territories and possessions of the United States.

§12XX.102 Voting.

(a) The Department will use the USDA AMS National Organic Program database of organic 

certificate holders and mail a ballot to each certificate holder with a stamped return address envelope.

The Department will instruct certifiers to mail a ballot to all the entities it certifies. All ballots will be cast 

by mail directly to the Department. Voter will be instructed to fill out the ballot and place the finished 

ballot in an envelope with the word “Ballot” on it. That envelope with the word Ballot on it will be placed 

into a stamped addressed envelope that contains the returned mailing address of the voter and who they 

are certified by and mailed to the Department.

(b) Proxy voting is not authorized, but an officer or employee of an eligible voter, or an administrator, 

executor, or trustee of an eligible voter may cast a ballot on behalf of such entity. Any individual so voting in a 

referendum shall certify that such individual is an officer or employee of the eligible voter, or an administrator, 

executive, or trustee of an eligible entity and that such individual has the authority to take such action. Upon 

request of the referendum agent, the individual shall submit adequate evidence of such authority.

(c) A single eligible voter may cast one vote in the referendum.

(d) All ballots are to be cast by mail and will be anonymous, as instructed by the Department.

§12XX.103 Instructions.

The referendum agent shall conduct the referendum, in the manner provided in this subpart, under the 

supervision of the Administrator. The Administrator may prescribe additional instructions, consistent with the 

provisions of this subpart, to govern the procedure to be followed by the referendum agent. Such agent shall:

(a) Determine the period during which ballots may be cast;

(b) Provide ballots and related material to be used in the referendum. The related material will at 

least include information from those proposing the referendum and those opposing it to ensure that the 

vote has all the information in one mailing. 

(c) Give reasonable public notice of the referendum:

(1) By using available media or public information sources, including paid advertising.

Such sources of publicity may include, but are not limited to, print and radio; and

(2) By such other means as the agent may deem advisable, including holding outreach 

educational meeting on the proposal to be voted on in different parts of the country, 

especially in those rural areas that lack internet connectivity.
18

(d) The Secretary must provide public notice of instructions on voting and a summary of the terms and

conditions of the proposed Order. All eligible voters will receive by mail a ballot. No person who claims to be 

eligible to vote shall be refused a ballot;

(e) At the end of the voting period, collect, open, number, and review the ballots and tabulate the results 

in the presence of an agent of a third party authorized to monitor the referendum process. In opening the 

envelopes the outside mailing envelope will be checked first to ensure that it has been mailed by an eligible 

voter and the envelope with the ballot in will be placed in a separate pile and opened by someone different from 

who opened the mailing envelope to ensure that all votes cast are anonymous;

(f) Prepare a report on the referendum; and

(g) Announce the results to the public within 60 days of the end of the voting period.

(h) The Secretary must implement the decision of the referendum within 60 days of declaring the result 

of the referendum

§12XX.105 Ballots.

The referendum agent and subagents shall accept all ballots cast. However, if an agent or subagent deems that a 

ballot should be challenged for any reason, the agent or subagent shall endorse above their signature, on the 

ballot, a statement to the effect that such ballot was challenged, by whom challenged, the reasons therefore, the 

results of any investigations made with respect thereto, and the disposition thereof. Ballots invalid under this 

subpart shall not be counted unless the result will be impacted by these ballots.
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

1 2013-08-04 18:21:03 Edward Maltby MA 01342 Yes WE neither want nor need a federally mandated organic check-off

2 2013-08-05 20:28:17 George Wright jr. NY 13652 Yes

As far as I am concerned the conventional check-off put small family farms out of business. We 

don't need a catchy slogan like "GOT ORGANIC MILK"!!!!! The research will more than likely lead 

to organic GMO's??????

3 2013-08-05 21:22:24 Liz Bawden NY 13646 Yes

4 2013-08-05 21:24:18 Cindy-Lou Amey NH 03592 Yes Please understand that this is a serious issue for us and we will not let it go.

5 2013-08-10 14:17:21 janet a baker WA 98022 Yes

I want to emphases that the Organic Trade Association does not represent my views. I resent the 

fact that they claim to represent organic farmers, when it is processors that they really represent.

6 2013-08-10 18:22:37 Klaas Martens NY 14527 Yes

7 2013-08-16 11:14:08 Lia Babitch NY 12516 Yes

8 2013-08-16 11:30:10 Jerry Snyder NY 14803 Yes

9 2013-08-16 11:30:51 Fred Griffen NY 13040 Yes

10 2013-08-16 12:17:59 Kerry Planck-Beiter NY 14139 Yes

11 2013-08-16 12:24:33 Louis Lego NY 13021 Yes

We are a part of a check-off program like this with the Apple Association, and it is a disaster that 

is costing us business as well as the collection fees. Please do not do this to us!

12 2013-08-16 12:30:27 John Stoltzfus ny 14897 Yes I ship to organic valley and I do not want them to put a yes vote in for our farm

13 2013-08-16 12:53:46 George Wright jr. NY 13652 Yes

Check-offs don't work period. The only research ever done by conventional check-offs only 

benefitted the Family Factory farms. Little farms were forced out of business. George Wright

14 2013-08-16 12:55:53 Deborah Muntner NY 14527 No

Though I am not a certified organic farmer, I am a small scale farmer practicing sustainable 

organic management of my vegetable and laying hen operation. I do not think the organic checkoff program would benefit me nor any of the small scale organic farmers in my region.

15 2013-08-16 14:27:02 lyman hill NY 14477 Yes

16 2013-08-16 14:27:19 Shannon Ratcliff NY 14891 Yes

17 2013-08-16 14:30:58 Robert VanWuyckhuyseNY 14477 Yes

I already am coxed into the Beef Check Off program. I am a small farm and these programs seem 

to lean to support the larger farms and not so with small family farms. I am against it.. I advertise 

for me. I am responsible for me. Kind of like throwing good money into the wind .... I would 

rather I do my own shouting. The beef check off is always calling and reminding me to send them 

money and I'm like "What have they done for me, Directly for me?" Us small farms need to stick 

together, not link up with a large corporation type outfit. Keep it Local - Buy Local - Spend Local

18 2013-08-16 15:43:47 Michael Makinajian NY 11743 Yes

Our family farm has been certified for twenty years. This is not something along with our 

certification fees, the time to keep an audit trail, and the paperwork records we keep already that 

needs to be added on to our burden. Nor should it be added on to our customer costs that 

already pay a premium for our product and we are not subsidized.

19 2013-08-16 16:38:21 Kurt Forman NY 14522 Yes Page 1
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

20 2013-08-16 17:30:20 Nicholas Martielli NY 11743 Yes

21 2013-08-16 19:02:27 david wines n y 11901 Yes

 i grew potatoes for 40 years and paid an assesment to the national potato promotion board. 

the only ones that benefited were thoes working for the board, wrote the aids, or got free trips to 

the conventions. it did not help the price at all. just check last years whole sale potato prices. they 

were the same as they were in 1975,here on long island!

22 2013-08-16 21:29:15 matthias reisen NY 14809 Yes

23 2013-08-17 06:38:04 Lawrie Nickerson NY 12090 Yes

24 2013-08-17 11:54:29 John Shaw NY 13081 Yes

25 2013-08-17 13:11:13 Mary-HowellMartens NY 14527 Yes

We are already in a deficit situation for most larger-scale organic crops in the United States. An 

organic checkoff program that includes ANY money spent on promotion will only serve to 

increase organic imports. Therefore, organic imports alone should be assessed through a 

checkoff, and American organic farmers should not be penalized with additional taxation. 

26 2013-08-17 13:51:08 Klaas Martens NY 14527 Yes

27 2013-08-17 18:39:53 Peter Martens NY 14527 Yes

28 2013-08-18 06:42:39 Diane Kistler NY 13637 Yes NO Check OFF!

29 2013-08-18 06:43:34 Jonathan Kistler NY 13637 Yes Keep out of our milk Checks!

30 2013-08-18 08:12:50 Daniel Sullivan NY 13439 Yes

Whether certified or not, farmers who farm with organic methods and practices represent the 

antithesis of an economy that centralizes production and distribution, and dilutes the little profits 

that come to farmers by giving it away to others who do not produce the food. My neighbors are 

largely dairy farmers (some of them organic), and they struggle with the system to stay in 

business. Keep the "system" out of organics. Organics will become meaningless if it goes 

corporate.

31 2013-08-18 15:03:30 Nora Owens MA 01342 Yes

32 2013-08-18 15:06:18 Amigo Cantisano CA 95960 Yes

33 2013-08-18 16:00:06 john toltzfu ny 14897 Yes never have this

34 2013-08-18 16:49:35 Duane Hoeft MN 55936 No I do not know if I want to go into organic farming if have do this. Duane olymiss farm.

35 2013-08-18 18:06:41 Wade Bulman WI 54747 Yes

36 2013-08-18 20:35:48 William Larchar NY 13411 Yes

37 2013-08-18 21:43:15 Kathie Arnold NY 13158 Yes

38 2013-08-18 22:10:51 Andy Smith ME 04358 Yes

39 2013-08-18 22:20:50 lydia vorsteveld vt 05734 Yes

40 2013-08-18 22:23:58 Chris Dunham Ca 92673 No

41 2013-08-19 00:44:28 Jackelyn Worden NY 13865 Yes

42 2013-08-19 07:13:17 Sue Rau NY 13662 Yes

Page 2
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

43 2013-08-19 07:23:46 Rita LaBarge NY 13612 Yes

I must say that the only people who will benefit from this program are the Advertising Agencies 

and the large companies that sell organic. I thought that our government was trying to encourage 

small business and locally grown food. Let the local farmers do their own marketing!

44 2013-08-19 09:05:08 Jeanine Huber NY 14883 Yes

45 2013-08-19 15:35:12 James & Pat Sharpless NY 14489 Yes

46 2013-08-19 18:33:40 Diana Saxton NY 14775 Yes I do NOT support an organic check off!! I think it is just a way to snatch our hard earned dollars. 

47 2013-08-20 08:17:56 Susan Yerry NY 12871 Yes

The potential for misuse of funds and more corporate involvement/corruption/control in our 

government is too great with this type of program.

48 2013-08-20 12:05:29 julia widdowson NY 12545 Yes

49 2013-08-20 16:02:43 doug dittman NE 68428 Yes

I'm a certified organic dairy farmer from NE and it's frustrating to see how we family farmers pay 

into checkoffs with the result of systematic loss of market share. I am opposed to the organic 

checkoff. 

50 2013-08-21 11:53:42 Katy Green ME 04915 Yes

51 2013-08-22 17:25:11 John Nord MD 21842 No

I am looking for land to be an organic farmer. It would be nice if the word identifier, "Organic", 

coulld be commonly understood to be of great value to the eating public and to the global 

method of production of food stuffs. And any and all efforts to diminish the weight and meaning 

of said word would be abolished. We the people desirve as much. Wheather one identifies 

himself as being religious or not, the truth of this holy word is self evident. The word's value and 

practical usage goes way beyond the evil manipulations of the old crowd to dilute and diminish 

its God given worth to better mankind and to enhance this good earth. 

52 2013-08-24 12:55:30 Terry Shistar KS 66047 No

53 2013-08-25 21:11:01 Jessica Runge NY 14723 Yes

54 2013-08-27 12:45:55 John Accornero IL 62294-3228Yes

55 2013-08-27 13:39:59 Janet Morse IL 61560 Yes

56 2013-08-27 14:04:54 Jeff Glazik IL 60957 Yes

57 2013-08-27 14:06:48 Rita Glazik IL 60057 Yes

58 2013-08-27 14:43:45 Steve Shank IL 62246 No

59 2013-08-27 15:44:52 Jack Erisman IL 62557 Yes

60 2013-08-27 16:14:11 Tim Clay IL 61018 Yes We do not want a check-off!!!!!!!

61 2013-08-27 17:47:41 Molly Breslin IL 61350 Yes

62 2013-08-27 18:50:51 Theodore Weydert IL 60151 Yes

OTA does not represent me. This is their scheme to tax farmers without our voice. Leave the 

farmer out of this.

63 2013-08-27 19:38:47 John Downey Ill. 61231 Yes

64 2013-08-27 22:27:16 Carmen Fernholz MN 56256 Yes Page 3
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

65 2013-08-27 22:46:54 Darrell Parks KS 66502 Yes

66 2013-08-27 23:11:10 Charles Lambert Il. 60914 Yes

I agree with the a above petition. I am involved also with a conventional non gmo farm and I find 

that most checkoffs are a manipulated waste of hard earned money

67 2013-08-28 12:52:28 Lou Stephenson IN 46947 Yes

My view is the money will go to support research and marketing for big corporations and not to 

benefit the farmer. 

68 2013-08-28 21:20:26 Jim Christensen Wi. 53549 Yes

69 2013-08-29 08:45:13 James Quick WI 54941 Yes

70 2013-08-29 08:48:03 Lewis Prow IN 47320 Yes

71 2013-08-29 10:45:00 Paul Olson WI 54659 Yes

Organic farming is the only way we want to farm. It is alot of work and time comsuming 

paperwork and trails. It was our decision to go organic and we have enough fees to pay--we don't 

need or want another mandated checkoff!

72 2013-08-29 11:04:59 Richard Wiegand IL 61739 Yes I do agree with the above information.

73 2013-08-29 21:52:46 charles rinehart IN 47882 Yes

74 2013-08-30 00:45:54 Clayton McAlpine MT 59486 Yes

75 2013-08-30 11:38:24 Randall Willrett IL 60150 Yes

Until we have FAIR representation on the NOP board, (some current board members have 

corporate interests influencing their decisions), will I support a checkoff.

76 2013-08-30 11:59:10 james chalmers pa 16922 Yes

77 2013-08-30 18:33:34 Daniel Coehoorn WI 54974 Yes Organic is a production method, not a commodity .

78 2013-08-30 18:38:50 Darlene Coehoorn WI 54974 Yes

Please don't force organic producers into this system. I believe that organic is a production 

method and I don't want it to become another commodity without adequate returns to the 

producer. OTA is representing the processing industry on this issue, they have left the best 

interests of the organic producer in the dust. Processors already get a make allowance, let them 

advertise the end product, we produce a raw material. 

79 2013-08-31 13:10:24 Bill Jessup CA 92274 Yes

80 2013-08-31 14:04:20 Paul Cultrera CA 95818 No

81 2013-08-31 15:43:44 Qayyum Johnson CA 94965 Yes

I am strongly opposed to further taxation measures aimed at exploiting organic farmers. I do not 

trust the USDA to further sustainable agriculture in this country, no do I find their advertising 

campaigns to be a beneficial use of farmers' money. The evidence does not point to the 

effectiveness nor sincerity of these kinds of Check-Off programs & it is clear that small & mediumsized producers will be the most affected & least benefited by the program.

82 2013-08-31 16:07:06 Frank Morton OR 97370 Yes I don't need or want an organic promotional program, and I don't want to pay for one.

83 2013-08-31 16:40:09 Floyd Johnson IL 62560 Yes

84 2013-08-31 17:21:23 Anne Schwartz WA 98283 Yes

I have witnessed how marketing orders in WA state have been hurting farmers for decades. I 

have watched national businesses assume most of the control of OTA, their efforts to grow 

organics will pad their pockets. there is no proof these programs help farmers. I am opposed to 

an organic marketing order.

Page 4
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

85 2013-08-31 20:09:18 Sara Tashker CA 9465 Yes

86 2013-09-01 07:49:59 alex dragovich OH 44662 Yes

87 2013-09-01 10:46:49 dale coke CA 95045 Yes

No more extra taxation of organic farmers! We already have to pay for the costs of annual 

certification, fees based on our gross sales, in our case CCOF and fees to the State of California for 

being organic! Organic farmers, the group that is farming in a more environmentally friendly 

manner has to pay more? for the privilege not to spray conventional pesticides or use 

conventional fertilizers? The existing fees and taxation to be organic are no way to encourage 

more organic farming. another tax to be organic is perverse! This is a cleverly conceived 

campaign to squeeze more money out of organic farmers for the corporations that see organic as 

a good marketing ploy.

88 2013-09-01 12:13:30 Michael Braga CA 93637 Yes

89 2013-09-01 14:40:01 Peter Eichorn CA 93923 Yes

90 2013-09-02 00:32:55 MIKE JERKOVICH CA 93630 Yes

91 2013-09-02 01:45:52 susan pelican CA 95695 Yes

 •As an organic farmer I do NOT want to be further taxed with an Organic Check-Off Program. •I 

do NOT support a federally mandated Organic Check-Off program •I do not want my pay check 

cut either directly from paying into an Organic Check-Off or indirectly because my 

customer/buyer has to pay into one. •I do not want to be forced to pay into a federally mandated 

check-off program. •I want to have the freedom to decide how I spend my hard earned dollars. •I 

oppose an organic check-off because I do not trust the USDA Federal Research and Promotion 

Programs due to problems in oversight and because money is spent on programs that do not 

benefit on-farm research or improving my bottom line. In fact, the history of Federal Research 

and Promotion Programs shows that they have actually worked to reduce farmers’ profitability. 

•Check-off funds are used to pay for marketing campaigns such as the “Got Milk?” and “Pork, The 

Other White Meat” or "The Incredible Edible Egg." This advertising primarily benefits processors, 

marketers and retailers, not the farmers—but we farmers are stuck paying the bills! •The Organic 

Trade Association does not represent me on this issue. •I DO want farmers to be able to continue 

to be exempt from paying into conventional programs and I DO want that exemption to be 

extended to all operations that are organically certified. Susan Pelican, Woodland, CA

Page 5
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

92 2013-09-02 01:47:25 Howard beeman CA 95949 Yes

 •As an organic farmer I do NOT want to be further taxed with an Organic Check-Off Program. •I 

do NOT support a federally mandated Organic Check-Off program •I do not want my pay check 

cut either directly from paying into an Organic Check-Off or indirectly because my 

customer/buyer has to pay into one. •I do not want to be forced to pay into a federally mandated 

check-off program. •I want to have the freedom to decide how I spend my hard earned dollars. •I 

oppose an organic check-off because I do not trust the USDA Federal Research and Promotion 

Programs due to problems in oversight and because money is spent on programs that do not 

benefit on-farm research or improving my bottom line. In fact, the history of Federal Research 

and Promotion Programs shows that they have actually worked to reduce farmers’ profitability. 

•Check-off funds are used to pay for marketing campaigns such as the “Got Milk?” and “Pork, The 

Other White Meat” or "The Incredible Edible Egg." This advertising primarily benefits processors, 

marketers and retailers, not the farmers—but we farmers are stuck paying the bills! •The Organic 

Trade Association does not represent me on this issue. •I DO want farmers to be able to continue 

to be exempt from paying into conventional programs and I DO want that exemption to be 

extended to all operations that are organically certified. Howard Beeman, organic grower 

93 2013-09-02 09:28:14 Jim Eldon CA 95606 Yes

94 2013-09-02 10:31:40 Chris Hay CA 95695 Yes

95 2013-09-02 10:47:31 Dan Gannon CA 95818 Yes

96 2013-09-02 12:07:13 Steve Peters CA 94402 Yes

97 2013-09-02 12:23:57 warren weber CA 94924 Yes

98 2013-09-02 13:43:07 Rachel Petitt ca 95616 Yes

99 2013-09-02 13:55:14 Lily Schneider CA 94534 Yes

100 2013-09-02 14:21:43 Ken Ratzlaff Ca 95472 No

I am an organic processor and can not afford to pay more to do organic juice and it is not fare to 

the customer to have to pay so much more. We do not need more taxes. The money should go 

back to the farmers to help them not to big business.

101 2013-09-02 14:35:58 Bennett Lyons CA 95688 Yes

We do not need the government to charge us for marketing that does not help the local small 

farmer directly.

102 2013-09-02 15:59:04 john teixeira CA 93622 Yes

103 2013-09-02 21:30:34 Emma Torbert CA 95616 Yes Please do not pass this bill!

104 2013-09-02 23:14:36 Ruthanne jahoda CA 95603 Yes

These attempts to garner funds and to out-regulate organics is an attempt to force organic 

producers out of the market place. 

105 2013-09-02 23:20:31 Katie Koch CA 95616 No

106 2013-09-03 01:21:12 Daniel Paduano CA 95033 Yes

This is a raw deal for small farmers. Our markets are hyper-local and in no way would benefit 

from a national campaign. How about working on less government overhead (specifically the 

completely bogus tax we pay to "register" each year with CDFA on top of paying CCOF for Organic 

Certification), rather than adding another level of nonsense? Thank you for your consideration, 

Daniel

Page 6
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

107 2013-09-03 10:26:05 Erika Janik WI 53092 No

108 2013-09-03 14:25:24 PETE WOLF CA 93630 Yes

109 2013-09-03 18:11:23 clifford fong ca 95695 Yes

110 2013-09-03 22:22:04 Robert Keatley WI 54022 Yes

Our cost of production is high enough with out adding a check off tax. I am adamantly opposed 

to this. Nothing in this proposal will help the small farmer struggling to survive. 

111 2013-09-04 13:35:48 Pat Herbert CA 95023 Yes

112 2013-09-04 13:36:43 Patti Herbert CA 95023 Yes

113 2013-09-06 10:10:20 Tamara Hicks Ca 94971 Yes

114 2013-09-06 10:10:54 Susan Young CA 94945 No

115 2013-09-06 10:19:20 David Minar mn 56071 Yes

116 2013-09-06 10:22:12 Melya Stylos CA 94901 Yes

117 2013-09-06 10:25:57 Jennifer Jorgensen CA 94920 No

118 2013-09-06 10:26:51 Maryann Nardo CA 94901 No

119 2013-09-06 10:34:46 Bea Agins CA 94960 No

120 2013-09-06 10:35:22 Trinka Marris CA 94956 No

I have a small organic garden, but rely for food mostly on the local, organic farmers that live in my 

area. I encourage policies that help the small farmer...not hinder them.

121 2013-09-06 10:35:42 Chris Ducey CA 94973 Yes

We should be supporting organic farming with as much effort as we have been agribusiness 

Interests for decades. It's time to replenish a safer, more locally available, sustainable farming 

model Which is better for our land and people.

122 2013-09-06 10:35:55 Malcolm Booth CA 95472 No

As a consumer of organic produce this program will increase cost and provide no benefit. I'm 

against it and urge you not to institute it.

123 2013-09-06 10:36:15 Angela KEARY CA 94915 No I oppose the organic check off system proposed by the USDA

124 2013-09-06 10:36:38 AMy Weber CA 94924 Yes

125 2013-09-06 10:37:45 Monique Tse CA 94960 No

126 2013-09-06 10:41:30 Elizabeth Fenwick CA 94937 No The farmers do not benefit from this I oppose it

127 2013-09-06 10:42:21 judy north CA 94963 Yes

128 2013-09-06 10:42:22 annika miller ca 94941 No

129 2013-09-06 10:42:38 Sarah Koenig CA 94901 No

Page 7
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

130 2013-09-06 10:43:33 Jessica Denning CA 95608 Yes

What a bad idea to tax real farming that sustains the soil and ecosystem, nurtures community 

and genetic diversity and brings fresh local, healthy food to families. Organic farmers already bear 

the economic burden of certification... Which I do not do, though I have shunned pesticides and 

herbicides, clear my land with goats, and am bio dynamically trained. Please don't put one more 

burden on organic growers. Who asked organic farmers if they want this additional tax? It will 

make organic food even less affordable in the US. Given the lack of any farm bill support for 

organic farming this year, this smacks of extermination of competition. Industrial, corporate 

agribusiness has already forced thru laws which banned farmers from saving their own seeds 

even in Europe and now are doing this in Puerto Rico, Argentina, Colombia. There are 

demonstrations worldwide asking that even small farms retain any sovereign food rights. There is 

an appalling tyranny of people's rights to grow their own food and share it within their 

communities, worldwide. Please don't pound one more nail in the coffin of organic farming and 

folks rights to grow and share their own food. Stop this tax. 

131 2013-09-06 10:45:20 Tracey Van Hooser CA 94920 No

132 2013-09-06 10:45:57 Susan Zelinsky Ca 94901 No

I buy from local farmers and choose to support their efforts in growing foods safe from pesticides. 

Please support them, too. Sincerely, Susan Zelinsky

133 2013-09-06 10:47:28 francesca kennedy ca 94901 No

134 2013-09-06 10:49:35 Chris Borjian CA 94930 No

135 2013-09-06 10:50:33 Melinda Suelflow MN 55603 No

As an organic consumer and gardener, I value deeply the organic farmers that grow the food that 

I eat. I do not believe that a federal check-off program paid for with increased taxes will benefit 

organic growers. And I definitely don't trust the USDA Federal Research and Promotions Program 

to spend such funds wisely.

136 2013-09-06 10:52:11 Eleanor Lyman CA 94924 Yes

137 2013-09-06 10:53:55 Mary Osier CA 94960 No

138 2013-09-06 10:59:10 Nina Katz CA 94960 No

139 2013-09-06 11:00:39 Christine Edmond CA 94901 Yes

I am a back-yard farmer, but I support my local Farmer's Market providers, most of whom provide 

Organically grown produce.

140 2013-09-06 11:02:30 david bernard ca 94963 Yes

141 2013-09-06 11:04:01 Brooke Barnhart CA 94118 No

142 2013-09-06 11:07:48 Framcesca Fifis CA 95476 No

This legislation endangers our health by making organic food less accessible to people who need 

it most. 

143 2013-09-06 11:08:41 Janet Sluis Ca 94705 No

144 2013-09-06 11:11:05 Louise Hassan CA 95476 No

I purchase organic produce at our local Farmer's Market each week. This would be an 

unnecessary burden on our local farmers.

145 2013-09-06 11:12:11 Erika Hoytt CA 94947 No

I volunteer locally with several organic ag non-profit organizations. SMALL local ag is very 

important to me, my children, and my grandchildren.

146 2013-09-06 11:14:35 Mindy Marin CA 94924 No Page 8
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

147 2013-09-06 11:16:46 Sarah Kaplan CA 94920 No

148 2013-09-06 11:17:46 Kyle Turner CA 94925 No

149 2013-09-06 11:21:24 Rika Gopinath Ca 94903 Yes

150 2013-09-06 11:25:46 Smol Kristen Ca 94901 No

As a consumer of organic produce and goods, I say NO to any increased tax on these goods, 

especially when the check-off tax goes into a general fund with minimal regulation, and which has 

the commercial- not the organic farmer in mind.

151 2013-09-06 11:27:25 Richard Saxe CA 95004 No

To saddle organic farmers with supporting this type of program is a very bad idea and hampers 

small businesses that are the backbone of our local economies. Thank you for your consideration.

152 2013-09-06 11:31:48 Pamela Johnson CA 94939 Yes No check-off program! 

153 2013-09-06 11:36:40 daniel altman ca 94941 Yes

154 2013-09-06 11:38:08 Nina B CA 94952 No

155 2013-09-06 11:42:19 Mark Swoiskin CA 94941 Yes

156 2013-09-06 11:42:45 Rosemary De Sanna CA 94904 No

Organic farmers should not be subject to an additional bureaucratic fee for every product they 

sell. It is not easy to be an organic farmer and this is a totally unnecessary constraint on them. 

Also they do not need to be supporting someone else's marketing campaigns. I simply don't trust 

the USDA on this. 

157 2013-09-06 11:43:09 SHANNON PIGOTT CA 94904 No

158 2013-09-06 11:47:45 Andrea Brodkin CA 90405 No

159 2013-09-06 11:48:49 Jill moore ca 94924 No

160 2013-09-06 11:50:41 sarah domenico ca 94612 No

Please stop compromising the integrity of healthful food by succumbing to corporate pressure. 

Got a conscience?

161 2013-09-06 11:53:24 Saskia Horn CA 94574 No

162 2013-09-06 11:54:25 Jacque Bibeau CA 94960 No

163 2013-09-06 12:00:02 molli milner ca 94937 No

How can anyone sleep at night knowing they are making good, safe food harder for more people 

to get???

164 2013-09-06 12:15:28 Alex Altman CA 94941 No

165 2013-09-06 12:16:26 John Levy CA 94937 No

I am a strong supporter of local organic farmers, whose interests are not furthered by the 

proposed Federal checkoff. The Organic Trade Association is not a representative of these small 

organic farmers, or of my interests as an organic produce consumer.

166 2013-09-06 12:18:47 Moreva Selchie CA 94937 No

167 2013-09-06 12:19:02 Canice Flanagan CA 94109 No

168 2013-09-06 12:20:30 Sheryl Ott CA 94920 No

169 2013-09-06 12:22:53 Nancy Pimentel CA 95345 No

170 2013-09-06 12:26:28 Sigrid Stroes CA 94903 No

171 2013-09-06 12:29:53 Erin Albachten Ca 94930 No

Page 9
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

172 2013-09-06 12:32:16 Gina Bradley CA 91361 No

173 2013-09-06 12:32:26 Deborah Zierten CA 94609 No

174 2013-09-06 12:32:30 DJ Niccolls CA 94142 No

175 2013-09-06 12:33:15 Melissa Baca CA 92879 No

I am a mother of 4 and do have my own organic garden. I support organic farmers and I do not 

want to pay into federal programs when I buy organic products. 

176 2013-09-06 12:33:38 Rose Dallal CA 96088 Yes

177 2013-09-06 12:39:24 Linda Riebel ca 94549 Yes

178 2013-09-06 12:41:38 Shannon Bollman CA 94949 No

179 2013-09-06 12:47:56 Brenda Balanda CA 94937 No

180 2013-09-06 12:48:19 nils langenborg ca 95409 Yes This is an absurd program. Please give farmers a voice!! 

181 2013-09-06 12:49:12 Mark Dowie CA 94956 Yes

182 2013-09-06 12:53:41 Pam Fabry CA 94924 No

183 2013-09-06 12:55:16 Dexter Carmichael CA 94110 No

No taxation of organic farmers without their majority representation on the Organic Trade 

Organization.

184 2013-09-06 12:58:38 Lynn Gutstadt ca 90066 No Stop the march of big farming stomping on the rights and profits of independent organic farmers!

185 2013-09-06 13:10:42 Ellen Obstler CA 94901 No I'm an organic farmer consumer and supporter.

186 2013-09-06 13:18:49 Julie Kastrup CA 94904 No

Organic farmers do not make that much anyway. I do not think it is fair or right for them to be 

forced to give part of their hard earned income for this program. 

187 2013-09-06 13:20:44 David Weckler CA 94941 Yes

Legitimate organic farmers already spend a lot of money and take a lot of care to grow their crops 

organically. Don't charge them for marketing they neither want nor need. 

188 2013-09-06 13:35:21 Elizabeth DeRuff CA 94957 Yes

189 2013-09-06 13:37:22 Mary Ann Petro CA 94937 No

Small farmers are opressed enough trying to provide good food in their local areas. They should 

NOT be taxed on the produce they sell. Keep big Brother out of Organic Farming! Mary Ann 

Petro, Inverness, CA

190 2013-09-06 13:42:13 Alan Martin CA 94960 No

191 2013-09-06 13:42:45 Janet Brown CA 94973 Yes

I oppose the proposed organic check-off program. Please do not further tax organic farmers who 

are subject to many taxes, fees, inspections, and expenses that other farmers do not have to pay. 

It's really unfair that the most benign form of agriculture is also the most heavily regulated.

192 2013-09-06 13:45:36 M. Baker VA 22901 No

I have many friends who are organic farmers. Their efforts to grow healthy food naturally should 

be rewarded, not taxed for marketing over which they have little or no say. The UNDP's report on 

Food Security globally says the US should immediately adopt major policies to support the growth 

of organic foods in our country. It is time to reverse the course of big agriculture's insensitivity to 

a healthy ecosystem and adopt some sweeping policies to support and reward organic farmers 

for their contribution to true food security. 

193 2013-09-06 13:46:20 Linda Emme CA 94940 No

Page 10
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

194 2013-09-06 14:13:21 Elizabeth OHara CA 95678 No

195 2013-09-06 14:13:31 Joanna Rosenfeld CA 94972 No

196 2013-09-06 14:19:11 Christine Murphy CA 90046 No

197 2013-09-06 14:46:03 Steve Woodward CA 94930 No

198 2013-09-06 14:55:00 kim janson ca 94930 Yes

199 2013-09-06 14:55:42 Marjorie Miller IN 47037 Yes

Just say NO to the Corporatization of Organic Food. USDA's Organic program caters to General 

Mills, Kellogg, Kraft, ConAgra, Dean, Danone, Smuckers, Coke, Pepsi, and Mars--NOT the small, 

sustainable Organic farmer or the Local Distribution systems. 

200 2013-09-06 14:56:26 Jenni Anselment MN 55614 No

201 2013-09-06 15:00:17 Tammy Sill PA 19606 No

202 2013-09-06 15:03:57 Kim Baenisch CA 94901 No

As a consumer of organic products, this Check Off proposal is completely unwarranted. What the 

organic industry truly needs to provide more healthy food to all US citizens is an end to the 

federal subsidy of non-organic corn and soybeans, and support to connect the underserved 

communities where "food deserts" exist that lack fresh produce with the abundant local organic 

produce that could nourish these residents.

203 2013-09-06 15:13:04 Elena Freeman CA 94947 No Government funding should be supporting, not penalizing organic farmers. 

204 2013-09-06 15:19:59 Cynthia Sawtell CA 94960 No

I am an organic CONSUMER who directly supports her local farmers by buying their meat, 

produce and dairy products. Big Ag has cornered the market on subsidies and influence. Let's 

not punish small farmers who dare to farm the old-fashioned, sustainable way.

205 2013-09-06 15:28:55 dennis dierks ca 94924 Yes Small organic farmers should not be charged to support large agra business operations.

206 2013-09-06 15:29:08 Gerald Gass CA 94953 No

207 2013-09-06 15:44:06 CA Lonergan CA 94602 No

I buy organic produce EXCLUSIVELY, despite a higher cost, to encourage the industry and to help 

get prices lowered so more folks can afford to ignore factory farming... You need to broadcast 

this campaign more extensively than just Marin Organics mailing list! You need to leverage social 

media right away to get your word out: open a fb page, so everyone can "like" you; open a twitter 

acct, so folks can "Psssst! Pass it on!" - like ye olde hand-written notes passed around in class, in 

the olden days. Get young people who understand social media to help you! :-) --Oakland fan of 

Marin Organic; consumer of Marin Sun Farms products :-)

208 2013-09-06 16:06:58 kim burggraf ca 94930 No I'm with you!

209 2013-09-06 16:19:18 Helen Barton CA 94941 No

210 2013-09-06 16:26:30 kimberly wheat CA 94941 No

211 2013-09-06 16:42:28 Marion Reyes CA 91307 No

212 2013-09-06 16:53:26 Ellen Finestone CA 94903 No

213 2013-09-06 16:57:02 Ronna Reed CA 94941 Yes

214 2013-09-06 17:06:02 Danielle Andrews ca 94973 No

215 2013-09-06 17:08:30 Lynne Frame CA 94941 No Page 11
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

216 2013-09-06 17:13:08 John Wick CA 94301 Yes

217 2013-09-06 17:36:59 annabelle lenderink CA 94924 Yes

218 2013-09-06 17:37:41 Leigh Etheridge AL 35007 No

219 2013-09-06 18:03:04 wayne meyer CA 95991 Yes

Check off $$ have never, ever helped farmers. They are collected to help the buyers of my 

products, not to help me. NO CHECK-OFF!!!!!!!! 

220 2013-09-06 18:18:33 connie curtis tx 78758 No

I eat organic.. this doesnt need to be.. the companies can see where it going.. we want organic.. 

food without chemicals. 

221 2013-09-06 18:21:50 Barbara St John CA 94930 No

I try to buy almost all organic - but local organic. I am not in favor of this program because I fell it 

penalizes small farmers.

222 2013-09-06 18:34:27 Chris Lyon CT 06840 No

223 2013-09-06 18:39:44 diane schultheis CA 95630 No

I am an "organic only" eater. This program is nonsense. Not going to happen. USDA is on the run. 

They don't know how to stop the "organic only" eaters.

224 2013-09-06 18:51:39 Peter Ratner ca 95973 No

225 2013-09-06 19:03:04 Alice Knutson CA 94941 No

226 2013-09-06 19:05:26 Margaret Elliott CA 94930 Yes

227 2013-09-06 19:19:35 Peggy Diedrichs CA 94965 No I work for an organic farmer, so this is very important to me!!

228 2013-09-06 19:24:31 Laura Wyatt CA 93108 No We need to support farmers and not make it more difficult to do this already challenging job. 

229 2013-09-06 19:27:11 S Fleming CA 94925 No

230 2013-09-06 20:45:13 Gina Inez CA 94941 No

To whom it may concern, Having spent the better part of the decade of the 1980's involved in 

organic farming and helping to write the code for sustainable agriculture in California, I know 

first hand the hard work and integrity that goes into growing and retailing organic food crops. The 

present federal statute proposed ( the Organic Trade Association Check-off List) would nullify, or 

at very least undermine, the efforts of both the organic growers and the concerned consumers to 

sustain a viable organic agriculture in the USA. Please do not make the mistake of undermining 

the organic food growers and consumers. These people represent a very important thread in 

American society and stand for the future of a healthier nation.

231 2013-09-06 21:38:51 Sharon Delap VA 22191 No I will be soon

232 2013-09-06 21:52:43 Nancy Wiens CA 94901 No

233 2013-09-06 22:28:06 ben anderson ct 06896 Yes

234 2013-09-07 00:02:38 Brooke Battles CA 94618 No

235 2013-09-07 00:14:42 Sandra Bird Ca 94904 No Organic farmers have a hard enough time without additional paperwork or expenses

236 2013-09-07 00:27:33 mary Cosgrove CA 94941 No

237 2013-09-07 00:37:23 Kathryn Moorehouse Wa 99203 No

238 2013-09-07 01:18:14 Neva Alsip OK 74085 Yes We strongly oppose the proposed Organic Check-off Program.

Page 12
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

239 2013-09-07 01:56:55 Frank Menhams CA 95437 No

I buy organic, and keeping the costs down is very important. Please do the right thing, I will track 

your activities...thank you, Frank Menhams

240 2013-09-07 02:30:48 Tom Willey CA 93637 Yes

241 2013-09-07 02:34:41 Jan Dietrick CA 93001 No

I grow beneficial insects used by organic farmers and my business depends on organic farmers 

being able to have a level playing field and prove the value of the products in fair trade. This is 

not fair.

242 2013-09-07 02:59:24 Joseph Coats CA 93065 No I'm a organic gardener and Permaculture Designer.

243 2013-09-07 03:06:35 Michael Baird CA 94002 No

I support the certified organic, local farming movement. I do NOT support reprehensible taxation 

of sustainable alternative food sources! Tax big ag, those who can afford it!

244 2013-09-07 07:35:40 Brad Hubbell CA 94941 No

As a purchaser of organically farmed foods and a supporter of the health benefits and diversity 

that organic farming provides, I strongly support this petition to keep Organic Farmers off of the 

Organic Check-off program.

245 2013-09-07 08:57:24 Louise Hamm CA 93446 Yes

246 2013-09-07 09:44:14 Jessica Cardinal CT 06811 No

247 2013-09-07 09:51:20 Lucinda Olney CA 94708 No

Organic farmers need to be supported, not taxed. They have figured out how to raise food 

without herbicides and pesticides. Tax the companies that sell herbicides and pesticides, not the 

organic farmers! Protect our health !!

248 2013-09-07 12:25:19 Margaret Graham CA 94971 Yes

National organizations just by definition are too large to be effective for the small members 

which is what 'organic' is all about. To co-opt our money to support the large growers is beyond 

ironic.

249 2013-09-07 12:36:53 Kate Firestone CA 94965 No

250 2013-09-07 12:47:31 liz daniels ca 94946 Yes

251 2013-09-07 13:05:13 Jill Barrett CA 94920 No

252 2013-09-07 13:17:51 karen preuss CA 94931 No

253 2013-09-07 13:18:24 Shari W. CA 94521 No

Organic farmers receive little benefit from programs such as these from the FDA. These check off 

programs benefit the corporate marketplace and yet it's the farmers that pay for them. This is 

incredibly lopsided and unfair to the people who actually grow the food. Farmer's (the actual 

people who get their hands dirty, not the quasi-farmers who sit in an office somewhere wearing 

a suit etc ) profits are already very low SO if the manufacturers and retail sellers want the FDA to 

have the programs that basically benefit them they must be the ones to pay into the 'check off' 

programs.

254 2013-09-07 13:20:25 Mary Grillo CA 94947 No Stop taxing us for every little thing you need to trim your budget!

255 2013-09-07 14:05:52 annie b ca 94526 No

I am not a farmer. But on behalf of those farmers whose hard work and perserverance to their 

trade (and doing it sustainably!) puts organic food on my table, I cannot support this issue. To 

chance taking away in this manner even a minutiae of the earnings these folks have earned - 

regardless of whether they gross minor or massive profits on their wares - is wrong. I hope critical 

thinking and active discussion can be utilized to create a program that makes far more sense than 

this.

Page 13
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

256 2013-09-07 14:56:06 Vicky Passmore GA 30506 No

257 2013-09-07 16:16:21 Devon Paoli CA 94901 Yes

258 2013-09-07 16:28:33 Evan Wiig CA 95472 Yes

259 2013-09-07 16:31:09 Michael White ca 90034 No

IT is clear our government now is owned and operated by corporations and hates family farms. 

We, the People, are FOR small, family farms and we the people do NOT want OUR government 

making laws that favor Agribusiness farms and hurt small family farms. Period.

260 2013-09-07 18:08:17 Linda Frender CA 94939 No

261 2013-09-07 20:09:26 Janet Daijogo Ca 94941 No

262 2013-09-07 20:28:14 Judy Engardio CA 95457 No

263 2013-09-07 21:34:43 Terry Allan Ca 95401 Yes

264 2013-09-07 23:54:40 J. Huston CA 94606 No

265 2013-09-08 00:18:49 Sonia Covey VA 24161 Yes

266 2013-09-08 00:24:12 Rosemary Reilly CA 94501 No

267 2013-09-08 09:06:21 Lisa Smith IL 61938 No

268 2013-09-08 09:38:12 Thea Blair CA 95959 Yes

269 2013-09-08 12:26:45 Susan Gertman CA 94941 No

270 2013-09-08 12:49:06 Michael Salzman MO 64111 No

271 2013-09-08 20:30:48 Carrie Sherriff ca 94941 No

272 2013-09-08 23:55:26 Robyn Martin CA 95960-0075Yes

273 2013-09-09 01:03:46 Liese Keon CA 94939 Yes

274 2013-09-09 01:19:27 armida scopazzi ca 94901 Yes

275 2013-09-09 08:36:44 Oren Holle KS 66412 Yes

276 2013-09-09 11:55:20 Catherine Bishop CA 94117 No

277 2013-09-09 12:40:32 janet a baker WA 98022 Yes

We as dairymen have been disenchanted with the check off programs that are national programs. 

We were led to believe that they would be more efficient than our local programs, but history is 

not proving this to be true. The current program being offered (pushed) by the Organic Trade 

Association does not have the support of Organic Producers and would be primarily to the 

benefit of processors, using organic producers money. Please take this into consideration as to 

whom is promoting this legislation, using processor money for lobbing. Sincerely Janet A Baker 

t

278 2013-09-09 13:32:08 Jessica Prentice CA 94804 No

279 2013-09-09 17:06:41 cynthia douglas ca 93446 Yes

280 2013-09-09 17:29:33 Barbara Rothkrug Ca 94925 No I support small family farms.

281 2013-09-09 20:11:21 Laura Bohlender CA 95632 Yes

282 2013-09-09 20:21:44 robin rust in 46115 Yes Page 14
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

283 2013-09-10 01:59:25 Jack Liebster Ca 94925 No

284 2013-09-10 07:49:20 Michael Gurecki ny 13440 No

285 2013-09-10 17:38:30 Shannon Wilson CA 94131 No

286 2013-09-10 22:41:23 Lisa Krausz CA 94920 No

287 2013-09-11 11:26:04 Richard Christianson MN 55406 No

As an Organic wholesale produce distributor, we work with hundreds of organic farms all across 

the country. I can say without reservation that the vast majority of organic farms that we have 

contact with are STRONGLY opposed to an organic checkoff. 

288 2013-09-11 13:42:42 Pete G KS 66210 Yes

This is not needed and not welcome. These programs always, Always, ALWAYS end up working 

against the interests of the farmers they claim to help. This is nothing more than an effort to get 

us to pay for our own destruction and enslavement. As a direct marketer I'm already paying for 

these efforts, I need not pay someone else to do it form me and likely in a way that will directly 

compete with my message and for my consumer dollars.

289 2013-09-11 15:08:52 Dana Haugli IA 50423 Yes

I remain as independent as possible from all farm programs, with the exception of NOP 

certification which is required by law for me to sell certified organic products. I have no desire to 

participate in a one-size fits all organic checkoff, and I am opposed to all other checkoffs.

290 2013-09-11 17:13:46 cindy kamm CA 94941 No

please stop harassing organic farmers with tactics like this! they do us all a great service ! 

sincerely cindy kamm

291 2013-09-11 18:30:06 Kent Morris IA 50022 No

The "check-offs" are a from of taxation on Rural Farm Agriculture to fund the commercial 

promotion of Corporate Agriculture.

292 2013-09-11 20:06:11 Clarissa Langley WA 98264 Yes

293 2013-09-12 05:58:18 JOHN ROSSI TX 78628 No

•I do NOT support a federally mandated Organic Check-Off program. •I do not want to be forced 

to pay into a federally mandated check-off program. •I want to have the freedom to decide how I 

spend my hard earned dollars. •I oppose an organic check-off because I do not trust the USDA 

Federal Research and Promotion Programs due to problems in oversight and because money is 

spent on programs that do not benefit on-farm research or improving my bottom line. In fact, the 

history of Federal Research and Promotion Programs shows that they have actually worked to 

reduce farmers’ profitability.•I DO want farmers to be able to continue to be exempt from paying 

into conventional programs and I DO want that exemption to be extended to all operations that 

are organically certified. 

294 2013-09-12 07:44:36 Cheryl Collins ME 04037 No

I work as a nutritionist with an organic feed mill and this proposal will just drive out more organic 

family farms that we can't afford to lose.

295 2013-09-12 10:48:33 Randy Rolf CO 80020 No

296 2013-09-13 14:24:29 Bryce Loewen CA 93648 Yes

297 2013-09-13 15:18:29 Miriam Weinstein CA 94930 No

Wouldn't it be wonderful when the USDA starts supporting organic farmers, whose food is good 

for us, and whose processes benefit the planet, instead of being a stooge for industrial agriculture 

and Monsanto. Wouldn't it be a great day when the USDA does the will of the people instead of 

corporations?

Page 15
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

298 2013-09-13 15:19:08 Marisa Hoke CA 94949 Yes

I grow vegetables organically, (farming), but I do not sell them. However, one day, since I might, 

this is important to me. 

299 2013-09-13 15:20:50 susanne weihl ca 94925 No

300 2013-09-13 15:38:16 Christine Farren CA 94133 No

301 2013-09-13 18:17:34 Jeannie Hall CA 94941 No Please DO NOT let Washington push us around, say NO to Taxing our Organic food!!!

302 2013-09-13 22:39:49 William Larchar NY 13411 Yes

303 2013-09-14 01:31:17 Sue Crawford CA 94920 No

We buy most of our fruits and veggies directly from CSAs through a weekly organic box and 

directly from Farmer's Markets. The margins for organic farmers are not large and yet the 

benefits of organic farming are incalculable for the environmental health of the planet and all its 

inhabitants. It is unhelpful and undemocratic to impose the burden of a generic tax on small scale 

organic farming operations.

304 2013-09-14 01:36:32 dontaye ball ca 94124 No

305 2013-09-14 03:11:55 Denni Adamson CA 94901 No

I ask you to vote against the Organic Check Off Program to maintain the availability of the highest 

quality food at an affordable price for families. High quality food which is free of pesticides and 

herbicides will promote physical and mental health in our communities and help reduce future 

health care costs. I urge you to vote in accordance with the voters you actually represent and not 

for corporations. Exercise your conscious. Thank you. 

306 2013-09-14 14:33:35 Jordan Thompson CA 94954 Yes Please do not make it more difficult for farmers who are choosing to grow organic.

307 2013-09-15 16:39:52 Kathy Cronin CA 95472 No

308 2013-09-15 19:28:26 Rodney Graham NY 14846 Yes

These funds will not be used to promote organic agriculture. Why should I have to fund it? To 

promote GMO soybeans that I don`t agree with?

309 2013-09-15 21:51:10 andrea owen ca 94925 No

310 2013-09-16 00:51:04 Nancy Boyce CA 94901 Yes

311 2013-09-16 09:23:36 Elizabeth Barnum ND 58203 No

I do not want the large agribusiness companies in the organic field to further dominate the 

market. I am in favor of more local, small producers who take care of the land as well as the 

integrity of their production.

312 2013-09-16 09:33:04 Robert Steininger PA 19460 No

313 2013-09-16 09:36:01 Kathleen Mathis FL 32210 No

The farming I do is personal and organic. The products I purchase I strive to make as organic by 

health choice. I do not wish my spending dollars to go towards corrupt and worthless campaigns 

and research that further serves toxic chemical agriculture, corporatized large scale farmers. I 

believe checkoff fees shoud be abolished altogether and my tax dollars to no longer go towards 

subsidies to large agribusiness, or, on another topic towards supporting the advancement of dirty 

energy. Both are poisoning the people, the environment and destroying the chances of 

humankind ot live on this planet peacefully and healthily. thank you.

314 2013-09-16 09:59:15 Sarah Umberger WV 24901 Yes

315 2013-09-16 10:05:24 Dena Haupt PA 15865 No

The farmers should be able to keep their money! They do not benefit from these Check-Off 

Programs so why must they be the ones to payroll it?! Page 16
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

316 2013-09-16 10:12:05 Nora Handler IL 60613 No

317 2013-09-16 10:17:01 Heidi Lawson CA 95223 No

318 2013-09-16 10:26:09 Rebecca Breaux NY 14814 No

319 2013-09-16 10:31:19 Cindy Scherrer wa 98640 No

320 2013-09-16 10:39:35 Lynn Frederiksen MA 01701 No

I am a concerned citizen and someone who fears that agribusiness has taken us down a deadly 

path. Our public and environmental health suffer greatly while these corporate behemoths 

consume profits off the backs of small farmers. These farmers should not have to pay for 

programs that not only do not benefit them, but instead support the egregious works of huge 

corporations who would put them out of business.

321 2013-09-16 10:40:00 Becky McColley CA 92081 No

322 2013-09-16 10:42:45 Jeremy McLaughlin TX 7708 No If these are the issues that we face our own government we have much bigger problems. 

323 2013-09-16 10:57:16 sandra mccolley ca 91763 No

I am an American consumer who is weary of being a victim of congress who are bought and paid 

for by big business.

324 2013-09-16 11:05:54 Sharon Bodman OR 97380 No

I grow my own food and use organic methodologies. After seeing the data of the experiences of 

the beef,pork and current farmers experience I would create my own check-off list under the 

strict auspices of worldwide organic standards with specific goals and expectations where the 

monies could go. Otherwise, the system is rigged against organic farmers and they should be 

exempt from the current check-off list.

325 2013-09-16 11:47:27 Patt Rose CA 94541 No Food should not be a political tool. Our farmers need support not more taxes.

326 2013-09-16 12:10:38 ross hunter ky 42445 Yes

I feel these programs serve only already rich and powerful corperations and individuals. They do 

nothing more but burden the middle and small operations with another expense in a further 

attempt to lessen our ability to compete for market share.

327 2013-09-16 12:28:21 Cindy Brown ca 94903 No

328 2013-09-16 12:38:45 Mary Ann O'Donnell IL 60554 No

I am not an organic farmer, but I do buy organic and wish to support organic farmers in any way 

that benefits them. I do not believe the check-off program will benefit them. Please do not pass 

an organic check-off program.

329 2013-09-16 13:21:30 Margie Goulden WA 98372 No

I grow much of my own food organically and I supplement with food grown by organic farmers. I 

do not agree with a program that harms them in any way.

330 2013-09-16 13:21:35 Jeanne Watts MA 02169 No

I am not an Organic farmer BUT I am an Organic Gardener and I support the Organic Farmers who 

are fighting hard to keep our food clean.

331 2013-09-16 13:58:56 Deborah Raley Ca. 95005 Yes

332 2013-09-16 14:30:57 Diane Burnett AZ 85338 No

I am a consumer and as such demand the right to choose food free of chemical enginering and 

political hype.

333 2013-09-16 14:36:09 Chris Boileau Nv 89148 No

334 2013-09-16 15:22:34 Lori Restani CA 94904 No

335 2013-09-16 15:35:49 Melinda Pitcher CA 95124 No

336 2013-09-16 15:53:02 Jane McCullam OH 44065-9712No

Page 17
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

337 2013-09-16 17:54:26 michele grayndler sc 29936 No a very concerned consumer

338 2013-09-16 19:06:52 Joan Basore CA 94960 Yes

339 2013-09-16 19:08:11 Amigo Cantisano CA 95960 Yes

I do not want my money to be used to promote the agendal of large corporate multinational 

companies who now own the majority of organic processed foods. They will dominate the board 

of this checkoff and tax me without any benefit to me. Just say NO!

340 2013-09-16 21:36:34 Judy Nelson MN 55733 No

341 2013-09-16 21:46:15 theresa bridges mi 48336 No

342 2013-09-16 22:40:07 Lisa Butterfield CA 95501 No

I live in a rural county, an I know many organic farmers personally. I do not trust the USDA to do 

anything that benefits organic farmers or consumers anymore. I don't need promotional ads 

telling me what to eat. Because of having eaten "conventional" poisoned GMO foods for many 

years, I now have many food allergies and inflamed intestines. I don't have the "choice" to eat 

conventional food anymore, and I don't want to have my farmers further burdened by taking 

more of their money.

343 2013-09-17 00:42:10 Robert Kuljis OR 97123 Yes Small and mid sized farms do not need to pay for industry marketing schemes. 

344 2013-09-17 05:55:49 jean molinari CA 90731 No What a nightmare.

345 2013-09-17 07:44:59 Melissa Rubano PA 16669 No

346 2013-09-17 10:51:29 karey degnan mn 55746 No

347 2013-09-17 15:37:34 Elsie Smith IA 52556 No

348 2013-09-18 08:21:15 Bruce Scholten WA 98036 No

I am a dairy geographer at Durham University Geography Dept, UK, with a family and hournalism 

background in dairy farming.

349 2013-09-18 12:55:18 Ryan Butzow IL 60955 Yes

350 2013-09-18 12:58:04 dennis wilt wa 98629 Yes

351 2013-09-18 12:58:20 Helen Krayenhoff CA 94602 Yes

The OTA does not speak for me or hold my interests at heart. Do not add more hardship to 

struggling family farms!

352 2013-09-18 13:00:57 Rita Pelczar NC 28753 Yes

353 2013-09-18 13:02:08 Cliff Francis OR 97031 Yes Stop the over regulation of small farms. 

354 2013-09-18 13:02:49 Chris Klebaum WA 98951 Yes

355 2013-09-18 13:06:11 Joshua Smith MI 48754 Yes

356 2013-09-18 13:07:18 Ann Wilson ME 04438 Yes

357 2013-09-18 13:16:32 Jean Ratto OR 97080 Yes

358 2013-09-18 13:17:18 Michael Potter MI 48104 No

This is bad for organic family farms. Doing organic is expensive enough. OTA wants money to fund 

industrialization and commercialization of organic food. 

359 2013-09-18 13:17:45 Michael Evenson CA 95558 Yes

We don't need this to market our products. Why add another layer of bureaucracy, cost and 

such to the consumer by taking it from the producer. Makes no sense whatsoever.

360 2013-09-18 13:20:25 Tom Denison OR 97330 Yes

Page 18
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

361 2013-09-18 13:27:53 Kevin O'Dare FL 32963 Yes

OTA DOES NOT REPRESENT ANY ORGANIC FARMERS IN FLORIDA. THE PEOPLE WHO SIT ON THE 

BOARD OF OTA DO NOT CARE ABOUT ORGANIC FARMERS IT IS ALL ABOUT MONEY AGAIN AND 

AGAIN. THANKS, KO

362 2013-09-18 13:40:44 Melvin Gimbel SD 57371 Yes

363 2013-09-18 13:41:37 Sally Harper NM 88047 Yes

No to a federally mandated Organic Check-Off program. We are already paying thousand of 

dollars annually in order to farm responsibly and sustainably. This is backwards. The farmer who 

is using tons of chemicals annually should be taxed for the future costs of long-term results of 

massive chemicals going into our bodies, land, air, and water supplies. 

364 2013-09-18 13:57:34 Julie Sullivan CO 81149 Yes

365 2013-09-18 14:01:44 Christina Sirlin HI 96712 No

366 2013-09-18 14:21:59 Ryan Rich CA 93422 Yes

As a farmer check off programs have never benefited me. Only a few large interests. No check off 

for organic farmers EVER.

367 2013-09-18 14:24:03 Caitlin Couture CA 93239 Yes

The amount of fees/charges/mandatory pay outs/etc that farmers are expected to foot is absurd. 

We are already a struggling industry and this program is simply another way to bleed us out. The 

OTA has unfortunately missed another opportunity to connect with farmers at a grassroots level 

(something they claim to have a passion for doing) and instead have continued their pandering to 

DC bigwigs with zero interest in the livelihoods and success of organic farmers. 

368 2013-09-18 14:34:31 Roger Wechsler WA 98232 Yes In addition to all said above, there is no fee structure that would be fair to all.

369 2013-09-18 14:34:58 Daniel Tollefson MN 55334 Yes

370 2013-09-18 14:35:46 Jennifer Tollefson MN 55334 Yes

371 2013-09-18 14:36:19 Thomas Bardessono CA 94558 Yes

372 2013-09-18 14:39:07 Steve Taylor ID 83301-0621Yes The Organic Trade Association does not represent me!!!

373 2013-09-18 14:39:53 Dada Gana ca 93532 Yes

374 2013-09-18 14:45:02 Kim Mosel NE 68766 Yes

375 2013-09-18 14:59:50 David Rhea NE 68002 Yes

376 2013-09-18 15:16:59 Ray Hoppes OH 43160 Yes Let us have less bureaucracy rather than more. We do not need or want an organic check-off!

377 2013-09-18 15:42:01 susan pelican ca 95695 Yes PLEASE! 

378 2013-09-18 15:45:25 Julie Mingo ID 83271 Yes

379 2013-09-18 16:20:58 John Whitman CA 93001 Yes

Organic farming is for the most part small farming. It is difficult enough to make a living without 

added encumbrances.

380 2013-09-18 16:31:29 Madelyn Jackson OR 97423 Yes

381 2013-09-18 16:47:26 Carole Anne Rose ArKS 72742 Yes

382 2013-09-18 16:48:29 David Walsh MN 56308 Yes

383 2013-09-18 19:02:52 Cara Cordoni CA 94117 No Protect our current organic farmers - hear their side, not just the PAID side!

384 2013-09-18 19:31:32 Julie Bosma WA 98932 Yes I do not support an organic checkoff program. Page 19
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

385 2013-09-18 20:02:29 Brad Mallett SC 29483 No

As a coffee roaster that is required to submit to lengthly and costly measures to insure that what I 

buy is given out as organic I find it offensive that we have to come to these measures. Please 

make the playing field fair to all concerned. B

386 2013-09-18 20:29:58 Neil Austin OR 97381 Yes

387 2013-09-18 20:35:06 william smith mo 64641 Yes

388 2013-09-18 21:46:05 Richard Parker NC 28125 Yes

I refuse to support any program which doesn't allow organic products to be showcased for the 

superior products they are.

389 2013-09-18 22:39:27 Rebecca Shirley CA 94014 Yes

390 2013-09-18 23:04:13 Elmer Lehmann KS 66857 Yes

The USDA is not promoting Organic Farming now, so why would I expect that to change if there is 

an organic check-off fund?

391 2013-09-18 23:10:12 Alison Frost NY 13158 Yes

392 2013-09-19 07:46:39 John Saeli NY 14456 Yes

393 2013-09-19 07:50:24 Amy Krasne IA 51503 Yes

394 2013-09-19 08:25:22 ken crouse CO 81612 Yes

395 2013-09-19 09:04:32 Douglas Baty MT 59831 Yes

396 2013-09-19 10:23:21 Fred Grice Jr. MI 49452 Yes

397 2013-09-19 10:31:22 Doug Beretta CA 95407 Yes

398 2013-09-19 10:52:23 Jeffrey Creque CA 94952 Yes A mandatory check off is not helpful.

399 2013-09-19 11:24:52 Hakon Torjesen MN 55946 Yes

400 2013-09-19 11:28:28 Andrea Aronson CO 81611 Yes

401 2013-09-19 12:09:16 Gary McDonald IL 62704 Yes

402 2013-09-19 12:32:32 Norma Tofanelli CA 94515 Yes Stop trying to kill organic. Consumers want us and we want to farm this sustainable way.

403 2013-09-19 12:46:23 Donna Meyer Mn 55041 Yes Why should I support something that I can't advertise my product with?!

404 2013-09-19 16:14:41 David Trumble NH 03281 Yes

405 2013-09-19 18:02:16 Bettie Ann Hough CA 95968 Yes

406 2013-09-19 18:08:52 Dehl Jossi OR 97124 Yes

407 2013-09-19 21:18:21 Mark Wilson MD 21613 Yes

408 2013-09-19 22:17:03 Elliott Driscoll IA 52361 Yes

409 2013-09-19 22:21:27 Craig Bruns MN 56534 Yes

410 2013-09-19 22:53:58 Alfred Farris TN 37141 Yes

411 2013-09-20 02:06:20 Colleen Wolfisberg WA 98247 Yes

412 2013-09-20 05:52:50 Thomas Green AR 72823 Yes Any additional taxation on our business will put us out of business. 

413 2013-09-20 05:55:09 Heidi Tafel NY 13843 Yes

414 2013-09-20 11:19:40 Ron Parling MI 48880 Yes

As per reasons cited above check-off programs are ineffective and unfair. We don't need another 

one!

Page 20
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

415 2013-09-20 13:06:23 David Rottinghaus IA 50458 Yes

I'm sure big ag companies are pushing the check-off with the politicians because they don't get 

the money out of the little farmers that don't use their chemicals and non organic inputs.

416 2013-09-20 15:14:53 Janet Muther CA 94952 No

417 2013-09-20 20:32:49 Pam Moore NY 13812 Yes

418 2013-09-20 20:33:45 Rob Moore NY 13812 Yes

419 2013-09-21 13:00:02 Tyler Bolton PA 19530 Yes

420 2013-09-22 00:05:01 Valerie Wall WA 98223 Yes

421 2013-09-22 10:31:07 Kevin Ryan IA 50140 Yes

422 2013-09-22 13:51:03 Mark Sievers CA 94534 Yes

423 2013-09-22 20:35:55 Donna Marie CA 92589 Yes

424 2013-09-23 04:35:30 Lee Thomas MN 56560 Yes Just another tax.

425 2013-09-23 07:24:00 John Knutson CA 95357 Yes

426 2013-09-23 15:06:56 Dean & Jan Pigman WA 98513 Yes

427 2013-09-24 07:44:11 henk postmus TX 76446 Yes

428 2013-09-24 16:37:59 David Via OR 97461 Yes OTA does not represent our farm. We prefer to do our own advertizing at our own expense.

429 2013-09-24 17:48:31 Mike Peters WI 53585 Yes The comments above on this petition say it all. Amen.

430 2013-09-25 15:20:31 Bill Casey NY 13020 Yes

431 2013-09-25 15:28:37 Joanne Casey NY 13020 Yes

432 2013-09-26 14:49:47 James Shuler NY 14048 Yes

433 2013-09-27 18:57:01 Tierra Cantisano Ca 94965 No

434 2013-09-27 20:57:24 Paul Dolan CA 95482 Yes

435 2013-09-27 22:03:59 Alitza Blough IA 52556 No

The USDA will pick something banal to promote such as educating the consumer about the 

difference between "natural" and "certified organic" instead of something controversial, such as 

the carbon sequestering power of organic production.

436 2013-09-27 23:05:29 Seth Rosmarin CA 95960 Yes

I am a farmer, consultant,and inspector and I think this bill is bad for small farms and community 

based foods causing economic hardships on an already stressed industry. 

437 2013-09-27 23:07:30 SEan Coder ArKS 72701 Yes

This program would not be in organic farmers' best interest, as evidenced by the other 

commodity programs that don't ultimately benefit farmers. Keep hands off organics! 

438 2013-09-28 00:30:12 Jan Dietrick CA 93001 Yes

People recognize my product and all good organic products by the obvious quality. We don't 

need this kind of marketing help at all.

439 2013-09-28 00:51:09 Elisabeth Lambert CA 93704 No

I want to keep small local organic farms viable. No check off program. Keep corporate farms out 

of the organic farming business because they will irreparably corrupt it.

440 2013-09-28 01:02:30 A. Wolf CA 92117 No

441 2013-09-28 01:03:27 Lindsey Larson Ca 90291 No

442 2013-09-28 01:13:15 Trevor Estlow CA 95525 Yes Page 21
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

443 2013-09-28 01:24:41 Carla Curle CA 93955 No

444 2013-09-28 01:25:26 Wendy Thiessen TX 77023 No

445 2013-09-28 01:25:51 Bre Perry CO 80910 No

I have family and friends who are farmers. We have to make the system better instead of 

overburdening it with more government fees and paperwork. They need subsidies and tax 

breaks. 

446 2013-09-28 01:29:52 Lisa Henke CA 92705 No

447 2013-09-28 01:32:28 catherine callaghan IL 60008 No

448 2013-09-28 01:34:23 Heather Dziczek AZ 85210 No

449 2013-09-28 01:40:00 Jane Rittenhouse OR 97405 Yes I work for an organic farmer.

450 2013-09-28 02:02:15 patti rich ca 94606 Yes

451 2013-09-28 02:49:11 matt miller MO 65201 No

452 2013-09-28 04:40:27 Bridget O'Brien WA 98109 No

453 2013-09-28 04:53:13 Velma Wagatsuma HI 96734 Yes

454 2013-09-28 05:25:31 Kathleen McMillan NY 10003 No

455 2013-09-28 06:04:09 Cindy Power WA 98407 No I support you 100%!

456 2013-09-28 06:06:47 Kathy Lindner CA 96117 Yes We are 'organic' in practice, but we do not use that word because we are not certified.

457 2013-09-28 07:39:55 phyllis crawford MD 21740 No

458 2013-09-28 07:50:30 tamika phillips ri 02914 No

I buy organic foods for many reasons even though I'm unable to afford lots. This is the only type 

of food that is safe for food allergy sufferes

459 2013-09-28 08:02:04 Lisa Esposito PA 19107 No

460 2013-09-28 08:07:32 Maryanne Allen FL 32789 No

461 2013-09-28 09:09:06 Jodi Brown LA 70121 No I do NOT want an Organic check off program.

462 2013-09-28 09:10:19 Kyle Klingman WI 53704 No

463 2013-09-28 09:12:45 John McGrath CA 94580 No

I am a consumer who like to buy organic products, and I am happy without the mandatory 

programs because we already have enough information to tell the difference between "natural" 

and "organic". If the small farmers are forced to pay more fines under the new program, it can 

risk putting the farmers out of business and we the people would have less access to untainted 

foods.

464 2013-09-28 09:51:22 Ashley Shaloo NJ 08540 Yes

465 2013-09-28 10:43:34 Amy Kelley TX 78734 No Quality is obvious with organic products. No need to increase their fees!!!

466 2013-09-28 10:43:35 Andrea Acevedo Ca 91739 No

Public Awareness is spreading on the many benefits of organic products. Sales will continue to 

increase and marketing is irrelevant. Word of mouth is much more powerful than marketing 

tactics. 

467 2013-09-28 11:45:05 Laura Taylor Co 81647 No

468 2013-09-28 11:54:35 Sheila Wyeth Il 61046 Yes

469 2013-09-28 12:07:06 vicky passmore GA 30506 No Page 22
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

470 2013-09-28 12:57:34 Torrey Reade NJ 08079 Yes

471 2013-09-28 13:48:27 Susan Sauceda Ca 93727 No

472 2013-09-28 14:46:12 Nikki Arce CA 92404 No

473 2013-09-28 15:25:04 christine baker MO 65201 No

474 2013-09-29 01:23:20 joseph dietz MN 56236 Yes Stop the check off!!!

475 2013-09-29 08:36:55 kristan floyd SC 29506 Yes

476 2013-09-29 08:54:11 Paul Delisle IA 52556 No

477 2013-09-29 09:19:34 Jean Marie Hall IA 52043 No

478 2013-09-29 09:56:17 Myron McVeigh IA 52632 No

479 2013-09-29 10:05:58 robert arbuckle ia 52240 No

This proposal only supports large producers, not the small producers that purchase from. This 

proposal will only increase the price I pay for products that I am alreadt committed to. 

480 2013-09-29 10:51:41 Julia Ahlers Ness MN 56218 Yes

481 2013-09-29 12:23:51 Wolfgang Rougle CA 96022 Yes

Organic farmers, esp. those of us who market direct to consumers, already do more to promote 

farming and local (and domestic) food consumption than all the check-off programs in the U.S. 

combined. There's no way I want to spend ANY of my hard-earned income supporting some 

marketers, graphic designers, lobbyists and middlemen who aren't even focused on Organic.

482 2013-09-29 12:24:27 Jim Gerritsen ME 04735 Yes

483 2013-09-29 13:41:38 Kelly Garner CA 95821 No

484 2013-09-29 13:42:13 Barbara Blough IL 60645 No

I EAT organic foods for the health of my body. I support organic FARMING. I support organic 

FARMERS. Clean shit belongs on organic farming land. The rest of it requires cleaning - I refer to 

the stuff shoveled at us from the USDA Federal Research and Promotion Programs.

485 2013-09-29 13:50:06 Gwenne Baile NJ 08108 No

I am an organic home gardener and on the Executive Committee of an organically-grown 

Community Garden. 

486 2013-09-29 14:59:55 steve mcgowan ca 94941 Yes

I do not support an Organic Checkoff Program. Signed Sept 29, 2013 Steve McGowan, 

heirloomketchup@aol.com

487 2013-09-29 15:42:21 Susan Brown CA 91942 No

I am strongly opposed to the corporate effort for organic farmers to fund their promotion 

activities. It isn't needed. 

488 2013-09-29 16:07:35 Dorothy Drees IA 52556 No

489 2013-09-29 17:09:36 Diane Vance IA 52556 No

I am an organic eater and support my local farmers market that sells organic foods. I also buy 

organic products at the 2 local grocery stores.

490 2013-09-29 17:36:50 Diane Davis IA 52556 No NO to the organic check-off program

491 2013-09-29 18:27:43 Marybeth Gardam IA 52405 No

Making it harder for organic farmers makes it harder for all of us to eat well and be healthy. Food 

security is National Security. There's a reason Churchill told people to plant victory gardens. 

When organic farmers win, we all win!

Page 23
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

492 2013-09-29 20:14:36 Kenneth Langen CA 92008 No

493 2013-09-30 08:53:20 Brad Jennings IA 52556 No

494 2013-09-30 09:22:51 Jack Erisman IL 62557 Yes

495 2013-09-30 21:10:55 Cathy Holden CA 95865 No I am an organic gardener and consumer. I want a fair shake for organic producers. Thank you.

496 2013-10-01 11:31:34 Dee LeVan CA 95959 No

497 2013-10-01 13:01:14 mark wheeler OR 97527 Yes Bad idea!!!! Vote it down. Mark Wheeler Pacific Botanicals

498 2013-10-01 19:37:22 Evelyn Riebe IL 60929 Yes

No the organic movement will do their own research so as not to be tainted by the commercial 

pushers of GM grain and chemical fertilizers. 

499 2013-10-01 23:56:24 Lisa Rowe CA 95960 No

People who choose organic already pay more money to make a better food choice. No more cost 

added to the organic farmers!

500 2013-10-02 11:37:20 Hershel Carmichael NM 88132 Yes They have never done one thing for me!!

501 2013-10-05 09:00:35 Scott Paladino NJ 07461 Yes

502 2013-10-05 09:16:37 Tim Cutler NJ 07960 No Obviously unconstitutional.

503 2013-10-05 09:49:08 Fern Hickey NJ 08560 Yes

504 2013-10-05 11:13:27 Ashley Shaloo NJ 08540 Yes

505 2013-10-05 11:56:40 Diane Skoss NJ 07059 Yes

We pay enough in fees to get certified as organic. We do not need further economic burdens. Let 

organic farmers do their jobs; support and publish their research. Don't charge them for 

marketing campaigns they don't need and won't do them any good.

506 2013-10-05 19:50:26 Al Esposito NJ 07865 Yes

507 2013-10-06 07:58:27 Jeff Moyer Pa 19534 Yes Stop this Prgram now

508 2013-10-06 10:05:28 Connor Murphy CO 80306 Yes

This provision will damage small scale producers and educational non profits like the one that I 

work for. We are small enough that we've been doing our own educational work for years. If my 

customers have a question about certification they ask me. This year our organization is 

struggling to meet our operating budget. We will be negatively impacted by an organic check off 

program.

509 2013-10-06 11:42:17 Judith Robinson NJ 08540 No

I am a farmers market manager and have only small farms as members. They need to be 

supported as a sustainable local supply of food to our community. So helping them to promote 

and educate the public is essential. Large corporate farms already receive most of the 

government benefits so make sure that the ones who really need the promotion receive it. 

510 2013-10-06 18:28:28 Lindsay Napolitano NJ 08825 Yes

511 2013-10-07 08:46:44 Orin Moyer PA 19547 Yes Check Off programs are a side arm of corporate Ag giants...lets try to keep them out of organics 

512 2013-10-07 10:30:05 David Heiens KS 67410 Yes Checkoff invite big corporations that ruin family farms

Page 24
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

513 2013-10-07 11:27:40 TG Mueller NJ 08005 Yes

The original Organic Standards and Certification process and verification was established and 

functioned very well without USDA intrusion. The USDA usurped and changed the effective 

organic certification process to allow large agribusiness access to the organic market. The USDA 

has corrupted the original standards and imposed additional costs on the small organic farmer. I 

am opposed to any further intrusion by the government and its agencies into organic farming.

514 2013-10-07 22:14:17 Andrea Bustos de Romagna NY 11741 No

515 2013-10-08 10:24:12 Laura Barnaud SD 57762 Yes

516 2013-10-08 10:24:56 Bernard Barnaud SD 57762 Yes

517 2013-10-09 07:41:06 Jeff Hill KS 67730 Yes We do not need an organic check off program. 

518 2013-10-09 13:22:39 Michael Blahut NJ 07439 Yes

519 2013-10-10 13:07:22 Carla Curle CA 93955 No

520 2013-10-14 02:02:45 Leon Morton NC 27253 No

521 2013-10-18 02:10:00 robert ricahrd OR 97210 No

I own a food enterprise that depends upon a viable local, organic supply. Please do not introduce 

regulations that make it harder for small farming operations to produce organic product.

522 2013-10-18 08:29:38 Carroll Wade N Y 14855 Yes

523 2013-10-18 10:50:33 Janet Cowling MI 48176 No I

524 2013-10-18 12:10:56 Cecilia Bowman IN 46118 Yes

525 2013-10-18 14:03:29 Kathy Jaffey IA 52556 No

There are several proposals afoot that would increase costs for organic farmers and further widen 

the gulf between the price for organic food and commodity crops, and would also very likely 

reduce the number of organic farms and farmers by making it too difficult for organic farmers to 

make a living. I strongly oppose these measures, and suggest that legislators would better spend 

their time reducing or eliminating subsidies for gmo seeds and their companion chemical 

treatments. The sheer quantity of chemicals required to keep gm crops going is killing off the bee 

population, polluting the water and creating the dead zone in the gulf of mexico. These are real 

problems that regulations need to address. The cost of commodity farmers not using cover crops 

to hold the soil in place and to absorb rain water and melted snow during the 8 months of the 

year when corn and soy are not growing is enormus and is carried by the public, not the 

commodity farmers who are getting the big subsidies to carry on the practises that pollute the 

water, erode the so8l, cause the dead zpne and reslult in less nturitious food for the consumer.

526 2013-10-22 12:40:27 Amy Krasne IA 51503 Yes

As an organic farmer, I am opposed the the Organic Check-Off program- honestly all check offs. I 

would be better served to keep my money to use as I like for promotion of organics. 

527 2013-10-22 21:14:58 Blakeley Kim CA 94122 No

528 2013-10-23 10:19:10 RaeMarie Timm NC 28451 No

Page 25
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

529 2013-10-28 00:27:29 Michael Monthey WI 53901 No

I am a consumer of organic food products. The main reason I back this petition is because organic 

farmers deserve to make a better living on producing and providing safer and naturally 

wholesome foods for us to eat, not to be victims of government corruption and corporate greed. 

If the Organic Check-off Program is passed, we will lose value within the organic food system in 

the long run. 

530 2013-10-29 16:44:26 Diane Adams IN 46960 No

I work with many organic and natural farmers, they do not need the additional cost exhaustion. 

They have children to feed and seeds to purchase. They can donate if they choose, and their 

money is theirs to choose.

531 2013-10-29 23:02:13 alexandra loureiro NJ 07974 No

organic food should not have to pay to be labeled organic, genetically modified food NEED to be 

labeled, we need to know if our food is not "natural"

532 2013-10-31 17:05:09 Daniel Gasser OH 44276 Yes

533 2013-10-31 17:18:33 James Gasser OH 44276 Yes

534 2013-11-04 09:16:44 Michelle Benrud MN 55027 Yes

535 2013-11-04 09:16:53 Roger Benrud MN 55027 Yes

536 2013-11-06 20:12:38 Stacy Shaker WI 53929 Yes

537 2013-11-06 20:14:24 Tim Shaker WI 53929 Yes

538 2013-11-09 09:52:01 Johnny Stansell Tx 79601 No

The people who sing the praises of any check-off are the ones running the program. A 

government program with fat salaries and pensions that take money away from the farmer. 

"Got Milk?", very successful??? milk consumption down cheese up, but it's not "Got Cheese" 

Do car companies collect a dollar a 100 pounds from car owners to advertise as a separate 

program run by the government??? Currently organic gardener with a goal of an organic dairy. 

All said the gov people who will shove this down the throats of farmers can't help it because 

there is a lot of money to be made off them!!!

539 2013-11-09 09:54:48 Margaret Passarello N.J. 08021 No

540 2013-11-11 21:58:56 Amanda Freitas RI 02903 No I am an organic eater.

541 2013-11-16 17:04:06 Laurin Vinson MO 64137 No Please support organic farming and natural food production.

542 2013-11-19 16:08:55 Gary Bechtold NJ 08848 Yes

543 2013-11-28 21:43:04 Ron Ackerman IL 61726 Yes

544 2013-12-10 10:23:00 Sam Welsch NE 68502 No

I certify many organic farmers and I do not see any benefit to farmers under the proposed 

Organic Check-Off program. Sales of organic products has been averaging increases of over 10% 

per year during the past ten years since the implementation of the National Organic Program. 

Maintaining the integrity of that program so consumers continue to trust the USDA Organic Seal 

is important and necessary to sustaining the growth of organic trade. The proposed check-off is 

not needed.

545 2013-12-10 12:17:04 douglas hartkopf ME 04910 Yes

546 2013-12-10 18:24:44 Ann Wilson ME 04438 Yes

Page 26
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

547 2013-12-10 23:38:03 Tim Cada NE 68629 Yes

I have contacted both of my senators in the last couple of years. Sen Fischer's office actually 

called today about this, and Sen Johannes did call back last year and asked questions about this. 

They are interested. I am 100% AGAINST this check off. I should have thought of this myself to 

fund my work.......

548 2013-12-11 07:30:06 Klaas Martens NY 14527 Yes

549 2013-12-11 10:14:25 Richard Parker NC 28125 Yes

550 2013-12-13 12:40:33 Maria Amador CA 95540 No

551 2013-12-20 23:32:24 Linda Rodriguez WI 54665 Yes

We are already putting in 18 hour days while losing more than $30,000 last year alone. We are on 

food stamps and Medicaid. DO NOT INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF CHARITY WE ARE ALREADY 

GIVING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BY MAKING US PAY FOR SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T EVEN 

PROMOTE THE HEALTHFUL MILK WE ARE SUPPLYING. Thanks for your time.

552 2013-12-27 10:07:55 Steph Beneng NY 12936 Yes

553 2014-01-01 22:56:04 alan van dyk n.y. 12866 No

554 2014-01-14 19:51:38 Lisa Turner ME 04032 Yes

555 2014-01-17 09:56:27 Linda Voith NY 14711 No

Stop creating mandates that stress the profit marginess of organic dairy farmers. the organic 

farmers are being pushed out of business. You are squeezing them too hard.

556 2014-02-02 22:31:40 Steve Kimball NY 14733 Yes

557 2014-02-08 12:17:09 Hans Wolfisberg WA 98247 Yes

558 2014-03-10 07:34:26 Linda Voith NY 14712 No Please discontinue the check off program or exempt all organic farmers from it.

559 2014-03-15 16:02:38 Bill Casey NY 13020 Yes

560 2014-03-15 18:04:07 cecil linscott jr ME 04438 Yes

561 2014-04-29 19:45:37 Erika Worden NY 13865 Yes

562 2014-06-06 22:42:02 Jim Goodman WI 53968 Yes

Generic advertising does not work. Tell me how they propose to promote organic without 

disparaging non-organic food?

563 2014-06-07 06:14:41 Dave Minar Mn 56071 Yes We don't need this unwanted tax.

564 2014-06-07 10:13:58 Julie Rawson MA 01005 Yes

565 2014-06-10 20:14:49 Charles Brault MD 21788 Yes I am opposed to all check-off programs.

566 2014-06-10 22:27:27 Tim Cada NE 68629 Yes NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO AND NO------ NO ORGANIC CHECKOFF!!!!!!!

567 2014-06-10 22:30:48 Richard Parker nc 28125 Yes Less government is better. 

568 2014-06-11 06:15:24 Charlie Greene NY 13118 Yes Thank you for providing this opportunity to stand free of the OTA and USDA-NOP check off.

569 2014-06-11 10:21:10 Diana Saxton NY 14775 Yes I am against an organic check off!!

570 2014-06-13 21:16:47 Dana Haugli IA 50423 Yes

I am 100% opposed to checkoffs in all forms, but especially an organic checkoff. As far as I am 

concerned, they are un-American - more like Soviet-style "collective" thinking. The Founding 

Fathers must be rolling over in their graves. It's this kind of taxation and government 

intrusiveness that makes me sad for our country.

571 2014-06-14 07:57:09 Stephanie Beneng NY 12936 Yes

Page 27
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

572 2014-06-19 15:11:53 Bill Jessup CA 92274 Yes I would be excluded from the proposed assessment. Opposed nonetheless.

573 2014-06-21 16:30:48 Philip Davis CO 81419 Yes

574 2014-06-22 15:02:39 Lynda aGRESTI az 85379 No

575 2014-06-22 17:50:21 Jeanne Brooks ME 04066 No

Although I am not a farmer, I agree with this petition since I support our local organic dairy 

farmers and trust them if they do not believe in the "Check-Off" Program.

576 2014-06-23 10:06:24 Gay Timmons CA 95030 No

I am a certified organic handler (Oh, Oh Organic, Inc.). I am completely opposed to this program 

as written. It is a tax without representation. I see certified organic ingredients into the cosmetic 

industry. This industry will not receive any benefit for the cost involved.

577 2014-06-24 11:27:39 Susannah Smith VA 24013 No

578 2014-06-26 14:46:15 E Hudson WI 54630 No Organic nursery business and gardens since 1975.

579 2014-07-04 10:59:30 Pete Gasper KS 66701 Yes

The USDA cannot be trusted. The check-off system is fundamentally broken from the farmer's 

perspective. It is money that has been, is, and will be used against our interests.

580 2014-07-06 06:51:45 Tony Marzolino NY 13736 Yes

581 2014-07-12 12:34:54 Arden Landis PA 19540 Yes

I am totally against any form of check off Let the companies that sell the products promote them 

if there such a big return on the money spent.

582 2014-07-12 13:28:48 David Minar MN 56071 Yes We do not need an Organic checkoff

583 2014-07-12 19:01:49 Rich Larson VT 05774 No

Working toward organic certification. We can manage our own businesses, thank you. I DO NOT 

WANT A GOVERNMENT-MANDATED 'CHECK-OFF'. I DO MY OWN ADVERTIZING, THANKYOU. 

584 2014-07-17 22:56:39 janet a baker WA 98022 Yes

As a dairy farmer in Washington State we have paid into our State Dairy Promotional program. 

Since the National program was instituted, and a good share of the money that is collected in this 

state, and now goes into the national program we have become disenchanted with Federal 

Promotion Programs. I am not at all comfortable with "The Organic Trade Association" and its 

policies and lack of transparencies, and its representation of Processors, who tend to make a 

profit under all circumstance, and farmer do not. Promised increased sales (the reason for the 

promotion deducts) have not proved to be so. Sincerely Janet and Robert T. Baker, Osceola 

Jerseys, Organic Valley Producers, 

585 2014-08-11 06:28:06 TONY MARZOLINO NY 13736 Yes

586 2014-08-11 07:34:03 Rich Larson VT 05774 Yes

I don't want any government 'help'. I market my own products, and it is very effective. I will not 

pay into a public cesspool. 

587 2014-08-13 08:04:39 arthur harvey ME 04220 Yes

The trend of history and science is in our favor. We do not need the "help" of the advertising 

industry.

588 2014-08-21 09:37:27 Dale Johnson WI 54162 Yes

589 2014-08-23 12:08:12 Nora Owens MA 01342 Yes

590 2014-08-23 12:28:03 Eric Glasgow Ma 02535 Yes

591 2014-08-23 13:02:16 Johnny Stansell TX 79601 Yes

Page 28
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

592 2014-08-23 13:59:40 anne phillips ny 13045 Yes

593 2014-08-25 08:13:41 Trent Hendricks Mo 65692 Yes

594 2014-08-28 22:05:32 Liana McCoy Mn 56466 No

I am a black angus beef farmer, formally registered neither the beef check-off or the American 

Angus Association has helped my sales or increased them. Organic farmer or not a federally 

mandated check-off for any commodity or being organic is just taking money from the farmers 

who struggle to make ends meet to begin with. I think the idea of MOSES and the organic 

conferences with farmer involvement minus all the big Ag or government sticking there noses or 

sticky fingers in is much better. I feel there are better ways to research and prove organic and 

sustainable farming is way better than the 'newer' conventional/chemical farming.

595 2014-09-14 00:40:53 Adam Sheridan GA 30516 Yes

596 2014-09-17 17:53:46 Florence Minar MN 56071 Yes

597 2014-09-18 09:40:33 don faulkner VT 05602 No

previously an organic farmer, my wife and I know that Organic farmers almost without exception 

vehemently oppose the proposed check-off program as do we and probably most of any Organic 

consumers who are aware of its Negative effects on Organic producers and failure to help Organic 

Agriculture much as the Beef and Dairy Check-offs failure.

598 2014-09-20 20:50:55 Klaas Martens NY 14527 Yes

599 2014-10-27 12:19:28 Ellen McConnell NJ 08872 No

600 2014-11-30 01:53:18 Tony Marzolino NY 13736 Yes

601 2015-02-16 18:42:46 Alan Gordon CA 93003 Yes

I cannot stress how emphatically I am opposed to ANY checkoff program. We will do just fine 

without any involuntarily imposed additional tax(s) on our farms. The host of current regulations 

are necessary, though onerous, to protect the integrity of Organics. Additional expense, 

administered by those with a different agenda is a burden unneeded and unwelcome. 

602 2015-02-18 19:07:26 Conor MacDonald ME 4574 Yes

603 2015-03-01 16:13:12 David Minar MN 56071 Yes

604 2015-03-07 10:55:46 Paul Van Amburgh NY 13459 Yes

605 2015-03-07 12:26:52 John O'Meara ME 04762 Yes Organic farmers do not support this proposed program.

606 2015-03-14 07:54:25 Linda Voith NY 14711 No

I am a consumer who supports the efforts of organic producers. The producers overwhelmingly 

oppose the check off program, and state thatvit does give them fair representation. They state 

that it will tax rhem for overseas organic products of their competitors who would be exempt 

from the check off. For all of these reasons and many others, i oppose the check off program. 

607 2015-03-15 10:50:03 Lyle Edwards VT 05874 Yes

608 2015-03-15 15:23:53 Steve Straits OH 44687 Yes

 I do not trust the USDA Federal Research and Promotion Programs. This only benefits marketers 

and retailers. They are the ones that need to pay for their own promotion!!! I am producing a 

product that is already in short supply. I need all the income I can get to support my own 

expansion!!! Page 29
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

609 2015-03-18 14:39:34 Mitch Blumenthal FL 34240 Yes

610 2015-04-13 07:41:50 Joseph Sawyer NH 03608 Yes

611 2015-04-16 20:08:47 Kathie Arnold NY 13158 Yes I am against any kind of compulsory check-off program.

612 2015-04-16 21:23:43 Tony Marzolino NY 13736 Yes

613 2015-04-17 07:05:52 Charles Brault MD 21788 Yes

614 2015-04-28 08:01:21 Klaas Martens NY 14527 Yes

615 2015-05-06 11:38:59 Diane Kistler NY 13637 Yes

616 2015-05-06 12:41:09 Phil Barbato NY 11901 Yes

617 2015-05-06 16:08:48 Bob Schultz NY 14701 Yes

618 2015-05-06 22:01:57 Fred Griffen NY 13040 Yes

I also do not trust the OTA because in my opinion they are a mouthpiece for large corporate 

organic entities and are also behind and/or support efforts to allow more synthetic ingredients 

and inputs in organic agriculture which undermine the essential and original standards 

established by the NOSB.

619 2015-05-08 09:36:27 Pat Sharpless NY 14489 Yes

620 2015-05-08 13:17:18 Fred Jodry NY, NJ 10805 No As above stated!

621 2015-05-09 07:57:54 Nadia Maczaj NY 12428 Yes

622 2015-05-09 07:59:01 Oleh Maczaj NY 12428 Yes

623 2015-05-10 13:11:56 Anne Schwartz US: WA98283 Yes

Thank you very much for putting together this website. I worked with many others to draft and 

pass our WA state organic rule, and the Federal Rule on Organics. It is very disheartening to see 

the state of affairs these days. Your website will be very helpful for me as I work to engage my 

colleagues across the state to stand against the check off. It will not be easy, but we do have our 

own example of the WA State Apple Commission which was reduced by court order due to their 

own misuse of funds. Thank you again.

624 2015-05-11 21:27:49 Bruce Drinkman WI 54013 Yes

625 2015-05-11 22:23:14 Daniel Zufall NY 13658 Yes

The Organic farming industry does not need a "check-Off" program, because the various co-ops 

and businesses are able to successfully promote the industry themselves. 

626 2015-05-13 07:55:00 Peter Martens NY 14527 Yes

What direct benefit will the farmers paying this proposed checkoff experience? There is already 

more demand than can possibly be filled by current certified production and prices are stable and 

high. A checkoff is used by processors and industry groups to increase demand for a product and 

through increased demand, increase price. If demand is already greater than supply and price 

already high what can this accomplish? It will simply drive more imports of organic food from 

other countries and could actually undermine the reputation of organic in the marketplace 

because of questionable oversight in other countries. This is a bad deal for everyone except 

those who would receive a healthy salary for administering the program at the OTA

627 2015-05-13 08:12:49 Ila Terry NY 13646 Yes

Page 30
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

628 2015-05-13 12:15:55 JON KOWAL NJ 08822 Yes

IDENTIFY WHERE AND HOW THE MONEY IS GOING TO BE SPENT, AND NOT BENEFIT THE FEW 

LARGE AGRI BUSINESSES, BUT CONCENTRATE ON THE SMALL FARMER WHO NEEDS THE MOST 

HELP.

629 2015-05-13 14:42:23 Robert Moore NY 13812 Yes

630 2015-05-13 14:54:27 Pam Moore ny 13812 Yes

Organic is a grassroots movement that came about without the use of or need for a checkoff 

funded program. Much of the confusion in the commodity marketplace is due to lack of 

regulation and oversight regarding the terminology and labelling allowed (or required) on 

product packaging. The mandatory labelling of GMOs and Country Of Origin on food will both 

boost sales in the organic sector without the need for further promotion by the organic industry. 

631 2015-05-13 17:44:46 Sally Fox CA 95606 Yes

632 2015-05-13 21:53:16 Gregg Stiner ME 04654 Yes

Small farmers need to have an automatic voice, not measured by how much they feel like paying 

in. The market pressures are so high, margins too tight, justifying a bureaucratic payout is lunacy. 

Locally sourced organic food is better.

633 2015-05-18 10:09:04 Bryce Stephens KS 67643 Yes

The OTA is not the first of its kind of a generic checkoff. The conventional fruit and vegetable 

industry in 2009 proposed a generic multi commodity checkoff through PBH (Produce for Better 

Health Foundation). It FAILED. http://www.perishablepundit.com/docs/kaiserbackgroundbrief.pdf Here is the paper that created concern and opposition for the Generic PBH 

checkoff.

634 2015-05-18 10:10:46 Daniel Pace NJ 08534 No

Please do not use my email for any other solicitation. I do not normally give out my email address 

but am making an exception in this case.

635 2015-05-18 10:16:05 Dave Hunt NJ 08867 No

636 2015-05-18 10:20:40 Krista Coleman NJ 08823 Yes

637 2015-05-18 10:27:05 Christopher Bujara NJ 07013 No

638 2015-05-18 10:50:20 carol jagiello nj 07403 No

The Organic Program does not need another program designed to break small farmers. National 

Organics Board is increasingly packed with large producers corrupting the intention of organic 

food to please Big Ag who want a larger easier share of the markets. With a handful of very large 

profitable companies already getting half or more of all farm subsidies, an increased effort must 

be made to assist all producers to maximize their clean and profitable efforts. Check off again 

hurts the Big Ag competition which again seems to be by design. My entire life I have strived to 

find the cleanest food possible after being raised on disgusting processed foods my Mom trusted 

and loved. As standards keep being degraded intentionally by USDA and now NOB, I personally 

seek out even smaller growers who are not labeled but trustworthy. The aforementioned have 

gone so far over the line with their bias against family and small farms, food safety and 

trustworthiness it has lost any credibility with anyone paying attention. Stop being enforcers for 

big ag - punishing farms who are no threat to big ag. Stop it, No Organic Checkoff.

639 2015-05-18 11:13:56 Susan Asack NJ 08540 Yes

640 2015-05-18 11:14:15 Jim & MeganGerritsen ME 04735 Yes Page 31
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

641 2015-05-18 11:56:49 Nora Pugliese NJ 078553 Yes

642 2015-05-18 12:54:16 Bud Feder NJ 07044 No

643 2015-05-18 13:57:04 Janice Hazeldine NJ 08520 Yes

let us choose our own way to advertise. I dont want to have my products railroaded by someone 

who has no idea about what I grow and I certainly dont want to have to pay for such garbage.

644 2015-05-18 14:16:31 WILLIAM SHADEL NJ 07735 No

645 2015-05-18 15:33:51 Sandi Robertson NJ 07720 No

Please don't make it harder for organic farmers and producers to make a decent wage. High 

quality organic foods can stand on their own.

646 2015-05-18 16:26:06 Lucy Kuiper PA 18343 Yes This only pushes out more farmers. Where will our food come.

647 2015-05-18 16:27:47 Dana Haugli IA 50423 Yes

Collectivism should have died with the Soviet Union, but it is alive and well in the United States 

through mandatory, "collective" agricultural checkoffs. Whatever happened to good old 

American independence? If Communism was scary, corporate cronyism is even scarier and has 

pretty much decimated rural communities and environmental health in the name of "feeding the 

world." Go ahead Comrade - be just another cog in the wheel, always looking over your shoulder. 

Vote for the organic checkoff.

648 2015-05-18 18:28:20 Richard Tregidgo PA 17532 Yes

649 2015-05-18 22:19:35 Wilson Klein nj 08721 Yes stop feeding the bureaucratic tapeworm

650 2015-05-19 05:31:29 Jeanne Lardino NJ 07876 No

651 2015-05-19 07:36:55 Suzanne Cunningham NJ 08844 Yes

652 2015-05-19 08:44:42 John Theobald NJ 07712 Yes

653 2015-05-19 19:29:25 Liz Bawden NY 13646 Yes

This check-off really does not serve the interests of the organic farmer. The proposed budget for 

administration costs alone should send off alarm bells that someone else will be profiting greatly 

from this check-off. 

654 2015-05-20 18:11:39 Jeff Larkey Ca 95060 Yes

 I have been farming organically since 1981. The OTA does not represent me. I have and will 

develop my own markets, thank you very much. Another example of "Farming the Farmer". 

Enough! This program was conceived and is being pushed by people who make their living off of 

the actual producers of Organic food. I am talking about the merchants, processors and large 

corporations who have consolidated the organic label into a generic faceless commodity. These 

kinds of programs offer absolutely no benefit to farmers but I will be forced to pay for their 

benefit. They are bleeding us to death with their fees so they can market "their" products. This, 

even though, by their own admission, the demand for organic products exceeds the supply. How 

does bleeding existing farmers dry create more organic farmers? 

655 2015-05-21 07:47:12 Rebecca Warsinsky WV 26501 No

As a consumer of organic food and products, and as an organic gardener, I oppose the Organic 

Check-Off Program. I oppose this Program because organic farmers' do not need or deserve to 

have their profitability negatively affected, which would then most likely be passed down to the 

consumer. It is an unfair and unnecessary program which will only hurt the organic farmer and in 

turn, the consumer.

Page 32
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

656 2015-05-22 08:09:17 Janet GRILLO NJ 08825 Yes

657 2015-05-22 12:48:58 Steve Bear WA 98368 Yes

http://alpenfirecider.com/ Who we are, part of an industry that has so few organic people 

involved.

658 2015-05-23 09:35:52 Chris Klebaum WA 98951 Yes If the people creating the checkoff think it's such a good idea, why don't they fund it themselves?

659 2015-05-23 17:33:46 Francoise La Monica MA 02459 No Consumer

660 2015-05-24 00:08:17 Alan Ward SD 57070 Yes

I do not want a check-off program of any kind. A check-off program is legalized stealing from the 

producers so some " industry representatives" can line their pockets at our expense!!

661 2015-05-25 10:35:57 Mariellen Keefe NJ 07920 No This program will negatively affect the growing community of small organic farmers in NJ. 

662 2015-05-25 20:20:49 Joel & Tami Shaw KS 67749 Yes The wording of the petition describes our feelings very well. Thank you.

663 2015-05-27 09:42:54 Ray Hoppes OH 43160 Yes

I don't want an organic checkoff. I do not need an organic checkoff. It's just a way for some 

middlemen to make money off us organic farmers. Let us just do our job and leave the politics 

out of it. Thanks

664 2015-05-27 09:47:51 Sue Rau NY 13662 Yes

665 2015-05-27 09:48:25 Andy Soutar NY 13662 Yes

666 2015-05-27 09:58:59 Roger Wechsler WA 98232 Yes

667 2015-05-27 10:02:18 Liana McCoy MN 56466 No

I am not a certified organic farmer, but I am a farmer and have had dealings with check-offs. In 

my opinion it did not help in advertising like they claimed to help sell my product. I have had to 

do all of my own advertising, etc to get decent prices for my commodity. I feel the check-offs are 

just another way to get money from farmers to pay for people to sit in ivory towers, get paid 

huge wages, do what the big corps wants, and still no nothing about the products themselves and 

the work that goes into them. I oppose any kind of check-off. Farmers just need to unite to help 

each other not let someone less knowledgeable about their work and products do it for them.

668 2015-05-27 10:26:37 Pam Moore ny 13812 Yes

669 2015-05-27 10:27:04 Robert Moore ny 13812 Yes

670 2015-05-27 10:33:00 Michael Evenson CA 95558 Yes

We don't need any promotion. The quality of our products speaks for itself and by the growth of 

our market, it does not need any help.

671 2015-05-27 10:59:53 Diane Burnett AZ 85338 No

672 2015-05-27 12:02:49 Rich Larson VT 05774 Yes

I will make my own advertising decisions, thank you. I do not want some government bureaucrat 

sucking off more of my small farm income. What a stupid idea. Who benefits? Follow the money, 

and find who benefits. Not small organic farmers!

673 2015-05-27 12:14:37 Diane Skoss NJ 07059 Yes

I'll be in charge of deciding how to spend my marketing budget, thank you very much. There's no 

extra cash in my kitty to pay for another government program.

674 2015-05-27 12:43:28 joseph Dietz mn 56236 Yes

675 2015-05-27 16:20:41 Elizabeth OHara CA 95678 No This is yet another way to promote corporate control of our food! 

Page 33
Entry 

Id

Date 

Signed 

Petition Name Last State

ZIP 

Code

I am an 

organic 

farmer. Comments

676 2015-05-27 20:06:47 Bonnie Wideman WI 54655 Yes We don't need this!

677 2015-05-27 22:07:27 Fred Griffen NY 13040 Yes

678 2015-05-27 22:24:32 bill ahlborn pa 18940 Yes

679 2015-05-30 21:52:01 A B MI 48302 Yes

680 2015-05-31 13:42:32 Charles Lambert Ill. 60914 Yes we need to promote organics but not to the benefits of corporation that want to take control

Page 34