RFP recap....Alaska Ag's MMM&S facility

(Photo credit: ADN)

The newly published RFP (Request for Proposal) released today, October 28th, 2016 bears a recap.

The notice linked below, is actually the second such RFP issued concerning the plant this year. When the first one was published, a tremendous amount of speculation ensued. Perhaps a coalition lead by members of the Alaska Farm Bureau, maybe. Or maybe someone who had a lengthy history of livestock production here. Or someone else, who was not well known-no one knew who, or how many would respond.

In the end, just one person responded, with a newly formed company. The man attended one of the BAC meetings, and to say his reception to his speech was chilly, is an understatement. He made some broad boasts, asserted dubious (at best) facts, and ended up insulting the entire industry by the time he was done. In the end, his proposal was turned down. Since that matter is private, one can only speculate, but it made the rounds (and Facebook groups) and was thoroughly discussed and dissected and he was (basically) publicly eviscerated. This author's hunch is that despite his pie-in-the-sky claims, he did not have enough ready capital (read: cash on hand) for daily operations-but again, just speculation. All that is known for certain is that Rean Brooks, and his company, are not in the running this time around either. 

The link below will take you to the actual notice for the plant:

https://aws.state.ak.us/OnlinePublicNotices/Notices/View.aspx?id=183370

Given that the state is highly unlikely to hire experienced, qualified people and get them trained within six weeks....and it's highly unlikely anyone is going to hand over $700,000 for the plant by the December 15th deadline-what happens then?

Department of Corrections personnel are not trained, do not have the necessary certifications, and still don't even provide their own transportation for the inmates. The Division of Ag does not have the manpower either, and neither does the Department of Natural Resources. So where will that leave all the small producers, the family homesteads, the small businesses that depend upon the plant being open for their livelihood?

You know the answer to that........

Alaska Ag....lost in the weeds

Like an invasive weed, that bane of every gardener everywhere, MMM&S issues never seem to be resolved. 

Oh, you thought that topic was gone....dead and buried in the mists of local history?

Alas no, the issues surrounding the plant, and the players involved, continues to spread discontent and confusion throughout Alaska Ag, and beyond.

Alaska Ag is not helped by the perception that the new Director of the Division of Ag, does not seem to be seriously committed to the plant. Not being a livestock producer, one could possibly excuse the inattention...but being tasked to tend all of Alaska Ag does not mean the Director should be able to pick and choose which sectors to protect, promote, or preserve.  If one listens to the latest audio recording of the BAC (Board of Agricultural Conservation) meeting on October 24th, who oversees the plant...the frustration is clearly evident. The farmers present want a solution, and the bureaucrat(s) present fall back on procedure and protocol. And in the middle: Every producer who uses, or hopes to use, the plant waits with bated breath.

Over the course of the summer, a curious event happened which involved a plant production manager, the Director of the Division of Agriculture, and the Alaska State Troopers.  It is fairly well known that a plant production manager was escorted off the premises, by a Trooper....and ended up taking a couple weeks' leave while the matter was sorted out. Whether or not we, the public, will ever learn what happened and why, is an open question.

Recently, it was rumored that all three employees had given notice of termination of employment with the state, effective December 15th.  It's a small community, so of course rumors tend to make the rounds and it wasn't long before verbal confirmation was obtained.  Yet, according to DNR (who seemingly hires for the plant) they have yet to get notification in writing.

But that aside, the problem is this:  IF the state makes an exception and is allowed to hire replacements (keeping in mind the DoC training and/or certification is needed for inmates to continue to work at the plant) it isn't going to happen as fast as December 15th. Generally speaking, employment openings are advertised for at least 30 days. Then, the review and interview process takes place, with selection following typically 60 to 90 days after first posting of the job vacancy. Given the glacial pace of the hiring process, it does not seem likely that any people hired to work at the plant through the fiscal year, will get any training whatsoever from current employees. November 1st is just around the corner, remember?

As a puzzler on this particular matter, the DNR guy (Ed Fogels, I think?) was heard stating that he had a replacement in mind...which this listener found very odd indeed.

And lastly, this cannot be stated often enough:

If the BAC and it's borrowers assume any losses from plant operations....why is it constantly stated that MMM&S is funded through the State?

Alaska Ag: The Truth about MMM&S

Like a snarled up mess of broken fishing lines, lures, and weights you reeled in from the Kenai River or Willow Creek....the truth about Alaska Ag is about like this:

Yes, a huge snarl and figuring out which rope to pull to find that truth is a frustratingly aggravating endeavor.  There are so many lines and players here, so many enemies, frenemies, and well meaning do-gooders, it's a wonder anything can be found out all-because no one is talking to anyone. Well, a correction: If you are the "right person" with the "right bonafides" then yes you can learn a lot. If you aren't? Well, too bad and don't bother anyone with silly questions. There are more factions here than any place in the Middle East of similar geographical area, and that *is* a truth.  The fate of Mount McKinley Meat & Sausage processing plant in Palmer is a crucial issue facing Alaska Ag. Without its cornerstone presence, the dirge for Alaskan grown meats might as well continue playing and all that will be left is planting roses in remembrance of what could have been. As it stands, there are numerous people involved, or wanting to be involved in the plant. 

Let's run just a few up the flag pole and salute their involvement, shall we?

First there are the three supervisory employees managing the plant. Yes, three managers. Whether this is appropriate, no one seems to know but all agree, at least a part of their function is to supervise those inmates.  Their competency does not seem to be in doubt (except on the business end) but my oh my, they can work both sides and the middle when necessary. They must see the writing on the wall and are angling to stay employed (and who wouldn't be, in this economy?) and aren't afraid to throw a few handfuls of mud about, hoping some will stick. These are the guys who assisted with the construction of the facility at Rocket Ranch, provide freezer space to special customers at no charge and who may, just may, have committed a bit of malfeasance. They're in a tough position, no doubt, but have not been under the microscope of public scrutiny long enough.

There is Denali Meat Company, whose formation was no surprise to those who knew about the Alaska Farm Bureau independent study. The AFB paid a lot of money for this excellent report, and it will no doubt serve the partners well when they submit their application. In addition, DMC is rumored to have asked for more money to fund a lobbyist. At first, I could not imagine what they'd need a lobbyist for-until it was remembered that the plant was built to a large economy of scale originally (That is, they process at around ten percent capacity annually as it stands today) and the only way to rapidly increase the carcasses going through the plant is to import them. Voila!  A need for a lobbyist materializes, since that person could advocate on their behalf, for a loosening of current import regulations. Import the cattle, finish them in Alaska to butcher weight, process, and slap a "Alaska Grown" sticker on the package. Bazinga! Alaska Ag is a success!

There is the BAC, whose power and threads reach everywhere into Alaska Ag. This is the group who allowed the former Director to say: A large animal veterinary clinic is not "agriculture".  The Chair also voted on Arthur Keyes' selection to the Governor (when the DNR commish was in disagreement) and most recently...was only stopped from taking the principals of the DMC into Executive Session by the astute actions of a fellow (attorney) member. The guys with DMC really want to plead their case and "discuss matters" off the public record. Presumably, this will now take place via back channels.

There is the mysterious Rocket Ranch, who still does not exist according to the state business and corporate licensing (for the second year). We'll presume no Borough business license either, but regardless, they have hung their sign, and are busily raising hogs. They are owned, at least in part, by Mike's Meats in Eagle River. They have a custom exempt plant up there on Lazy Mountain, the one that the MMM&S employees aided in seeing to fruition. It is speculated that this plant could easily be upgraded into a USDA facility for re-sale cuts...in which case there will be competition for MMM&S.

There are a couple of rumored alternatives being kicked around by enterprising individuals. Because no names have been attached, no speculation is warranted. The BAC is going to open up for public comments on MMM&S at the end of the coming month.

The today, the local Frontiersman newspaper posted an article about this subject:

http://www.frontiersman.com/news/group-hopes-to-get-meat-plant-out-of-the-red/article_0f9d33fa-d9be-11e5-a5cd-1b8062583bac.html   (Sorry, you have to click an answer to read the content)

In the article, it is clearly stated by DMC President Nate Burris that the plant won't be "a lucrative endeavor". Followed by this statement by Ernie Diamond (a former MMM&S manager who now holds a 25 percent stake in the new venture of Denali Meat Company):
“Everybody’s going to make more money and everybody’s going to succeed, if this works for us.”

From the outside, it looks as though it's likely that there will be two USDA plants, at least for a short while. One of those will be on very shaky footing, requiring another year of State subsidy (line of credit), a change in import regulations, and support from the legislature to make that happen. This alone proves that they are underfunded from the start and are on very uncertain ground, whatever their collective expertise.  Either one could easily just be "booked solid" for any producer, at any time. This is the real risk of privatization and the warring factions within the Ag community here.

And again......where does this leave the small producer?

Alaska Ag: The joke's on us......

Or....not!

Coming as no surprise whatsoever to the interested observer, the small producer, the hobby farmer, the homesteader, and the easily amused.......

Arthur Keyes beat out Tony Knowle's son for the Director of Agriculture position. Hope he enjoys that $121,000 a year job...while somehow still running all the things he bragged about doing in his letter of interest. Being Ben VanderWeele's son-in-law was no impediment *cough cough*

Also coming as no surprise, is the formation of a brand new baby LLC, known as "Denali Meat Company".  The four individuals named have equal partnership percentages, but only one has true retail business experience-that would be Mr. Burris, current owner of Mat Valley Meats here in the Mat Su. The rest are farmers, including, (ironically) one Todd Pettit, another "anointed by marriage" farm royalty member. Todd is the guy who publicly stated several times that he had no interest in the MMM&S plant whatever. He didn't use it, didn't plan on it, but felt it was important to all farming. You'll find Todd listed as a partner, although what part of the new venture he's going to help with is unclear.  Terry Van Whye is listed too, he is a large pork producer up the Glenn Highway, with plans to expand. The final member is an unknown, perhaps he is the money man? And lest you think all these twisted ties are coincidental, it comes to light that the attorney for the partnership is none other than former Alaska Governor Sean Parnell.  Yes, really. 

Seemingly, Denali Meat Company appeared at the BAC meeting yesterday. They hogged the microphone (not allowing others their three minutes) and at least once, attempted to move their conversation into "executive session". That's illegal, if you don't have loan matters to discuss-just so you know. And to our knowledge, Denali Meat does not yet have a loan with the ARLF. Keep in mind they were just formed January 5th, and got their business license on February 11th. It's assumed they'll submit a proposal to the BAC to take over MMM&S. Of course, they aren't smart enough to go for a five year lease (it takes about five years to establish a small business, say the experts) so they're asking for a single year. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that MMM&S will end up back on the cutting board at BAC/Div. of Ag before long. 

And just where does that leave the small producer?

Alaska Ag: Cronyism 1, the rest of us......0

I'd like to say that it was a savant, a clairvoyant, a seer...but it was not. It was a very dear friend, an astute observer of Alaska Ag that told this author last fall:

"The fix is in, Ag is done"

And I thought....surely that cannot be?  

No, not when there are literally hundreds of people just getting started with growing food here, not when there are many thousands of back yard gardens, greenhouses, and plant stands with lights in Alaska homes, right?  

Alas, yes, it is true.

Follow along, and you will sadly agree:

Everyone has their own version of what Alaska agricultural history is, so I won't re-plow spent soils there....other than to note that the ARLF (which predates Statehood) is overseen by the Board of Agriculture and Conservation.  "Agriculture and Conservation" has such a lovely ring, doesn't it? An image of a tidy field of row crops springs to mind, or perhaps crates full of produce, or maybe just a farmer on a tractor-coupled that warm feeling of saving something. It's a great marketing and sales tactic, selecting just the right words. Any political campaigner will tell you the same.  Their motto is: 

"Promote and encourage development of an agriculture industry."

Among the seats on that board, sits not one small producer. No, they represent, to a man, the commercial side of agriculture. Small "ag", as I like to think of it....is absent. Small ag is the homestead producer, the smaller operations who might send a handful of critters to MMM&S perhaps, or whose back breaking labor gifts them with a few weekends of produce at a farmers market. 

The same holds true for the ARLF board, sadly enough. The big guys with the big tractors only. It's an exclusive club, and membership depends a great deal on the whims of the board. Their motto is: "Financing the Future"

Then there is the Alaska Farm Bureau, who paid for an industry report on MMM&S, and it's great. They also formed what they call a "Steering Committee" to explore privatization of the plant.  Here again, you will not find one small producer, nary a one. Although several of the committee members were on the FB group, no homesteaders, backyarders, or small business are welcome at the table for the farm bureau steering committee. Their motto is: Farm Gate to the World

Of course, there are all the federal programs, many of them with ample public monies for projects. However, they do come with a number of conditions, and many Alaskans find those to be intrusive and onerous and they'd rather "go local" than not. So instead of a recap of the feds, suffice to say: It's there if you qualify.

Now you may be wondering where that cronyism might fit into the pieces listed above. Cronyism runs through Alaska ag, from it's founding with the Colony project, through the boondoggles of the mightily mismanaged projects of the 80s, the bankruptcies (and how did a $12 an hour employee of the failed creamery manage to acquire all those lovely cows, whose transport alone was in the many thousands?) and on through today. 

If a person were to check through the available records, a person would note that several names recur frequently. It is a complex tapestry of friendships, family, marriages, animosity and enemies. These days, if you don't have skin in the game, you're....well, nothing.  You have to attend the meetings, schmooze the mighty, befriend the suspicious, and acquiesce to the anointed.  And if you can't figure out who that is, well then...no money for you! The seats of power in Alaska Ag are those occupied by the boards listed above, with a complicit slate of Directors of the Division of Agriculture, coupled with essentially zero oversight from the legislature. In short, they do as they please, loan to who they please, and include who they please. Period.  It does not change because they do not allow change, because it has always been done this way. This is why outsiders are not welcome, newcomers are not welcome, small producers are not welcome.  Cronyism at its finest, right here in the Valley. 

A quote attributed to the La Famiglia, the Mafia sums this up nicely:   

You can be rich without knowing how to be powerful, but you cannot be powerful without being rich

And lest you think I am blowing smoke....how is it that a bankrupt farmer or two, got new loans for new ventures? And managed to go broke again? How is it, that the "ag lease" lands, are bought, chopped up, and resold for speculation so easily? Why is it that so many long time farmers, have given up and abandoned the state? Why is it that even a veterinary clinic, whose primary focus would be cattle, cannot get approved because it isn't "agriculture" enough?  Why is it that the former Director was ineffective and served as rubber stamp for the local El Capo? Why is that the only names forwarded for consideration for the new Director of the Division of Agriculture, either related to El Capo, or had strong Democratic political ties? 

And finally....why is that small ag, is not allowed a voice anywhere?

Answer: Because El Capo does not choose to accept them, their existence, and especially, their concerns, ideas, and new ways of doing things. 

Alaska Ag: Prop 90 response link

Here is the link to the comment form:

ADFG Board Comments

Make sure you click the drop down for the correct meeting, which is Board of Game on March 5th.

Please remember to be polite, and succinct, in your written message to the Board. 

A form letter in this case, just won't do. Also please consider contacting your state representative, as soon as possible. Yes, they are in session, but submitting your comments gets your voice "on the record", which is important. 

Alaska Ag: The Prop 90 assault

2016 is not shaping up to be any kinder to Alaska Agriculture than 2015 was. 

The selection process for the new Director of the Division of Agriculture, is nearly complete. Two names are slated to be forwarded to the Commissioner of DNR.   One has Alaska experience, and the other has political ties.  Arthur Keyes is the son in law of Ben VanderWeele, who sits on the BAC, and is the Palmer power broker when it comes to the ARLF.  Young Mr. Knowles...is, well you guessed it-a Knowles. 'Nuff said. Has less direct Alaska farming experience than yours truly, but of course, yours truly does not have the correct genitalia for consideration. 

So whichever of these two is selected for this plum, no one expects significant change. Yes, the MMM&S issue will no doubt be resolved in the state's favor-and that's a good thing. But when even state employees cannot be truthful to inquiries about board vacancies...expect the same cronyism that has plagued Alaska Ag since day one. One thing we can grow very well here, is that.

As to other assaults on the future of Ag, there is an item that recently came to attention. received via email, and I urge you consider carefully the ramifications:

Proposal to remove sheep and goats from the "clean list"

Our local hunters, via the Alaska Wild Sheep Foundation, is placing before the Board of Game, a proposal to take local Alaskan sheep and goats off the clean list. What does this actually mean? Well, it's one of those feel good notions with huge unexpected consequences.  Because there is an outbreak of (unspecified) disease in Big Horn sheep in the L48, the hunters up here want to prevent that. Sounds great, right? Except that they want  EVERY Alaskan who owns one or both, obtain a *permit* (forms, with fees no doubt) within one year of implementation-and yes that means every single backyard doe, ram, wether. They must also be contained within a Department approved facility (Money for inspections) that are at least double fenced-which equals a substantial amount of money for every hobbyist and rancher in the State of Alaska. Completely throwing out the current disease monitoring which is conducted by the State already...and the hard work and sacrifice of dozens of small livestock producers to maintain and test their entire herds year after year. 

But the most crucial, and overlooked component is this: That any person with possession of said animals *within 15 air miles Dall sheep habitat* must comply with the above rules.

Have you taken a good look at a map of Southcentral Alaska recently? Please note that it doesn't say "known range" or "current range" or even known habitat-that is, where a person might typically find them. Nope, just habitat. That would include nearly all of the Anchorage Borough, and a very big swath of the Mat Su Valley as well.  This proposal will likely get a serious look, and may even pass because people in the livestock community are completely unaware. Won't they be surprised when they discover that they live within that 15 mile boundary...and must rebuild their fences, buy a permit and pay for inspections? And suffer the unspecified consequences if they do not comply?

Because those female Dall sheep do bring their babies down to the lower meadows to forage in the summer months. I know this for a fact as I used to see them as a child growing up in the Interior-right through the kitchen window with Dad's telescope.  I've been told the same can be found in the Hatcher Pass and Chugach range area too.  Even if the "habitat" is restricted to the treeline and above...the impact area will be enormous. Hello, Municipality of Anchorage! Eagle River, Girdwood, Chugiak, Palmer, Wasilla, Talkeetna, and on into the Interior as well. Every community and homestead between Palmer and beyond the Matanuska Glacier will fall under this proposal as well. 

The next Board of Game meeting is in March. 

You can find the Alaska Board of Game website here: Board of Game  

On the list of action items in the white box, click the link for the 2016 Proposal Book. 

Once that page loads, click the link to the innocuous "miscellaneous permits". 

Scroll down a few pages and read 90 carefully. 

This is not the time to blow it off, it is the time to get involved. I do not have goats or sheep, but I will be making what effort I can to squash this right away. I encourage others to do the same, because sheep and goats raised locally are an integral part of Alaska's food security.