r-calfers, which way is it?

[Anonymous]

OCM,

Name me one recently formed cattle producer organization that is not involved in lobbying?

I noticed you conveniently diverted that question.


If you can, you might be able to slip out the door by suggesting that R-CALF was concerned with some other recently formed cattle producer organization THAT IS NOT INVOLVED IN LOBBYING getting a contract. LOL! I don't know if anyone would buy it but you can certainly try.

Once again, Hanna and Kiker's words conflict with R-CALF's recent resolution unless you can name me one recently formed cattle producer organization THAT IS NOT INVOLVED IN LOBBBYING that R-CALF is concerned about getting checkoff contracts.

You yourself said there was conflicting resolutions. Obviously, this was one of them.

"the ability for more recently formed cattle-producer organizations to bid on beef checkoff contracts"

You can't dance around what has been written OCM!

OCM: "ONCE MORE. Chris Clayton got it wrong."

Did Chris Clayton write R-CALF's resolution?



~SH~

 

[Tommy]

Quote:
"the ability for more recently formed cattle-producer organizations to bid on beef checkoff contracts"

Maybe they should add language to the resolution that says, the ability for more recently formed cattle-producer organizations to bid on beef checkoff contracts that are willing to set up a federation of state beef councils to their organization.
That way they would be able to keep it seperate like the NCBA.

 

[Hanta Yo]

"ANCW were co sponsors with the NCBA on one $1,821,500 request... "


OT! and I suppose you know where the monies were spent....you sure make it sound bad. Please tell me what ANCW does with checkoff dollars. I'd be interested in hearing your "opinion".

 

[Anonymous]

"ANCW were co sponsors with the NCBA on one $1,821,500 request... "


OT! and I suppose you know where the monies were spent....you sure make it sound bad. Please tell me what ANCW does with checkoff dollars. I'd be interested in hearing your "opinion".

Title of the Contract request: NEW PRODUCT, CULINARY CENTER AND NATIONAL BEEF COOK-OFF INITITIVES

Overview Description: This plan addresses the promotion activities of the New Product Marketing, Culinary Center and National Beef Cook-Off programs. These products work closely together to be a catalyst for new and better beef products, while also serving as a knowlege center for all beef and veal culinary and product needs..

And actually the requested project cost $1,955,000 with $133,500 coming from the State beef councils...

Source: Page 77 of Proposed 2006 Budget

 

[Hanta Yo]

"ANCW were co sponsors with the NCBA on one $1,821,500 request... "


OT! and I suppose you know where the monies were spent....you sure make it sound bad. Please tell me what ANCW does with checkoff dollars. I'd be interested in hearing your "opinion".

Title of the Contract request: NEW PRODUCT, CULINARY CENTER AND NATIONAL BEEF COOK-OFF INITITIVES

Overview Description: This plan addresses the promotion activities of the New Product Marketing, Culinary Center and National Beef Cook-Off programs. These products work closely together to be a catalyst for new and better beef products, while also serving as a knowlege center for all beef and veal culinary and product needs..

And actually the requested project cost $1,955,000 with $133,500 coming from the State beef councils...

Source: Page 77 of Proposed 2006 Budget

You have a problem with that? The Culinary Institute is awesome, got to sit in "Beef 101" where we learned different things to serve with beef that makes it taste even better.

I don't see R-Calf going in that direction of promoting our product in the near future.

 

[Anonymous]

"ANCW were co sponsors with the NCBA on one $1,821,500 request... "


OT! and I suppose you know where the monies were spent....you sure make it sound bad. Please tell me what ANCW does with checkoff dollars. I'd be interested in hearing your "opinion".

Title of the Contract request: NEW PRODUCT, CULINARY CENTER AND NATIONAL BEEF COOK-OFF INITITIVES

Overview Description: This plan addresses the promotion activities of the New Product Marketing, Culinary Center and National Beef Cook-Off programs. These products work closely together to be a catalyst for new and better beef products, while also serving as a knowlege center for all beef and veal culinary and product needs..

And actually the requested project cost $1,955,000 with $133,500 coming from the State beef councils...

Source: Page 77 of Proposed 2006 Budget

You have a problem with that? The Culinary Institute is awesome, got to sit in "Beef 101" where we learned different things to serve with beef that makes it taste even better.

I don't see R-Calf going in that direction of promoting our product in the near future.

The only problem I have is that their are only 2 or 3 groups that qualify to bid on or receive these contracts....Seems like with more eligible participants you might get some better diversity in the projects and competition in the costs... One group constantly running the same project and doing the same thing can get old- may be time for some new blood- new direction....

Hanta Yo--Does Cattlewomen put their name on the Checkoff funded projects and material like NCBA does?.....

 

[ocm]

OCM,

Name me one recently formed cattle producer organization that is not involved in lobbying?

I noticed you conveniently diverted that question.


If you can, you might be able to slip out the door by suggesting that R-CALF was concerned with some other recently formed cattle producer organization THAT IS NOT INVOLVED IN LOBBYING getting a contract. LOL! I don't know if anyone would buy it but you can certainly try.

Once again, Hanna and Kiker's words conflict with R-CALF's recent resolution unless you can name me one recently formed cattle producer organization THAT IS NOT INVOLVED IN LOBBBYING that R-CALF is concerned about getting checkoff contracts.

You yourself said there was conflicting resolutions. Obviously, this was one of them.

"the ability for more recently formed cattle-producer organizations to bid on beef checkoff contracts"

You can't dance around what has been written OCM!

OCM: "ONCE MORE. Chris Clayton got it wrong."

Did Chris Clayton write R-CALF's resolution?



~SH~

Name one single R-CALF leader (officer, board of directors, or committe chair) who wants R-CALF to get a checkoff contract. I have talked to most of them. NOBODY wants it.

In fact I heard one committe chair say that if R-CALF goes for checkoff funds, he will resign.

 

[mrj]

OT, you are incorrect in stating that "there are only 2 or 3 groups that qualify to bid on or receive these contracts". There are many that qualify, and many have contracted with CBB. You can verify that with Monte Reese. I believe you have his phone number, or do it on the cheap and email him: [email protected].

You are further incorrect in saying "One group constantly running the same project and doing the same thing...." It does not happen! Projects are subjected to severe scrutiny to assure there is NO re-invention of the wheel, so to speak, and that proposed projects are highly likely to produce useful and valuable results.

Why the fuss over NCBA or CattleWomen, or the auction group running the Beefmobile project "putting their name" on it? That is an extremely small 'benefit' for volunteers to be able to do. It might be different if they were allowed a profit for doing the contracted work, but remember, there is NO profit allowed with Beef Checkoff projects, with any errors or un-approved cost over-runs paid by the contractor.

MRJ

 

[Tommy]

mj...Why the fuss over NCBA or CattleWomen, or the auction group running the Beefmobile project "putting their name" on it?

Because it is misleading. The checkoff is paying for it.

 

[Hanta Yo]

OT, you are incorrect in stating that "there are only 2 or 3 groups that qualify to bid on or receive these contracts". There are many that qualify, and many have contracted with CBB. You can verify that with Monte Reese. I believe you have his phone number, or do it on the cheap and email him: [email protected].

You are further incorrect in saying "One group constantly running the same project and doing the same thing...." It does not happen! Projects are subjected to severe scrutiny to assure there is NO re-invention of the wheel, so to speak, and that proposed projects are highly likely to produce useful and valuable results.

Why the fuss over NCBA or CattleWomen, or the auction group running the Beefmobile project "putting their name" on it? That is an extremely small 'benefit' for volunteers to be able to do. It might be different if they were allowed a profit for doing the contracted work, but remember, there is NO profit allowed with Beef Checkoff projects, with any errors or un-approved cost over-runs paid by the contractor.

MRJ

MRJ,
You are absolutely correct, 'nuff said on my part. OT, when CattleWomen apply for beef-checkoff monies, we have to fill out an app form (this is at the state level), get it approved by the steering committee, do the project. In order to get reimbursed with checkoff funds, we have to:
a) give a written report on who, what, when, where and how many reached.
b) include all the original receipts
c) have pictures taken of the project, ALONG WITH the beef check-off logo plastered everywhere (not OUR logo) and a sign by the logo saying "Funded by Beef Producers with their beef checkoff dollars".
d) any of the above missing, no reimbursement. Period.

All these go into several large 3-ring binders to put in front of the Beef Council committee (whether Beef Promotion or Education). There is NO QUESTION how the beef checkoff dollars are spent. CattleWomen DO NOT put their logo on ANY beef check-off funded projects UNLESS CattleWomen have donated some funds toward the project. Not EVERYTHING is COMPLETELY and TOTALLY funded by checkoff dollars.

 

[Anonymous]

Tommy: "Because it is misleading. The checkoff is paying for it."

Until you can prove misuse of checkoff funds, you got nothing LEGITIMATE to complain about.

Why don't you get involved in the beef checkoff instead of just being another sideline critic?

GAAAAAWD this gets old!



~SH~

 

[Mike]

GAAAAAWD this gets old!

Agreed!