|
|
|
|
Investor Farmland Purchases Double
Farmland is increasingly being used to
shield capital gains from real estate sales. Unlimited farm program
payments contribute to the trend.
“The amount of farmland acquired by nonfarmer investors has doubled since
1989, topping 27 percent of all acreage at last count,” according to a
Barron’s Online report based on USDA data.
Growing investor ownership in farmland in part stems from public policy.
Barron’s reports that investors are drawn by the opportunity to avoid the
capital gains tax on gains from real estate sales by reinvesting it in
farmland. We long ago learned that creating tax-sheltering opportunities
in agriculture puts family farmers at a disadvantage against high-income
investors in competing for land and markets.
The structure of the farm program – specifically the absence of an
effective limit on payments to large farms – also contributes to growing
nonfarmer investment. With no effective cap on payment, farm program
benefits are directly tied to land. Large farms get additional federal
payments for every acre they add. That assures virtually the entire farm
payment finds its way to the pocket of the landowner – whether it’s the
farmer or the investor landlord. |
|
St. James Marketplace: Season #4 and Counting
St. James is back on the road map of Nebraska thanks in large part to the
ladies of the St. James Marketplace. Located less than a quarter mile
north of Hwy 12 in Cedar County, St. James Marketplace opened for the 2004
season on May 1.
More than 60 vendors will feature local products at the Marketplace, open
every weekend through the summer and early fall, with special shopping
days (including some fabulous Christmas shopping days) sprinkled
throughout the year. For a unique shopping experience, visit
http://www.stjamesmarketplace.com or drive to St. James and purchase
local homemade products.
Social Justice Advocate Hired
The Center has a new face on its leadership team – Chuck Hayes. Chuck’s
initial focus will be engaging more people in our work across the state
and nation. We expect his future role to include launching other new and
challenging initiatives.
Chuck is a native of Lyons. He recently returned from his third stint in
the Peace Corps, mostly focused on rural and agricultural development. The
unifying theme in most of Chuck’s past efforts has been the pursuit of
social justice. To contact him, call 402.687.2100, ext 1014 or email
chuckch@cfra.org .
Izaak Walton League Gains a Gem
Last month we bid farewell to Brad Redlin, the Center’s Media and Outreach
Coordinator. Brad began work at the Center as a policy analyst. He played
an integral role building support for our 2002 Farm Bill proposals, wrote
extensively for the newsletter, and organized citizens to reform national
ag organizations.
Brad is now at the Izaak Walton League of America’s St. Paul, Minn. office
directing their sustainable agriculture program. He joins his fiancée in
the Twin Cities, his reason for leaving us. We wish them all the best. |
It assures aggressive, expansion-oriented large farms bid the entire farm
program payment into higher cash rents, transferring the benefit to investor
landowners. An effective payment limitation would change that. Large farms
would have to bid for add-on acres based on what they could earn from the
market without federal payments. That would reduce their bids and slow the
spiral in cash rents, reducing the attractiveness of land to non-farm
investors.
It would enhance opportunities for small and mid-size farms to buy land and
pay for it by farming it.
Report Finds U.S. Taxpayers
Subsidize Low Wages
Low wages not only harm workers, they devastate
small business and communities as well. Policies should encourage reform.
Each Wal-Mart store costs federal taxpayers over $2,000 per employee to
supplement low wage levels, according to a congressional study released by U.S.
Representative George Miller. For a store with 200 employees, the report
estimates taxpayers each year pay:
- $36,000 for free and reduced school lunches
- $42,000 for housing assistance
- $125,000 for low-income tax credits and deductions
- $100,000 for services to at-risk students
- $108,000 for health care subsidies
- $9,750 for low-income energy assistance
The significance of these findings is underscored by estimates that
Wal-Mart will control over one-third of all food and drug sales in the United
State by 2007. This report reflects not just one company. It reflects one of
the world’s most profitable and rapidly growing corporations and the emerging
global economy.
Simply put, major companies are seeking a competitive edge by running a race
to the bottom for worker pay and benefits. It goes without saying that this is
bad for workers. But it’s equally bad for small business and communities.
Farmers and small business people are also working people. As wages for
working people are depressed, their incomes fall too. Self-employed small
retailers cannot pay themselves a middle class income for the work they do in
their own business and compete with large companies that pay poverty-level
wages. Family farmers face the same problem in competing with low-wage
corporate farms.
It’s devastating for communities. As chain stores replace independent
businesses, profits are drained out of the community. And as self-employed
business people are replaced by low-wage workers, communities lose their
middle class who can buy homes, put down roots, and give back.
It does not have to be that way. But if we want to take America in a better
direction we must make a different set of policy choices. We must make
companies pay a living wage in return for the things they expect of
government.
If corporations want access to American markets for goods produced outside our
borders, they should be required to respect the rights of workers to organize
and elevate living standards. If they want access to the special tax breaks
states and the federal government provide, they should be required to pay a
living wage and provide decent benefits. It does not serve the common good to
subsidize companies to create poor jobs.
Finally, we must return to the time when competition was based on efficiency
and service to customers rather than economic power. We must enforce
anti-trust laws, including those that prohibit the giants from using their
size and power to gain unfair price advantages.
Read the Congressional report:
http://edworkforce.house.gov/democrats/WALMARTREPORT.pdf
Agree or Disagree? Send your opinion to
Chuck Hassebrook, chuckh@cfra.org or
402.687.2100 x 1018.
Value
Added Producer Grants Program at Risk
The Value Added Producer Grants Program (VAPG) provides funding to farmers,
ranchers, cooperatives, agriculture trade groups, and others to help develop
new markets, products, and cooperatives, returning a greater share of food
system profit to producers and their local communities. The VAPG final rule
was due in April and a Notice of Funds Availability for 2004 is likely in May.
Grants can be made for feasibility studies or for working capital. The program
requires a 50/50 match.
VAPG was hard hit in negotiations on the 2004 agriculture spending bill. The
2004 omnibus bill eliminates the mandatory spending status of the program and
appropriates $15 million for fiscal year 2004. This is a considerable demotion
in status for the program, which was authorized in the farm bill to receive
$40 million annually in mandatory funding for years 2002-2007. The President’s
budget for 2005 sets the program at $15.5 million in discretionary spending.
Reviewers for the 2004 round of VAPG proposals are now being sought. If you
are interested, contact Kim Leval for more details,
kimleval@qwest.net or 541.687.1490.
Redirecting Federal Research Dollars
We have an opportunity to influence the
decisions USDA makes in their program priorities, budgets, and request for
proposals for the National Research Initiative (NRI), the premier competitive
research grant program for agriculture.
The Center strongly supports funding for the Initiative for Future Agriculture
and Food Systems (IFAFS) program, a competitive grants program for
outcome-oriented research to improve food production, family farm
profitability, environmental performance, and non-farm microenterprise and
other rural economic and community development strategies. IFAFS was subsumed
into the NRI in 2003.
With this budget-saving move, Congress directed USDA and NRI to target at
least 20 percent of $167.1 million of NRI funding to “IFAFS like” program
areas. But research into development of non-farm microenterprise and other
rural development strategies, public plant and animal breeding, farm/ranch
profitability, agriculture systems, natural resources, and environmental
quality are receiving little or no funding under NRI.
In the past, IFAFS and NRI research dollars have funded a variety of projects
to promote and improve direct marketing initiatives, from farmers’ markets to
understanding new co-operative ventures. They funded research into corn
breeding for sustainable and organic systems and other important projects
across the country.
We expect a supplemental call for NRI grants in 2004 in response to our
pressure on USDA to make good on the intentions of Congress to target part of
research funding to farm income and rural economic and community development.
We’ll keep you posted.
Contact: Kim Leval at 541.687.1490 (Oregon)
or kimleval@qwest.net for more
information.
Why Rural
Communities Differ: Social Dynamics Give Some Clues
As different as night and day, small rural
communities can be worlds apart. Underlying social factors help to explain the
differences.
Rural communities are a peculiar assemblage, and it is difficult to create a
plan of action to help them all. Small rural communities are as different from
each other as they are from their urban counterparts. So, how do we as community
developers and members work through these difficulties? The answer is to
understand the social and human dynamics that make up a small community.
Studies of macro sociology reveal underlying dynamics that make up social
structures and permit the community to become collectively alive. In the theory
of social functionalism, each rural community has certain purposes and needs. It
develops a collective conscience. Community institutions develop a functional
interdependence that sets the social system in place.
Dr. Cornelia Flora’s book, Rural Communities explains this experience as
bridging and bonding. Bonding is the ability for social structures to come
together and become one voice. We look at others in our community as a mirror
reflection and act accordingly. As a township we shape each other to create an
image of who we are.
Bridging is a phenomenon that allows outside resources to come in. Many small
rural communities have an extremely high bonding social structure but a
particularly low bridging capacity. Newcomers are looked at with suspicion, and
internal factions have conflicting views on changes they feel are good for the
community. As a result, communities resist change.
The idyllic social structure for a community is when bridging and bonding are
both high. This creates an entrepreneurial social infrastructure, and these
communities are poised for action and change. Ideas from individuals are
encouraged, and bringing outside resources to help with change is acceptable.
These communities are receptive and usually diverse in both ideas and opinions.
Citizens are included in decision making for the community.
Our next four articles will look at different communities. We will examine why
they differ and what makes them successful models for others.
Contact: Michael L. Holton,
michaellh@cfra.org or 402.687.2100 x
1015 for more information.
Corporate Farming Notes
Christensen climbs higher; USDA bows to bigness;
and Cargill stays in court.
Christensen Farms, Sleepy Eye, Minn., announced it will buy Heartland
Pork Enterprises, Alden, Iowa. The acquisition will add about 50,000 sows to
Christensen Farms’ production base, for a total of more than 140,000 sows.
It will make Christensen Farms one of the top five pork production companies in
the country. Christensen Farms will also acquire Heartland’s feed mill in Iowa
Falls, Iowa, as part of the deal. Source: Feedstuffs
USDA moved to block Creekstone Farms Premium Beef from doing a test
for BSE (mad cow disease) on all of its beef intended for export to Japan.
USDA’s action assures the Japanese market will remain closed to U.S. farmers and
ranchers and cattle prices will remain unnecessarily depressed.
It’s easy to understand why the major meatpackers would want to block a smaller
more nimble competitor from capturing the market by being responsive to Japanese
consumers. But there is no justification for the U.S. government shamelessly
doing their bidding at the expense of farmers and ranchers.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a Sizzler USA restaurant can sue
Minnesota-based Cargill’s Excel Corp. for an E. coli episode that sickened more
than 100 Sizzler customers and killed a girl in 2000. The court refused to hear
Excel's appeal to end the suit by Sizzler and some of those who became ill.
Excel contended it couldn’t be sued in state court because the steaks it sold to
the Sizzler USA restaurant in Milwaukee weren’t a ground beef product and thus
were not considered “adulterated” under federal law. The case now moves back to
Milwaukee circuit court. Worldwide Restaurant Concepts Inc.’s Sizzler USA plans
to seek more than $10 million in damages from Excel, a Sizzler lawyer says.
Source: Beef Magazine
The Saskatchewan Wheat Pool (SWP) plans to exit the pork business by
selling its majority shareholder interest in four operations in Saskatchewan. In
fiscal 2003, SWP’s pork operations sold about 360,000 hogs, or about 15 percent
of total production in the province. Source: Feedstuffs
Thanks to: Brad Redlin for writing
Corporate Farming Notes for the past couple of years. For more information on
this month’s column, contact Chuck Hassebrook,
chuckh@cfra.org or 402.687.2100.
|
|
Feature article:
2004 Nebraska Legislature: A Review
Small spending cuts and transfers of funds
postpone big budget balancing act until next year.
Compared to recent sessions of the Nebraska
Legislature, the just-completed 2004 session had a different meaning for rural
Nebraska. In the recent past, combinations of tax increases and major budget
cuts had significant consequences for rural people and communities and the
institutions that serve them. The immediate rural impacts of the 2004 session
are not as great, but gathering storms on several issues will help chart the
future of rural Nebraska.
The Governor’s Agenda
The 2004 legislative agenda was determined primarily by Governor Johanns’
January State of the State address. The Governor laid out a five-point “reform”
agenda that dominated most of the session. The five points and how the
Legislature dealt with them are outlined below.
Mental Health reform - Governor Johanns proposed creating a new system of
community-based mental health services and closing the regional psychiatric
hospitals in Norfolk and Hastings. A compromise plan created a process that will
lead to the community-based system and a legislative decision on closing the
Norfolk and Hastings facilities. The Legislature also appropriated funding for
the new system.
Child Protection reform - The Legislature adopted the Governor’s request
for additional funds for child protection workers, training, public education,
and equipment. The Legislature did not provide funding for additional child
abuse prosecutors.
Water Policy - The Legislature put the recommendations of the Water
Policy Task Force into law and appropriated funds to implement them.
Initiative 300 - Governor Johanns proposed creating a task force to
review and recommend changes to Initiative 300, Nebraska’s pro-family farming
constitutional amendment. In the only clear-cut defeat to the Governor’s agenda,
LB 1086 – the bill that would have created such a task force – did not receive a
minute of legislative floor debate.
School Finance reform - Governor Johanns supported a bill that would have
created major changes in the K-12 school finance formula. That bill received no
legislative debate. The Governor also recommended making permanent an increase
in the school property tax levy limit that was adopted in 2003, thus reducing
the amount of state aid paid to schools. In a compromise the Legislature made
the higher property tax rate apply for three years.
The Budget: Not So Bad This Year
The primary responsibility of the Legislature in 2004 was balancing the state
budget for the remainder of the budget biennium that ends on June 30, 2005.
Facing a nagging budget deficit that reached $315 million during the session,
the Governor and the Legislature were faced with the standard choices – spending
cuts, tax increases, use of reserve funds, or some combination.
Ultimately, a plan was adopted that relied on small spending cuts (0.5 and 1
percent to selected agencies and programs) and a variety of fund transfers. The
cuts to state aid programs to municipalities, counties, and other property
tax-supported institutions are small enough to have little if any effect to
rural communities and rural services. State aid to K-12 schools will actually
increase for the next school year, though, as always, the impacts create some
winners and some losers in the state aid game.
The Center’s primary budget priority was continued funding to the Nebraska
Microenterprise Development Act, a program that provides grants to small
business development organizations throughout the state such as the Center’s
Rural Enterprise Assistance Project (REAP). Our efforts were generally
successful, with the Microenterprise Development Act suffering only a 1 percent
spending reduction.
The ultimate result of the 2004 budget resolution is a balanced budget for the
rest of the biennium and the ability to pay the state’s bills. But state
policymakers are left with a virtually empty cash reserve fund (analogous to the
state’s savings account) and many crossed fingers hoping the economy improves.
But Wait Until Next Year
The state budget is projected to face a $304 million budget shortfall in the new
budget cycle that begins July 1, 2005. It is that hole the Legislature is left
staring into as they begin the process of creating a new state budget in the
2005 session.
Nearly half of the projected shortfall is a judgment entered against the state
in a lawsuit over Nebraska’s withdrawal from a low-level radioactive waste
disposal compact. The judgment is on appeal to the United State Supreme Court,
and the state is actively exploring settlement options. How these actions
transpire will determine how much cutting and taxing the Legislature may have to
do in 2005.
With the looming deficit and a judgment growing daily (due to interest), the
Legislature spent its longest continuous period of debate on how to deal with
the future. Governor Johanns, who has made his “no tax increase” mantra well
known throughout all previous budget debates, even proposed a half-cent sales
tax increase dedicated to paying off the judgment against the state.
Other sales tax, income tax, and electric bill surcharge proposals were
considered and debated. In the end, however, the Legislature decided it was
better off dealing with this issue when the bill actually comes due. The debate
over taxing and spending that began in 2004 will surely continue in 2005.
LB 1086: A True Grassroots Victory
To prevent floor debate and kill a bill that was a major priority of the
Governor, a designated Priority Bill of a veteran senator, and a bill supported
by the chair of the Agriculture Committee and several agricultural and commodity
organizations says a lot about the power of grassroots advocacy.
The credit for the defeat of LB 1086 goes to the hundreds upon hundreds of
dedicated people across the state who attended the public hearing, attended
educational meetings, contacted the Governor and state senators, wrote letters
to newspapers, and who, in the end, would not allow Initiative 300 and all it
represents to be victimized.
Gathering Storms
The actions of the Legislature in 2004 set the stage for the consideration of
numerous issues that will help determine the fate of rural Nebraska and its
communities. This debate will begin in 2005, and gazing into our crystal ball we
see:
Taxes and spending - As the new state budget is created, the economy and
revenue projections will determine spending levels. Past spending reductions
hurt programs that benefit the communities and people of rural Nebraska.
In many respects, Nebraska is one state with two tax systems – a low income,
high property tax part of the state, and a high income part of the state that
pays much more in income and sales tax. 2005 could be a watershed year in how
these two Nebraskas are reconciled.
In 2004, the Governor and a majority of the Legislature rejected a return to
historic income taxes rates to resolve the fiscal issues facing the state, yet
seemed resigned at some point to raise the sales tax despite its regressive
nature. The Legislature also put into motion the potential for higher property
taxes in rural communities by maintaining the higher school property tax levy.
School structure - In 2004, rural school advocates beat back an attempt
to change the structure of Class I (or elementary-only) schools. That attempt is
sure to resurface.
In our view, maybe unwittingly, the 2004 Legislature created the perfect
situation to begin a major restructuring (i.e., consolidation) of Nebraska’s
rural schools. The increased school property tax levy limit will mean lower
state aid for K-12 schools. State aid may be reduced further by the looming
budget deficit.
Combined with generous incentives approved by the 2004 Legislature for schools
to consolidate into schools of at least 390 students, many rural schools may
have no choice but to succumb to consolidation. The Legislature may have brought
together the perfect set of policies that leave rural schools in a corner with
no alternative.
Initiative 300 - The LB 1086 debate is not over. It will resurface in
some form.
Rural Development - Again, no major initiatives or proposals to
effectively develop the economies and communities of rural Nebraska were adopted
by the Legislature in 2004. And the challenges facing rural Nebraska are not
going away – continued population loss, low incomes, and lack of economic
opportunity still exist. As with the land, spring brings new hope – maybe spring
2005 will bring new hope for meaningful rural development legislation.
Contact: Jon Bailey,
jonb@cfra.org or 402.687.2100 extension 1013.
Jon sends out a free weekly email legislative update when the Nebraska
Unicameral is in session. When not in session, he periodically sends out items
of interest such as legislative hearings and interim studies to the list. Sign
up for the Nebraska Legislative Update by sending an email to Jon Bailey.
|
|
|
Living
Livestock Loan Made to Beginning Farm Couple in Nebraska
A pilot loan program to help beginning farmers
and ranchers kicks off with the purchase of a herd of Boer meat goats.
The first in the state, Eric and Konnie Frederick of Randolph, Nebraska,
received a living livestock loan from the Center for Rural Affairs in April. The
Fredericks used the proceeds to assist them in starting their Boer meat goat
business.
Livestock loans are not new, but this unique loan fund is. The Center has
partnered with Heifer International, better known as a hunger-relief
organization, to be part of a national demonstration project to help beginning
farmers start livestock businesses.
The living livestock loan is a no-interest loan to beginning farmers allowing
the borrower to defer payments during the first three breeding cycles. As with
most livestock loans, it is repaid within six breeding cycles, often six years.
To qualify the Fredericks agreed to some unique terms. They completed a farm
business planning course and a whole farm plan (see below). The whole farm plan
encompasses their farm business plan and assesses the environmental aspects of
their farm as it relates to their personal, family, community, and business
goals.
Eric says, “The part I’m most excited about is being able to share our learning
experiences with others.” The Fredericks agreed to the unique lender visits,
which will be more like a farm tour. Folks interested in the goat business or
this unique loan fund will be able to learn firsthand the intricacies of
starting this type of business.
For more information on how to qualify for this unique program or to participate
in the farm tours contact, Michael Holton at 402.687.2100, extension 1015 or
michaellh@cfra.org .
Agricultural Entrepreneurs Graduate from Farm Business Planning Course
 Lyons,
Nebraska was the site of the Center’s most recent “Tilling the Soil of
Opportunity” class. The class steers students through a comprehensive set of
business planning lessons. The end result is a complete business plan for a
prospective agricultural business.
Graduating from the class on April 6, 2004 were Klint Stewart of Stanton (shown
at left in photo), Shawn Satorie of Decatur, Jamie Kroger of Lyons, Ryan Roeber
of Pender (shown at right in photo), and Sherrie Zvacek of Omaha. The graduates
are now ready to take the next steps to participate in the Center’s living
livestock loan program (see story above).
The class was taught by the Center’s Farm Transition Specialist, Joy Johnson. It
took place in the conference room at the Center’s new office.
|
|
Non-Hormone Treated Cattle
Program Readies for Expansion
Major new natural foods marketing initiative
should lead to a rapidly expanding market for suppliers of natural beef.
Nebraska’s Small Farms Cooperative (SFC) is looking for producers interested
in marketing beef through the Non-Hormone Treated Cattle (NHTC) Program. The
program’s production standards prohibit the use of any growth implants
(hormones) or antibiotics.
To become NHTC certified, producers must complete a comprehensive farm plan and
have an inspection/audit by USDA. The audits are conducted annually. More than
half the producers in the country who have earned NHTC certification belong to
the Small Farms Cooperative.
A major marketing expansion is underway. This market expansion is driving the
rapidly growing demand for NHTC-certified producers. Products soon to enter the
natural foods marketplace will be the only meat in the world carrying multiple
certified claims.
John Smith, a Pender, Neb. area farmer, is the NHTC Coordinator for the
cooperative. He will conduct three informational workshops in the near future,
probably after planting season. Workshops will be held where interest in the
NHTC program has been greatest; most likely in northeast Nebraska (near
Hartington), southeast Nebraska (near Seward), and in the Panhandle (the
Scottsbluff area on or about June 11).
The workshops will feature an overview of the NHTC program, a question and
answer period following the presentation, and technical assistance to producers
wishing to begin the certification process. Center staff will also provide
technical assistance to producers entering the NHTC program. Look for more
information in the media as dates are finalized.
The Small Farms Cooperative will pay producers for their animals in two
installments. The live animal will be purchased by SFC (the price for NHTC
cattle cannot go below an established floor) with a first payment; and a second
“premium” check will follow on a regular basis (reflecting income generated by
the new marketing effort now underway).
Contact: Mike Heavrin,
mikeh@cfra.org for information.
Conference
Delivers Insight, Inspiration to Beginning Farmers
Humor, advice, and stories of farmer’s trials and
successes highlighted the day-long Beginning Farmer and Rancher Conference.
Dr. Don Jonovic, keynote speaker at The Beginning Farmer and Rancher
Conference held March 27 in Kearney, Nebraska said he doesn’t buy the common
assertion that there is no future in agriculture. “In all my experience in
industry of any kind throughout the Western Hemisphere, the greatest growth
potential is in agriculture.”
Jonovic challenged the nearly 200 people in attendance to openly communicate
about values, differences, strategies, goals, investment objectives, and
succession. He said the most common advice the next generation in agriculture
receives is “Shut up and watch, shut up and listen, and stay the heck out of my
way.”
Instead, we should “pay attention to differences in values and goals. Ask ‘why
are we doing this, what is the purpose,’ and recognize it’s not all financial.
Have a way to talk to each other, and get help in doing that sensibly,”
counseled Dr. Jonovic.
At noon R.P. Smith, a fourth generation rancher from the Broken Bow area of
Nebraska received gales of laughter with stories of child-rearing, travel, and
his cow-calf operation. Poems about his grandfather, son, and his love of the
ranching life, a “song that has no tune,” touched the audience.
A panel of farmers shared their trials and tribulations in getting started in
agriculture. Common themes included hard work, experimentation, constant
learning and adjusting, growth, and networking with others.
Panel member Eric Klien, a farmer from Elgin, Minn. has tried pastured beef,
hogs, and poultry. He and his wife love direct marketing, love meeting people
and talking to them. Eric said each day is a new experiment, a new education on
the farm. Eric and his wife Lisa now serve as mentors in the Land Stewardship
Project’s Farm Beginnings program.
Todd and Julie Stewart, farmers from Meadow Grove, Neb. told of realizing their
dream of farming full-time with the help of the Center’s Land Link program.
After a few years, Julie joined Todd full-time on the farm, which was when they
“started making money.”
Julie has had problems with lenders and equipment dealers taking her seriously.
She stressed the importance of being prepared before meeting with anyone about
the farm business. Julie counsels farm couples to leave the little frustrations
that arise from farming outside the house. Harsh words spoken in the barn are
best forgotten there.
Carol Ford, from southwest Minn. is just beginning extended season greenhouse
and root cellar vegetable production. Help from mentors, classes, and the Farm
Beginnings program are helping her learn as she fills a strong local market
stemming from Community Supported Agriculture farms.
Evaluations from the conference showed high marks. Attendee Keith Penry from
Colorado commented, “The conference was awesome. It was rewarding, fulfilling,
and I will probably be looking you up.” Conference materials are available from
us for $30.00; call 402.687.2100 or email
info@cfra.org .
Contact: Michael L. Holton,
michaellh@cfra.org for more
information.
|
