WELCOME! Iowa Local Food and Farm Plan Working Session October 11 , - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

WELCOME! Iowa Local Food and Farm Plan Working Session October 11 , 2010 Hilton Garden Inn Ames, IA

Local Food and Farm Plan Amendment 2010 Iowa Legislative Session LOCAL FOOD AND FARM PLAN. To the extent feasible, the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture established pursuant to section 266.39 shall prepare a local food and farm plan containing policy and funding recommendations for supporting and expanding local food systems and for assessing and overcoming obstacles necessary to increase locally grown food production. The Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture shall submit the plan to the general assembly by January 10, 2011. The plan shall include recommendations for short ‐ term and long ‐ term solutions, including but not limited to the enactment of legislation.

Leopold Center Timeline for Developing the Iowa Local Food and Farm Plan Inform stakeholders Begin analyzing Research Iowa’s local Review other state's Develop feedback about the Amendment preliminary data from food infrastructure reports on local food processes various sources June – September 2010 June 24th Food and Farm Plan Working Session Individual feedback Local listening Conduct online survey and meetings sessions Analyze, synthesize, October – November 2010 develop first draft Take key strategies and develop Develop complete draft of report “actionable” recommendations Due diligence on recommendations

October 11 Working Session Goals 1. Review summary of feedback on obstacles and strategies 2. Share key issues identified and work teams 3. Take key issues and accompanying strategies and develop “actionable” recommendations for use in the Iowa Local Food and Farm Plan ‐ is it feasible for the Iowa legislature to use recommendation as a base for bill or amendment? 4. Identify additional data need to complete recommendations, and share ideas on generating funds needed to implement recommendations

Iowa Local Food & Farm Plan ‐ 2010 County of Residence (Percent of Total Survey and Listening Session Respondents) Lyon Osceola Dickinson Emmet Winnebago Worth Mitchell Howard Winneshiek Allamakee Kossuth Palo Alto O'Brien Clay Hancock Cerro Gordo Floyd Chickasaw Sioux Fayette Clayton Humboldt Bremer Buena Vista Cherokee Pocahontas Wright Franklin Butler Plymouth 0% Dubuque Delaware <1% Black Hawk Buchanan Webster Hamilton Hardin Grundy Woodbury Ida Sac Calhoun 1 – 1.9% Jackson Jones Tama Benton Linn Greene Boone Marshall 2 – 4.9% Monona Crawford Carroll Story Clinton 5 – 6.9% Cedar Iowa Jasper Poweshiek Harrison Shelby Audubon Guthrie Dallas Polk Johnson Scott 7 ‐ 10% Muscatine Marion Mahaska Keokuk Washington Pottawattamie Adair Madison Warren Cass Louisa Wapello Jefferson Mills Montgomery Adams Union Clarke Lucas Monroe Henry Des Moines Fremont Davis Van Buren Page Taylor Ringgold Decatur Wayne Appanoose Lee

Iowa Local Food & Farm Plan ‐ 2010 Percent of Respondents

Iowa Local Food & Farm Plan ‐ 2010 Percent of Respondents Race (Survey and Listening Percent of Session) Respondents Gender (Survey and White Only 97.4 Listening Session) Multiple Races 1.1 Male 49.8 Hispanic Only 0.6 Asian Only 0.3 Female 50.2 Native Hawaiian Only 0.3 African American or Black Only 0.2 American Indian or Alaskan 0.2 Native Only

Iowa Local Food & Farm Plan ‐ 2010 *Responses do not total 100% because respondents could choose more than one occupation.

Iowa Local Food & Farm Plan ‐ 2010 *Responses do not total 100% because respondents could choose up to two sectors.

Iowa Local Food & Farm Plan ‐ 2010 Osceola Dickinson Emmet Winnebago Worth Lyon Mitchell Howard Winneshiek Allamakee Kossuth Palo Alto O'Brien Clay Hancock Cerro Gordo Floyd Chickasaw Sioux Fayette Clayton Humboldt Bremer Cherokee Buena Vista Pocahontas Wright Franklin Butler Plymouth Dubuque Black Hawk Buchanan Delaware Webster Ida Sac Calhoun Hamilton Hardin Grundy Woodbury Jackson Jones Tama Benton Linn Greene Marshall Monona Crawford Carroll Boone Story Clinton Cedar Guthrie Dallas Jasper Poweshiek Iowa Harrison Shelby Audubon Polk Johnson Scott Muscatine Keokuk Washington Adair Madison Warren Marion Mahaska Pottawattamie Cass Louisa Mills Montgomery Adams Union Clarke Lucas Monroe Wapello Jefferson Henry Des Moines Fremont Page Ringgold Decatur Wayne Appanoose Davis Van Buren Taylor Lee

Percent of Total Regional Expertise (Survey and Listening Session Respondents) Winnebago Lyon Osceola Dickinson Emmet Worth Mitchell Howard Winneshiek Allamakee Kossuth O'Brien Clay Palo Alto Hancock Cerro Gordo Floyd Chickasaw Sioux Fayette Clayton Humboldt Bremer Buena Vista Franklin Cherokee Pocahontas Wright Butler Plymouth Dubuque Black Hawk Buchanan Delaware Webster Hamilton Hardin Grundy Woodbury Ida Sac Calhoun Greene Monona Crawford Carroll Harrison Shelby Audubon Guthrie Jasper Polk Pottawattamie Cass Adair Adams Lucas Monroe Mills Montgomery Henry Des Moines Van Buren Fremont Page Decatur Wayne Appanoose Taylor Lee

Sector Identified by Listening Sessions as Needing the Most Attention Aggregate score where Percent of Percent of (3=1 st priority Sector Identified by Listening Listening Sessions Regions 2=2 nd priority Session as Needing the Most Choosing the Choosing the 1=3 rd priority) Attention Sector Sector Crop production 9 30.8% 50.0% Livestock production 0 0.0% 0.0% Processing 5 15.4% 25.0% Aggregation and distribution 12 53.8% 87.5% Marketing and market venues 18 53.8% 62.5% Food safety, regulations, and policy 3 7.7% 12.5% Financial assistance 12 46.2% 50.0% Beginning and underserved farmers 4 23.1% 37.5% Planning 4 23.1% 25.0% Consumers 13 46.2% 62.5% Crop production Livestock production Processing Aggregation and distribution Marketing and market venues Food safety and policy Financial assistance Beginning and underserved Planning Consumers 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Percent of listening sessions choosing the sector Percent of regions choosing the sector

Iowa Local Food & Farm Plan ‐ 2010 *Responses do not total 100% because respondents could choose up to two obstacles.

Arriving at key issues • Synthesizing and categorizing feedback – June 24 th meeting – Listening sessions – Surveys – One on one or group conversations

Issue 1 Farmers, processors, and food entrepreneurs need access to affordable loans to start and grow businesses.

Issue 2 Farmers, processors, and food entrepreneurs need incentives (such as tax credits, tax rebates, grants, and equipment cost ‐ share programs) to supply markets.

Issue 3 Existing and beginning farmers need access to land and water to initiate or expand operations.

Issue 4 Farmers, processors, and food entrepreneurs need affordable and comprehensive insurance products to minimize risks in crop production, liability, and health.

Issue 5 Existing and beginning farmers, processors, and food entrepreneurs need education and technical assistance to develop profitable enterprises.

Issue 6 Small- and mid-sized farmers need customized environmental and food safety regulations to be profitable, protect natural resources, and ensure food safety.

Issue 7 Farmers and processors need access to a skilled, affordable, and reliable workforce.

Issue 8 Iowa needs investment in aggregation, distribution, storage, and processing facilities (such as cold storage, packinghouses, and distribution warehouses) to reach existing and new markets with high quality local food products.

Issue 9 Iowa needs marketing networks for local food processors, food entrepreneurs, and farmers.

Issue 10 Consumers need better access to local foods and more information about local foods.

Issue 11 More coordination and data collection on the state of local foods is needed within and across organizations. Agencies supplying technical assistance, financial assistance, and regulatory oversight to local food producers, processors, and entrepreneurs need to be better coordinated.