07/24/2007: "Entire SJI Grange Leadership Resigns"

ig_SJG_Sesby-1 (50k image) (file photo of Jim Sesby, Former Master, San Juan Island Grange)

The elected leadership of the San Juan Island Grange has resigned. Citing internal conflicts, and a lack of support from the State Grange as being “extremely unsupportive of our efforts to conduct local Grange business and carry out our mission in support of local agriculture”, they decided to call it quits.

An email letter was sent out Monday (7-23-07) to the membership, stating a “vocal minority of members has made it impossible for officers and committee members to conduct Grange business”.

The resignation letter accuses unnamed members of repeating “half-truths, innuendo, character assassination and outright deception both in the Grange Hall and behind the scenes", which "has made business meetings extremely frustrating and uncomfortable for the membership”. But a letter from the State Grange made it clear that it was not just some local members that had concerns about how the local Grange was conducting business.

While the underlying reasons for the existence of strong opposing forces in the Grange may have a number of sources, it seems clear that the one of the main reasons for the lack of support for the now departed board members is based on their desire to move in a direction that lacked the full support of the broad membership, and the State Grange.

The actions of the Board to pursue the possibility of setting up a farmers market on commercial property the Grange owns in Friday Harbor, and a recent attempt by the Grange leadership to reject some applicants for membership by use of a secret ballot, resulted in a strong condemnation by the State Grange; and it appears to have manifested in the mass resignation of the leadership

State Master Terry Hunt, the top man in Washington state, sent a three page letter on June 4, 2007 to the local “Subordinate Master” and members of the San Juan Island Grange, in which he expressed his concerns, and possible consequences, for the local Grange if they continued to ignore proper procedures.

Master Terry Hunt, Deputy Chuck Prochaska, and Executive Assistant Sophia Keller met with the local Grange leadership to “try to resolve some of these issues”; the first of which was a voting issue.

Hunt followed up the meeting with a letter in which he stated that Grange members “can not vote against a person because we believe they may have a difference of opinion on an issue” , and warned the to do so opened the Grange to “potential for lawsuits of discrimination if the reasons were not legitimate”

The second concern was the “Executive Committee was meeting in between business meetings to discuss and set the agenda”, which Hunt explained was unacceptable because “the Grange works not from the leadership down but rather from the membership up. We are a grass roots organization and the membership should set the agenda.”

Based on both the Hunt letter, and the Board’s resignation letter, it appears the main problem which may have resulted in the voting problem, stems from a decision made in 2006 by “a large group of Grange members participated in a day-long visioning and goal-setting workshop” that generated an idea for the “conversion” of the Grange’s property in Friday Harbor, currently an auto parts store and repair shop, into “an agricultural and commercial center that would provide monthly income to the Grange as well as a permanent, year-round home for the San Juan Farmers Market”.

Hunt’s letter seems to acknowledge this in a long statement that summarizes his understanding of what happened, and why it became a divisive action by the Board:

The potential of members of the "Farmer's Market Group" taking over not only the Grange but the Spring Street Property raised red flags to new Grangers, long time Grangers and non-Grangers alike.

This concern needed to be looked into and addressed as well. It was clear that the Grange as a whole voted to do a feasibility study to determine the potential of a Farmers Market at their Spring Street Property and after the study was complete, report back to the membership for a vote of where the Grange would go next.

However, there were many flaws in this process. First, proxy votes were taken, which are directly against the by-laws; secondly, Officers of the Grange who strongly favored this project, constituted the majority on the feasibility committee; and lastly, threats were made to evict the current tenant of the property.

But what wasn't clearly expressed was the leasing of this property, the time frame for this study, the cost of the study, etc. Were these individual costs, which were paid out of the general fund, first voted on by the membership each time? Has the membership seen the results of any of those funds spent on grants, lawyer fees, etc.

Hunt was candid in his opinion that regardless of how the Grange came to support taking over the property for a Farmer’s Market, he was, in fact, not supportive of the idea. He stated in his letter that “I have great reservations on this proposed plan. I think it is wonderful for the Grange to support the success of a new Farmer's Market location, but I don't see the Spring Street Property being the end all location.”

This lack of support by the State Grange was given as another reason by the leadership for resigning: “The State Grange has been extremely unsupportive of our efforts… no guarantee that the State Grange leadership will allow us to make our own decisions”.

Hunt had addressed this question in his letter by asking the rhetorical question “You may be asking why it is that the State Grange even cares what the Grange does on or to its property”, and then goes on to explain that “it is the responsibility of the State Grange to oversee all Grange real property as it is essentially the property of the Grange as a whole and not just that of the Subordinate Grange”.

But it was not just the State Grange that questioned the wisdom of closing down the commercial property and using it as a Farmers market. Recent Grange member Frank Penwell wrote a letter to the grange asking:” How does it make good business sense to give up a $3000 monthly income to provide space for a 3 hour weekly Saturday Farmers Market? Can these farmers really afford to pay $3000+ a month for taking over the Car Quest space?”

So what now? In his closing remarks, Hunt stated that “I feel that the majority of this membership truly wants to make their Grange work and will work hard to fix these issues” and asked the remaining membership to remember that “We are an organization who supports communities that sustain agriculture and rural life. Let's not lose sight of that and work hard together to make a strong Community Grange”.

It will now be up to the remaining majority of the local Grange membership to step forward, take control, and continue to follow the mandate and goals of the National and State Grange. If they fail to do so, the State Grange can pull the Charter or suspend memberships. No one wants that to happen, so the next Grange meeting should be interesting.