Notes from our Hearing

[Guest guest]

Good Morning Folks,

We returned home late last night - after a very long and stressful day at the DATCP in Madison. I know many of you are anxious to hear how it went - and I can't really say YET.

The hearing was pretty much as we expected. Everyone gave testimony and many questions were asked. Judge s surprised us most, as she appeared to be very uninformed as to how each of our farms had set up our share programs. During the morning she asked a lot of questions that led us all to believe that she was actually going to agree that we were all set up correctly. When she questioned Randall Schuman (the lawyer representing the Department of Financial Institutions) he made it clear that each of the farms had gone through all of the correct channels and that he found us all to have followed her "final ruling (of 10-30-02)" to the T.

At 12:30 she called a recess and asked us all to return at 1:30 - at which time she would announce her findings. We all went to lunch with the belief that Judge s would rule in our favor and we would hear her decision when we returned and be able to go home.

Wrong........

When we returned, Judge s announced that she had a few more questions - which took another 2 hours. After this time she carefully and thoughtfully chose each and every word she said - as though she was afraid she might say the wrong thing. She said that "given the facts" she would not be able to offer clarification of the final ruling until she had listened to the transcript from the days hearing. She did however tell us all that many changes needed to be made in order for us to continue selling shares. This of course took her nearly an hour - and most if not all of what she said was totally "bogus". Why do I say this? Quite simply! Judge s merely gave us the "idea" for setting up these share programs - she did not and could not give us her permission to do so. She is a Judge for the DATCP, not a Securities Lawyer. She has no legal say in how our entities are set up, and therefore cannot expect us to make the changes she insists upon.

We sat quietly during her "speech" interjecting a few times when needed. We were all tired and wanted to go home, but instead were forced to sit and listen to her ramblings of changes needed, which of course were infuriating to all of us. In the end she said she would go over the transcript and mail our her findings to us as soon as she could. We were allowed to leave for our long drives home.

Here are a few of the things that the Judge feels need to be changed:

She feels that the small amount we are charging for our shares is not enough to be considered actual ownership. There should be a limit she said, to the amount of dairy products each person/family was allowed to take from the farm when purchasing a share. In other words, put a dollar value on the amount of dairy products you would take from the farm over a period of time and sell shares worth that amount. People could be allowed to make payments on their shares over time - such as each visit to the farm. Isn't this the same as "selling" the dairy products???

She feels that if a person were to buy a share in a farm, that they should be actively involved in the day to day workings in the farm. If you buy a share of 3M - are you expected to work for 3M?

She feels that our "full disclosure" is not strong enough - that we need more information about the health hazards of consuming raw dairy products. Several people from within the DATCP were "kind" enough to offer their help with this........how nice of them huh?

The Judge was very concerned that we farmers had the intention of eventually selling all our milk directly to share owners. This would mean that we would not need a milk producers license to sell our milk to a dairy plant. If this happened she said that the DATCP would no longer have control of the situation and was very unhappy about that prospect. She said that they needed to come up with a way to "oversee" our operations so that they could monitor them.

For some reason she feels that the DATCP has a say in how we're set up currently - which of course is not true what so ever.

Our Opinion of the days proceedings:

The DATCP wants control of our share programs - which they do not currently have.

All of the farms doing the share program are set up to comply with the Securities Division and are 100% legal.

We do NOT have to comply with what Judge s issues as "changes" to our share programs.

We will fight this all the way to circuit court if we must - we will stand strong! (Though we feel that Clearview Acres may decide to follow the Judges orders)

We will wait to see the paperwork Judge s sends us (however long that may take) before we decide the course of action we will take.

So many things were covered during the hearing, and I know that I'm missing a lot of the details here. We won't really know the outcome of the hearing until we receive the paperwork from Judge s. She did not give us a time slot when we could expect this paperwork, but we're expecting it to take weeks if not months!

As we go over the day and remember more I will post it here. Until then please know that we're very upset about our waste of time and money it took to make this trip to Madison, which turned out to be more of a 3 ring circus than anything.

Janet

Wayne and Janet BrunnerMidvalleyvu Farms, Arkansaw, Wisconsinwww.midvalleyvu.comWeston A. Price Chapter Leaders for West Central Wisconsinwww.westonaprice.org

[Guest guest]

The

Judge was very concerned that we farmers had the intention of eventually

selling all our milk directly to share owners. This would mean that

we would not need a milk producers license to sell our milk to a dairy

plant. If this happened she said that the DATCP would no longer have

control of the situation and was very unhappy about that

prospect. She said that they needed to come up with a way to

" oversee " our operations so that they could monitor them.

So, how do you kill your

contract with DATCP and tell all these meddlers to hit the road?

Laurel

[Guest guest]

We would have to sell all our cows and only sell milk to the share owners - which in our case isn't quite possible as our farm is much too large (80 cows) to be supported by the 100 share owners we currently have.

Janet

RE: Notes from our Hearing

The Judge was very concerned that we farmers had the intention of eventually selling all our milk directly to share owners. This would mean that we would not need a milk producers license to sell our milk to a dairy plant. If this happened she said that the DATCP would no longer have control of the situation and was very unhappy about that prospect. She said that they needed to come up with a way to "oversee" our operations so that they could monitor them.

So, how do you kill your contract with DATCP and tell all these meddlers to hit the road?

LaurelTo learn more about Raw Dairy, visit our home pages at http://www.midvalleyvu.com

[Guest guest]

Sounds like to me that someone "got to her" over her lunch break.

Sara

Notes from our Hearing

Good Morning Folks,

We returned home late last night - after a very long and stressful day at the DATCP in Madison. I know many of you are anxious to hear how it went - and I can't really say YET.

The hearing was pretty much as we expected. Everyone gave testimony and many questions were asked. Judge s surprised us most, as she appeared to be very uninformed as to how each of our farms had set up our share programs. During the morning she asked a lot of questions that led us all to believe that she was actually going to agree that we were all set up correctly. When she questioned Randall Schuman (the lawyer representing the Department of Financial Institutions) he made it clear that each of the farms had gone through all of the correct channels and that he found us all to have followed her "final ruling (of 10-30-02)" to the T.

At 12:30 she called a recess and asked us all to return at 1:30 - at which time she would announce her findings. We all went to lunch with the belief that Judge s would rule in our favor and we would hear her decision when we returned and be able to go home.

Wrong........

When we returned, Judge s announced that she had a few more questions - which took another 2 hours. After this time she carefully and thoughtfully chose each and every word she said - as though she was afraid she might say the wrong thing. She said that "given the facts" she would not be able to offer clarification of the final ruling until she had listened to the transcript from the days hearing. She did however tell us all that many changes needed to be made in order for us to continue selling shares. This of course took her nearly an hour - and most if not all of what she said was totally "bogus". Why do I say this? Quite simply! Judge s merely gave us the "idea" for setting up these share programs - she did not and could not give us her permission to do so. She is a Judge for the DATCP, not a Securities Lawyer. She has no legal say in how our entities are set up, and therefore cannot expect us to make the changes she insists upon.

We sat quietly during her "speech" interjecting a few times when needed. We were all tired and wanted to go home, but instead were forced to sit and listen to her ramblings of changes needed, which of course were infuriating to all of us. In the end she said she would go over the transcript and mail our her findings to us as soon as she could. We were allowed to leave for our long drives home.

Here are a few of the things that the Judge feels need to be changed:

She feels that the small amount we are charging for our shares is not enough to be considered actual ownership. There should be a limit she said, to the amount of dairy products each person/family was allowed to take from the farm when purchasing a share. In other words, put a dollar value on the amount of dairy products you would take from the farm over a period of time and sell shares worth that amount. People could be allowed to make payments on their shares over time - such as each visit to the farm. Isn't this the same as "selling" the dairy products??? She feels that if a person were to buy a share in a farm, that they should be actively involved in the day to day workings in the farm. If you buy a share of 3M - are you expected to work for 3M? She feels that our "full disclosure" is not strong enough - that we need more information about the health hazards of consuming raw dairy products. Several people from within the DATCP were "kind" enough to offer their help with this........how nice of them huh? The Judge was very concerned that we farmers had the intention of eventually selling all our milk directly to share owners. This would mean that we would not need a milk producers license to sell our milk to a dairy plant. If this happened she said that the DATCP would no longer have control of the situation and was very unhappy about that prospect. She said that they needed to come up with a way to "oversee" our operations so that they could monitor them. For some reason she feels that the DATCP has a say in how we're set up currently - which of course is not true what so ever.

Our Opinion of the days proceedings:

The DATCP wants control of our share programs - which they do not currently have. All of the farms doing the share program are set up to comply with the Securities Division and are 100% legal. We do NOT have to comply with what Judge s issues as "changes" to our share programs. We will fight this all the way to circuit court if we must - we will stand strong! (Though we feel that Clearview Acres may decide to follow the Judges orders) We will wait to see the paperwork Judge s sends us (however long that may take) before we decide the course of action we will take.

So many things were covered during the hearing, and I know that I'm missing a lot of the details here. We won't really know the outcome of the hearing until we receive the paperwork from Judge s. She did not give us a time slot when we could expect this paperwork, but we're expecting it to take weeks if not months!

As we go over the day and remember more I will post it here. Until then please know that we're very upset about our waste of time and money it took to make this trip to Madison, which turned out to be more of a 3 ring circus than anything.

Janet

Wayne and Janet BrunnerMidvalleyvu Farms, Arkansaw, Wisconsinwww.midvalleyvu.comWeston A. Price Chapter Leaders for West Central Wisconsinwww.westonaprice.org

To learn more about Raw Dairy, visit our home pages at http://www.midvalleyvu.com

[Guest guest]

Hi Janet

and Wayne,

            Nobody said it was going to be easy,

did they? Just remember, you are the good guys. Don’t be discouraged. Drink

plenty of milk!

            Be sure to take good care of

yourselves. This is going to be a long haul. Marshal your resources, and your

energy, carefully. Live to fight another day. There are going to be victories

here and there…and defeats. We all have to be prepared to just carry on as best

we can. You guys are bearing the brunt of the attack right now – that’s what

the bozos are doing, attacking in an attempt to stop the movement while they

still have a chance to. Another day, the rest of us may have to take a turn

standing up to them. I’ll tell you this – there are a lot of people prepared to

go to jail over this. You’re not alone in your struggle. And more people are

signing on every day.

            Hey Barbara, thanks for the rage

letter, and don’t be sorry, it was great! The time will come when we’ll

counterattack the bozos…when it comes, you should lead the charge!

            Sorry to use all the war terms, you

can probably tell I love war movies. But this is a war, it’s life and death

stuff. At fifty-seven, I know I’m only as good as my last meal. If I had kids,

I bet I’d really get worked up.

Ron

-----Original

Message-----

From: Janet Brunner

Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003

8:29 AM

To: !Raw Dairy

Subject: Notes from our

Hearing

Importance: High

Good Morning Folks,

We

returned home late last night - after a very long and stressful day at the

DATCP in Madison. I know many of you are anxious to hear how it went -

and I can't really say YET.

The

hearing was pretty much as we expected. Everyone gave testimony and many

questions were asked. Judge s surprised us most, as she appeared to

be very uninformed as to how each of our farms had set up our share

programs. During the morning she asked a lot of questions that led us all

to believe that she was actually going to agree that we were all set up

correctly. When she questioned Randall Schuman (the lawyer

representing the Department of Financial Institutions) he made it clear that

each of the farms had gone through all of the correct channels and that he

found us all to have followed her " final ruling (of 10-30-02) " to the

T.

At

12:30 she called a recess and asked us all to return at 1:30 - at which time

she would announce her findings. We all went to lunch with the belief

that Judge s would rule in our favor and we would hear her decision when

we returned and be able to go home.

Wrong........

When we

returned, Judge s announced that she had a few more questions - which

took another 2 hours. After this time she carefully and thoughtfully

chose each and every word she said - as though she was afraid she might say the

wrong thing. She said that " given the facts " she would not be

able to offer clarification of the final ruling until she had listened to the

transcript from the days hearing. She did however tell us all that many

changes needed to be made in order for us to continue selling shares.

This of course took her nearly an hour - and most if not all of what she said

was totally " bogus " . Why do I say this? Quite simply!

Judge s merely gave us the " idea " for setting up these share

programs - she did not and could not give us her permission to do so. She

is a Judge for the DATCP, not a Securities Lawyer. She has no legal say

in how our entities are set up, and therefore cannot expect us to make the

changes she insists upon.

We sat

quietly during her " speech " interjecting a few times when

needed. We were all tired and wanted to go home, but instead were forced

to sit and listen to her ramblings of changes needed, which of course were

infuriating to all of us. In the end she said she would go over the

transcript and mail our her findings to us as soon as she could. We were

allowed to leave for our long drives home.

Here are a few of the things that the Judge feels need to be

changed:

·

She feels that the small

amount we are charging for our shares is not enough to be considered actual

ownership. There should be a limit she said, to the amount of dairy

products each person/family was allowed to take from the farm when purchasing a

share. In other words, put a dollar value on the amount of dairy products

you would take from the farm over a period of time and sell shares worth that

amount. People could be allowed to make payments on their shares over time

- such as each visit to the farm. Isn't this the same as

" selling " the dairy products???

·

She feels that if a

person were to buy a share in a farm, that they should be actively involved in

the day to day workings in the farm. If you buy a share of 3M -

are you expected to work for 3M?

·

She feels that our

" full disclosure " is not strong enough - that we need more

information about the health hazards of consuming raw dairy products.

Several people from within the DATCP were " kind " enough to offer

their help with this........how nice of them huh?

·

The Judge was very

concerned that we farmers had the intention of eventually selling all our milk

directly to share owners. This would mean that we would not need a milk

producers license to sell our milk to a dairy plant. If this happened she

said that the DATCP would no longer have control of the situation and was very

unhappy about that prospect. She said that they needed to come up with a

way to " oversee " our operations so that they could monitor them.

·

For some reason she

feels that the DATCP has a say in how we're set up currently - which of course

is not true what so ever.

Our Opinion of the days proceedings:

·

The DATCP wants control

of our share programs - which they do not currently have.

·

All of the farms doing

the share program are set up to comply with the Securities Division and are

100% legal.

·

We do NOT have

to comply with what Judge s issues as " changes " to our

share programs.

·

We will fight this all

the way to circuit court if we must - we will stand strong! (Though we

feel that Clearview Acres may decide to follow the Judges orders)

·

We will wait to

see the paperwork Judge s sends us (however long that may take)

before we decide the course of action we will take.

So many

things were covered during the hearing, and I know that I'm missing a lot of

the details here. We won't really know the outcome of the hearing until

we receive the paperwork from Judge s. She did not give us a time

slot when we could expect this paperwork, but we're expecting it to take weeks

if not months!

As we

go over the day and remember more I will post it here. Until then please

know that we're very upset about our waste of time and money it took to make

this trip to Madison, which turned out to be more of a 3 ring circus than

anything.

Janet

Wayne

and Janet Brunner

Midvalleyvu Farms, Arkansaw, Wisconsin

www.midvalleyvu.com

Weston A. Price Chapter Leaders for West Central Wisconsin

www.westonaprice.org

To learn more about Raw Dairy, visit our home pages at http://www.midvalleyvu.com

[Guest guest]

Sorry to use

all the war terms, you can probably tell I love war movies. But this is a war,

it’s life and death stuff. At fifty-seven, I know I’m only as good

as my last meal. If I had kids, I bet I’d really get worked up.

Ron

Your comments made

me think of the tale The Incredible Story of and Dorothea Schmidt and

Real Milk in Canada written by Sally Fallon. http://realmilk.com/summer2001.html

“When affairs

at the farm were at their lowest ebb, and Dorothea took a walk into

their fields. had lost his will to fight and Dorothea was discouraged.

It was at that moment, when both were absorbed in thought, that he was gored by

one of his bulls. The horns that he had deliberately left on his cows gave him

a huge gash and caused him to spend over one week in intensive care.

Rudolf Steiner

taught that the farm is a self-contained unit and that everything the farmer

needs to know can be learned through patient observation of the life on the

farm. The bull that gored Schmidt carried the most important message of

all—that his only hope was to fight back.”

With hope that

this might help a bit,

Laurel

And BTW ---- 57 ain’t that old! (-:

[Guest guest]

I hope you are able to continue to fight this decision as you have the the right intentions and disire to provide for eithers.

May GOD be with you and yours.

Question, can you operate at a seperate location, that is a cow-share program for the 100 share holders and continue milking for the processor.

Regards,

Calverts Castle

& Judy Calvert

Spokane, WA.

[Guest guest]

I was thinking the exact same thing.

Tom

> Sounds like to me that someone " got to her " over her lunch break.

> Sara

> Notes from our Hearing

>

>

> Good Morning Folks,

> We returned home late last night - after a very long and stressful

day at the DATCP in Madison. I know many of you are anxious to hear

how it went - and I can't really say YET.

>

> The hearing was pretty much as we expected. Everyone gave

testimony and many questions were asked. Judge s surprised us

most, as she appeared to be very uninformed as to how each of our

farms had set up our share programs. During the morning she asked a

lot of questions that led us all to believe that she was actually

going to agree that we were all set up correctly. When she questioned

Randall Schuman (the lawyer representing the Department of Financial

Institutions) he made it clear that each of the farms had gone through

all of the correct channels and that he found us all to have followed

her " final ruling (of 10-30-02) " to the T.

>

> At 12:30 she called a recess and asked us all to return at 1:30 -

at which time she would announce her findings. We all went to lunch

with the belief that Judge s would rule in our favor and we

would hear her decision when we returned and be able to go home.

>

> Wrong........

>

> When we returned, Judge s announced that she had a few more

questions - which took another 2 hours. After this time she carefully

and thoughtfully chose each and every word she said - as though she

was afraid she might say the wrong thing. She said that " given the

facts " she would not be able to offer clarification of the final

ruling until she had listened to the transcript from the days hearing.

She did however tell us all that many changes needed to be made in

order for us to continue selling shares. This of course took her

nearly an hour - and most if not all of what she said was totally

" bogus " . Why do I say this? Quite simply! Judge s merely gave

us the " idea " for setting up these share programs - she did not and

could not give us her permission to do so. She is a Judge for the

DATCP, not a Securities Lawyer. She has no legal say in how our

entities are set up, and therefore cannot expect us to make the

changes she insists upon.

>

> We sat quietly during her " speech " interjecting a few times when

needed. We were all tired and wanted to go home, but instead were

forced to sit and listen to her ramblings of changes needed, which of

course were infuriating to all of us. In the end she said she would

go over the transcript and mail our her findings to us as soon as she

could. We were allowed to leave for our long drives home.

>

> Here are a few of the things that the Judge feels need to be changed:

> a.. She feels that the small amount we are charging for our

shares is not enough to be considered actual ownership. There should

be a limit she said, to the amount of dairy products each

person/family was allowed to take from the farm when purchasing a

share. In other words, put a dollar value on the amount of dairy

products you would take from the farm over a period of time and sell

shares worth that amount. People could be allowed to make payments on

their shares over time - such as each visit to the farm. Isn't this

the same as " selling " the dairy products???

> b.. She feels that if a person were to buy a share in a farm,

that they should be actively involved in the day to day workings in

the farm. If you buy a share of 3M - are you expected to work for 3M?

> c.. She feels that our " full disclosure " is not strong enough -

that we need more information about the health hazards of consuming

raw dairy products. Several people from within the DATCP were " kind "

enough to offer their help with this........how nice of them huh?

> d.. The Judge was very concerned that we farmers had the

intention of eventually selling all our milk directly to share owners.

This would mean that we would not need a milk producers license to

sell our milk to a dairy plant. If this happened she said that the

DATCP would no longer have control of the situation and was very

unhappy about that prospect. She said that they needed to come up with

a way to " oversee " our operations so that they could monitor them.

> e.. For some reason she feels that the DATCP has a say in how

we're set up currently - which of course is not true what so ever.

>

> Our Opinion of the days proceedings:

> a.. The DATCP wants control of our share programs - which they

do not currently have.

> b.. All of the farms doing the share program are set up to

comply with the Securities Division and are 100% legal.

> c.. We do NOT have to comply with what Judge s issues as

" changes " to our share programs.

> d.. We will fight this all the way to circuit court if we must -

we will stand strong! (Though we feel that Clearview Acres may decide

to follow the Judges orders)

> e.. We will wait to see the paperwork Judge s sends us

(however long that may take) before we decide the course of action we

will take.

> So many things were covered during the hearing, and I know that

I'm missing a lot of the details here. We won't really know the

outcome of the hearing until we receive the paperwork from Judge

s. She did not give us a time slot when we could expect this

paperwork, but we're expecting it to take weeks if not months!

> As we go over the day and remember more I will post it here.

Until then please know that we're very upset about our waste of time

and money it took to make this trip to Madison, which turned out to be

more of a 3 ring circus than anything.

>

> Janet

>

>

> Wayne and Janet Brunner

> Midvalleyvu Farms, Arkansaw, Wisconsin

> www.midvalleyvu.com

> Weston A. Price Chapter Leaders for West Central Wisconsin

> www.westonaprice.org

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>