Madison Regional Food Incubator. A grant proposal submitted to the Wisconsin Dept of Commerce. January 30, Partnering Organizations:

Transcription

1 Madison Regional Food Incubator A grant proposal submitted to the Wisconsin Dept of Commerce January 30, 2009 Partnering Organizations: Common Wealth Development Agricultural Innovation Center, UW Extension Thrive

2 APPLICATION CHECKLIST Section 1. ACTIVITY TO BE COMPLETED IF APPLYING FOR ONE OF THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES Check one, if applicable I. Regional... II. Community-Based Revolving Loan Funds. III. Entrepreneurship Teaching Grant... IV. Venture Capital Fair... V. Incubator..... X_ Section 2. APPLICATION - TO BE COMPLETED BY ALL APPLICANTS Page I. Project Description and Work Pan 4_ II. Community-Based Organization Description 6_ III. Need and Community Support 7_ Section 3. DOCUMENTATION - TO BE COMPLETED BY ALL APPLICANTS I Financial Statement 11_ II. Officers & key staff or outside service providers 11_ III. Fee schedule of outside service providers (if applicable) 11_ IV. Letters of support (Limit to the 5 strongestletters) 11_ V. Roster of Governing Body. 11_ VI. Service Area Map... 11_ VII. Authorizing Resolution.. 11_ VIII. Certification Statement.. 11_ IX. Verification of Tax Status from IRS. 11_ X. Request for Taxpayer Identification (W-9 form) 11_ Documents should be labeled and inserted at the end of the application.

3 SECTION 1: ELIGIBILITY OF PROPOSED ACTIVITY Incubator Grant Feasibility Study As conceived, the Madison Regional Food Incubator would likely rent space at lower than the market rate. However, with food business start-ups, the real issue is the capital cost for entrepreneurs to establish their own facilities, and the limited number of hours per week or weeks per year that they require facilities. Many, if successful, will achieve a scale of production that will justify renting or owning their own facility and producing year-round. The value of a food incubator is that it gives aspiring entrepreneurs to build toward that goal as they develop new markets and build cash flow to enable them to take on that larger risk and investment. We certainly foresee the Madison Regional Food Incubator providing shared business services as well as management and technical assistance. Our feasibility study will look at how successful incubators in the state and across the state are able provide this wrap-around support in a sustainable manner. Likewise, we hope to be able to develop relationships with organizations that may provide financial resources to qualified incubator tenants. Project partners have professional relationships with managers of revolving loan funds in several counties in the region, and we will explore those options once the feasibility of the incubator is determined. The Madison Regional Food Incubator will serve food entrepreneurs including caterers, food cart vendors, specialty food processors, etc. who live in the Madison-area or find it who worthwhile to drive to a Madison-based incubator. The Farm Market Kitchen in Algoma, which has upwards of sixty tenants today, some of whom travel hundreds of miles round-trip to use that facility as needed. Based on that experience, we do expect some non-farmer clients to commute from all of the eight counties in the 8-county Madison Region that is served by Thrive. The current economic downturn has affected all of these counties to varying degrees. The Madison Metropolitan Area has perhaps fared best, with its unemployment rate increasing from 3.4 to 4.2 in In terms of counties: Dec 2007 Dec 2008 Columbia 5.0% 6.2% Dane 3.1% 3.9% Dodge 4.9% 6.1% Green 3.9% 5.1% Iowa 4.2% 5.5% Jefferson 4.5% 5.9% Sauk 4.7% 5.7% Rock 5.1% 8.1% Source: State of Wisconsin Dept of Workforce Development Data not seasonally adjusted Poverty data should also be considered. Even in Dane County, where the unemployment rate is lowest among the 8 counties in the region, poverty has increased dramatically in recent years and shows alarming trends. There has been an increase in lower wage jobs at a time when higher wage jobs require more and more education than many in Dane County do not have access to. While county income levels may look high, it is becoming more and more a county with a distinct population of haves and have-nots. Entrepreneurial resources are more often targeted at biotechnology or other high tech businesses and not at businesses that might employ individuals 1

4 with lower educational levels. It should also be noted that over 37,000 people commute into Dane County from surrounding counties so that the workforce data for only Dane County residents does not adequately capture the entire surrounding workforce and their needs. Poverty Data for Dane County 2000# 2000% 2007# 2007% Increase Poverty all ages 29, % 50, % 4.1% Poverty, under 18 7, % 11, % 3.1% Eligibility for Subsidized Lunch 16.1% 23.9% 7.8% Source: U.S. Census Bureau We are hopeful that the counties surrounding Dane County will be able to coral the leadership and resources to establish food incubators in their own communities, and Thrive will support those efforts. In the meantime, a Madison-area incubator may be a welcome resource to dislocated workers in the 8-county region who suddenly find themselves in a position to seek out selfemployment and need support developing their food product ideas. It is also critical to understand the role that a Madison Regional Incubator can play for farm families in the region. The critical thing to understand about Wisconsin s farm economy is that the number of very small and very large farms has been increasing, while midsized farms are in a rapid decline. # of small farms # of medium farms # of large farms ,100 38,200 5, ,000 32,900 7,100 up 6% down 14% up 29% Source: National Agricultural Statistic Service While that data is statewide, the trend is certainly true in the southern portion of the state that the incubator would serve. Small farms defined here as generating less than $10,000 in gross sales per year include many ex-urban residents who engage in farming as a life style. However, many of these individuals have high hopes of growing their enterprise into a full-time, familysustaining business. The decrease in medium farms defined here as those with gross sales between $10,000 and $250,000 is a function of low commodity prices and high input costs forcing mid-sized farms to get big or get out. It is certainly important to support farm families who want to invest and expand production of commodity grains, dairy, beef and other products. Our agricultural economy depends on these larger farms. But what we also need are resources to support small and medium-sized farms who don t want to expand and compete in the commodity markets, but who instead want to target profitable niche markets, expand their seasons, and add value to their raw products. That is precisely what a Madison Regional Food Incubator would offer, and it is why a significant part of our strategy, as explained in the Section 2, will involve outreach and service to the farms in our region. 2

5 SECTION 2: APPLICATION Summary Page Establishing a Madison Regional Food Incubator is a critical to fostering the success of regional farmers as well as urban food entrepreneurs. This economic development project will create jobs and promote small business creation. It will utilize previous incubator studies and tap experts from successful models across the state. It will build upon the Project Team s successful pilots in 2008, which introduced two new product lines from a Madison chef and a Spring Green farmer. In 2009, there are several compelling and converging reasons why the time is ripe to launch a sustainable food business incubator in South Central Wisconsin. These include: The local food consumer movement Proliferation of artisan farms Lack of small-scale processing capacity New players public and private Multi-county, urban-rural collaboration Proven models in Wisconsin The economic downturn Successful pilot projects in 2008 A strong case can be made for locating an incubator in the Madison area. First and foremost, during the growing season a substantial percentage of farmers travel to the city on a weekly basis to sell their products, creating transportation efficiencies, critical mass, and economies of scale. Secondly, 400,000-plus metro-area residents and visitors offer a ready market for processed farm products via farmers markets, CSAs, groceries and other retail outlets. Thirdly, there is an ample supply of management and labor to carry out processing activity on farmers behalf. That introduces the notion of custom processing, which is critical to expanding seasons and increasing profitability for farmers. The potential for connecting food incubator tenants with local farmers has already being demonstrated at the Farm Market Kitchen in Algoma. Ironically, the economic downturn will likely increase demand for a food incubator, as dislocated workers pursue dreams of selfemployment. What s more, it s been well documented that immigrant entrepreneurs frequently find their foothold in food manufacturing. 1 By combining resources and expertise from Common Wealth Development, Thrive and UW Extension, our Project Team will leverage CBED support and continue our progress toward a sustainable Madison Regional Food Incubator in Incubator territory serving small-tomidsized farmers Incubator territory serving immigrants, dislocated workers, and other aspiring food entrepreneurs 1 A World of Opportunity, Center for an Urban Future, February

6 I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION & WORK PLAN We believe the goal of a permanent, sustainable food business incubator in the Madison area will move closer to reality by taking short, measured steps. The purpose of this feasibility study is two-fold. First, it will provide critical information and options to the Project Team and participating farmers and processors to make a confident go/no go decision on an interim facility in As the past nine months have demonstrated, these individuals are actionoriented. They made sound, collaborative decisions and delivered results. This study will allow them to continue their forward progress in Secondly, this study will provide data, models, insights and a strategy to develop a permanent, sustainable incubator facility in the Madison area. When the study is completed on December 31, 2009, it will provide the components for a business plan that will be further developed in 2010 by securing additional financial support. Our hope and intention is to break ground in 2011 on a Madison Regional Food Incubator that will serve Wisconsin farmers and Dane County food entrepreneurs. This feasibility study will be complete within the context of a larger strategic plan developed in 2008 (see graphic below) which will be further described under Need and Community Support. PHASE 1 PLAN & PILOT Assemble a Project Team Support pilots projects Secure funding for further study If feasible, proceed to Phase 2 PHASE 2 INTERIM FACILITY Rent pre-equipped facility to serve committed co-tenants Test out custom-processing If successful, plan for Phase 3 PHASE 3 PERMANENT FACILITY State-of-the-art facility Non-profit management Wrap-around technical support Incubator model plus expanded custom-processing service BUDGET SUMMARY Grant Request Match Total Common Wealth Development (CWD) $3,500 $3,500 Greenlink Consulting (GLC) $5,500 $5,500 Thrive (T) $6,000 $6,000 Ag Innovation Center (AIC) $4,000 $4,000 Farm Market Kitchen (FMK) $750 $750 Coulee Region Business Center (CRBC) $250 $250 TOTAL $10,000 $10,000 $20,000 This feasibility study will cover Lessons Learned, Market Research, Site Selection, Facility Design, Financial Analysis, Facility Management, and a Final Report for a Madison Regional Food Incubator. See detailed Work Plan and Budget in the table on the following page. 4

7 Activity Beginning & End Dates Outcomes & Deliverables Staffing (hours) Lead in bold CBED Budget Match Lessons learned Market research Site selection Facility design Financial analysis Facility management Facility management Final report Project management April 1 31, 2009 April 1 - May 31, 2009 April 1 May 31, 2009 June 1 30, 2009 July 1 31, 2009 Aug 1 31, 2009 Sept 1 31, 2009 Oct 1 Dec 31, 2009 April 1 - Dec 31, 2009 Summary of interviews with Carlson, Dave Loomis, and 4 other food incubator managers, including the failed Nuestra Culinary Ventures in Boston. 2 Summary review of past feasibility studies. Data results from web-based survey of farmers, current processors, and prospective food entrepreneurs to include product range, equipment needs, projected use, price points, etc. Comparables on 7 or more kitchen facilities in Dane County to include cost, square-footage, equipment, location, storage capacity, office space, etc. Equipment inventory and analysis based on survey results and interview with 4 or more incubators. Funding plan & pro forma financial statements. Operating budget, including staff & rent structure. Draft guidelines for Incubator Policies based on interviews and documents from 4 or more incubators. Draft of Management & Staffing Plan based on interviews and documents from 4 or more incubators. Final feasibility study report to include completed components above plus recommendations for next steps. Coordinate and oversee all project activities Pfeiffer (20), Bruner (10), Lawless (10) Pfeiffer (20), Lawless (10), Bruner (10) $500 (GLC) $885 (AIC) $600 (T) $500 (GLC) $885 (AIC) $600 (T) Lawless (30), Hole (8) $480 (CWD) $1,800 (T) Bruner (10), Lawless (10), Pfeiffer (10) Bruner (30), Carlson (10), Loomis (5), Hole (10) Bruner (10), Pfeiffer (10), Hole (5) Bruner (15), Hole (5) Bruner (25), Lawless (20), Pfeiffer (30), Carlson (5), Hole (10) Hole (20), Lawless (20) $500 (GLC) $442 (AIC) $600 (T) $600 (CWD) $1,500 (GLC) $500 (FMK) $250 (CRBC) $500 (GLC) $442 (AIC) $300 (CWD) $750 (GLC) $300 (CWD) $1,250 (GLC) $600 (CWD) $250 (FMK) $1,200 (T) $1,300 (AIC) $1,200 CWD) $1,200 (T) TOTALS $10,000 $10,000 2 Food Start-ups Losing their Kitchen Incubator, Boston Globe, November 14,

8 II. Community-Based Organization Description Common Wealth Development Common Wealth Development is a non-profit, 501c(3) community development corporation that has developed and managed numerous innovative economic, community and housing development projects during its 29-year history, primarily in the in Madison, Wisconsin. All of Common Wealth Development s projects have a track record of creative leveraging of private and public sector dollars and providing long-term benefits to community residents. We have successfully developed three incubator facilities as well as a 60-unit mixed income energy efficient housing development. Common Wealth Development currently oversees an asset base of over $12,000,000, which includes both housing and economic development entities and has a sterling track record of meeting all of its financial obligations in its 29 years of existence. Our 2008 operating budget was $1.5 million and we have a staff of fourteen. Common Wealth s core projects include owning and managing 104 units of affordable housing, managing an affordable home ownership program, running a youth pre-employment skills, job placement, mentoring program, and a teen financial literacy and savings program and managing two highly successful business incubators, the Madison Enterprise Center and Main Street Industries. Both facilities are financially self sufficient, fully occupied and have solid job creation records. Project Management Sarah Hole, Common Wealth s Incubator Facility Director, has over 13 years of incubator development and management experience. She manages the Madison Enterprise Center and Main Street Industries, both successful small business incubators. She is a member of the National Business Incubation Association and the Wisconsin Business Incubation Association. Sarah is also a key member of Common Wealth s Economic Development team and has feasibility study and business plan development expertise Common Wealth Development is a non-profit, 501c(3) community development corporation that has developed and managed numerous innovative economic, community and housing development projects during its 29-year history, primarily in the Williamson-Marquette neighborhood in Madison, Wisconsin. All of Common Wealth Development s projects have a track record of creative leveraging of private and public sector dollars and providing long-term benefits to community residents. We have successfully developed three incubator facilities. Common Wealth's successful business incubators include: the Madison Enterprise Center and Main Street Industries. Both facilities are financially self sufficient, fully occupied and have solid job creation records. From , Common Wealth Development partnered with Genesis Development Corporation, one of the largest black operated community development corporations in Wisconsin to develop Genesis Enterprise Center (GEC), a 70,000 square foot mixed-use incubator facility located in an economically distressed south side neighborhood. Common Wealth Development provided consulting services at every stage of the $3.5 million project. Project Work Team Sarah Hole Project Team Leader Common Wealth Development Greg Lawless Project Partner Thrive Anne Pfeiffer Project Partner Agricultural Innovation Center - UW Extension Amy Bruner Project Consultant Greenlink Consulting 6

9 Project Advisory Team Mark Olson Project Team Advisor Renaissance Farms Mary Pat Carlson Project Team Advisor Farm Market Kitchen * Dave Loomis Project Team Advisor Coulee Region Business Center * Kathy Ley Project Team Advisor Wisconsin Way Foods Lorna Zach Project Team Advisor Wisconsin Way Foods Lisa Wiese Northside Farmers Market Olivia Parry Dane County Planning Department * Carlson and Loomis will conduct some project work in addition to their advisory role. III. NEED AND COMMUNITY SUPPORT Establishing a food business incubator in the Madison area is a critical component in fostering the success of regional farmers as well as urban food entrepreneurs. This economic development project will create jobs and support the success of small businesses. Previous studies have laid the groundwork for the project: Common Wealth Development s 1994 study, UW Center for Cooperative s 2004 Central Agricultural Food facility study that included a food processing component and a 2004 Wisconsin Food Incubator business plan developed by Kathy Ley and Lorna Zach. As stated in our 1-page summary, the demand for a food business incubator is growing and the conditions are right for successfully launching this project. These include: The local food consumer movement Proliferation of artisan farms Lack of appropriate processing capacity New players public and private Multi-county, urban-rural collaboration Proven models in Wisconsin The economic downturn Successful pilot projects in 2008 A 2008 report by The Hartman Group documented the significance of the Local Food movement. 3 Consumers definitions of local vary: 50% say produced within 100 miles; 37% say produced within the state. But 68% completely or partially agree they would prefer a product that hasn t travelled a long distance to reach me. Furthermore, 74% of consumers say that locally grown labels are extremely or very influential in driving local purchases. The report concludes: Opportunities appear abundant for businesses seeking to make a buy local connection with consumers in their communities. In the 15 years since Common Wealth Development first explored the notion of a food incubator, a great many entrepreneurial farmers have stepped forward to meet the demand for local food. Wisconsin ranks in the top tier nationally in the number of farmers markets, CSAs, and organic farmers. Many of these artisan farms have established enduring, profitable relationships with local restaurant chefs and small, independent grocers. And as the more seasoned farmers push the limits of productivity, a new crop of younger growers are stepping forward to fill the seemingly insatiable demand for healthy, high-quality, locally-grown foods. 3 Consumer Understanding of Buying Local, The Hartman Group, Inc. February

10 Increasingly, a critical issue for both the farmers and their markets is the lack of appropriate-scale food processing capacity. A 2008 UW Extension report summarizes the problem: The viability of a local food system depends on creating an economically sustainable business model for farms... (and) it is becoming increasingly clear that a processing stream will be critical to providing adequate economic return... 4 In agriculture, seconds are fruits and vegetables that are rejected for retail sale for their imperfect shape, size or surface. While seconds are often suitable for processing ingredients, very few small-to-mid-sized farms have processing equipment on the farm or market outlets for seconds. Another key factor in farm profitability involves peak season production when a surplus of raw products Organic peppers left to rot near Black Earth. dramatically deflates prices, and farmers often cannot even cover the cost of harvesting. The combined effect of seconds and surplus translates into lost profits and high-value crops being composted or plowed back into the soil. Fortunately, a number of promising factors point to a solution. As the local food movement has blossomed, several organizations and companies, old and new, have entered the field and are poised to act collaboratively. State specialists and county agents in UW Extension have become increasingly engaged with local food. Non-profit groups like REAP and Thrive have full-time staff devoted to the issue. The state s Something Special from Wisconsin program has been re-energized. And innovative new companies like Greenleaf Market and Local Choice Distributing are making it cheaper and easier to get products into mainstream markets. It is especially promising that dozens of leaders from eight counties in South Central Wisconsin came together in December 2007 via the Collaboration Council to launch Thrive, an economic development organization committed to preserving and enhancing the region s quality of life. The start-up organization pooled substantial resources, and then chose agriculture as one of its three sectors of focus. Thrive and its supporters are fostering a spirit of collaboration and stronger urbanrural networks that will accelerate regional food system development. There are several compelling reasons why Madison offers a solution the lack of food processing capacity for farmers in Southern Wisconsin. First and foremost, a substantial percentage of producers travel to the city on a weekly basis in season to sell their products to the 400,000-plus metro-area residents and visitors. Secondly, these consumers offer a ready market for processed 4 Virtual Incubator Provides Local Food Processing Capacity, Anne Pfeiffer, Emerging Agricultural Markets Team, Annual report, University of Wisconsin Extension, December

11 products via farmers markets, CSAs, groceries and other retail outlets. Thirdly, there is an ample supply of management and labor to carry out processing activity on farmers behalf. (This introduces the notion of custom processing that will be explained further below.) That said, there are also good reasons to locate compatible processing facilities in rural locations through the region. First and foremost, that is where the farmers live and work. Secondly, the cost of real estate is generally much cheaper. And thirdly, a viable rural economy requires off-farm employment and entrepreneurial opportunities. The ultimate goal should be to develop a collaborative network of appropriate-scale processing options in metro-madison and throughout the region where local leaders step forward and promising facilities are identified. Fortunately, we have models to follow. With half its service territory comprising Lake Michigan, Mary Pat Carlson s Farm Market Kitchen in Algoma has proven that a dedicated food business incubator can work in a rural area. Meanwhile, Dave Loomis has shown across the state in La Crosse that a multi-purpose business incubator can support a food processing component. We will tap both of these pioneering leaders in our feasibility study. It s important to note that, while we have emphasized the benefit of a Madison-based food incubator for farmers throughout Southern Incubator territory serving small-tomidsized farmers Incubator territory serving immigrants, unemployed, aspiring food entrepreneurs Wisconsin, of course the facility would also serve non-farmers closer to Madison who dream of starting their own food processing venture. Ironically, an economic downtown could be good for specialty food processors. As people are less inclined to eat out, they are more inclined to buy ready-to-eat foods for home that offer the quality of finer restaurants. Furthermore, it s been well documented that immigrant entrepreneurs frequently find their foothold in food manufacturing. 5 Not only would a food incubator in Madison offer support to that growing population, but as individuals throughout our community lose their jobs in this recession, an incubator and supporting services will enable individuals to follow their dreams and create their own opportunities. And it is important to note that substantial steps have already been taken. In the summer of 2008, two dozen individuals were identified who were exploring the idea of a community kitchen in Dane County, either for their own use or to support farmers and entrepreneurs. UW Extension and Thrive conducted a web-based survey and convened three meetings to identify collaborative strategies and next steps. The surveys clearly pointed to an interest in locating a facility in or very near Madison. Everyone supported the concept of fostering farm product processing, though some existing processors did not use local ingredients. The scope of potential products, processes, uses and markets was broad: 5 A World of Opportunity, Center for an Urban Future, February

12 vegetable-based condiments, meats, canned, frozen and baked good, catering, institutional markets, etc. Major obstacles included start-up capital and finding an appropriate facility and location. There was strong consensus that the idea of a community kitchen in Madison had been studied to death and, while past studies required updating, real action steps needed to be taken. A meeting facilitated by the Dane County Planning Department led to a 3-phase strategic plan (see graphic on page 4.) It was expected that the longer-range details of the plan would be revisited through a formal feasibility study in 2009, but this preliminary plan was useful in propelling forward momentum as the 2008 growing season was winding down. The Phase 1 strategy involved the selection of pilot projects that would be supported by means of a virtual incubator. Ultimately we identified a food entrepreneur and then farmer, who (unlike many of their peers) had access to a licensed kitchens, but who did require technical assistance and support. The purpose was to develop a strong Project Team, learn what aspiring food processors need, and hopefully demonstrate the success of local food products. Our first pilot project was Tory Miller, chef and owner of L Etoile restaurant in Madison, had spent the summer growing salsa ingredients with the help of low-income middle school children. As their tomatoes ripened on the vine, our Project Team worked with DATCP officials to convey recently modified regulations for acidified products, and we also secured the services of a consultant specializing in small-scale food processing. By early October the salsa products were selling at the Northside Farmers Market. Our second pilot project was Spring Green basil producer Mark Olson. Five years earlier, he had the idea for ready-to-eat frozen meals based on local celebrity chef recipes and Wisconsin farm products. Mark found a chef and fine-tuned the recipes, while our Project Team sourced local vegetables, cranberries, wild rice, eggs and cheese. We developed promotional materials and introduced him to the owner of Metcalfe s Sentry at the Wisconsin Grocers Association. In November, Mark s Farm Market Dinners were launched at Metcalfe s first annual Open House and received extensive media coverage. The experience with Mark Olson highlighted the need and opportunity for custom processing. Like most farmers, Mark would prefer to spend his time in the field. And while he produces one main crop, most vegetable growers are juggling dozens, and during the harvest season they simply cannot devote time and resources to food processing. Many of these farmers have excellent direct and wholesale market outlets that could be served year-round. We believe there is a real opportunity for companies to offer fee-based custom-processing services to artisan farmers. In fact, there are strong potential synergies between custom-processing and a food business incubator. Mary Pat Carlson concurs, as several of her current tenants have started fee-based processing for farmers who supply products, specs, and packaging. We will further explore these synergies in our feasibility study. This extended discussion of the Need and Community Support demonstrates that the time is ripe for a Madison Regional Food Incubator. Consumer demand, farmer readiness, and a highly collaborative Project Team all point to continued success. 10

13 SECTION 3: DOCUMENTATION I Financial Statement Only copy of CWD s 17-page Consolidated Financial Statements for 2007 is provided with our application. If reviewers would like additional copies, please contact Sarah Hole at (608) II. III. Officers & key staff or outside service providers (attached) Fee schedule of outside service providers Amy Bruner of Greenlink Consulting is the primary outside consultant contributing to this project. She charges $50/hour. Mary Pat Carlon and Dave Loomis will be asked to make a small contribution of time to support the project, which we also budgeted at $50/hour. The match contribution of Greg Lawless at Thrive is calculated at $60/hour. The match contribution of Anne Pfeiffer at the Ag Innovation Center is calculated at $44/hour. The detailed Work Plan Table on page 5 explains where these individuals will contribute. IV. Letters of support Two are attached (Greg Lawless and Lisa Wiese.) Several were faxed to Doug Thurlow, including Mary Pat Carlson (Farm Market Kitchen); Mark Olson (Renaissance Farms); Lisa Wiese (Northside Farmers Market); Miriam Grunes (REAP); Anne Pfeiffer (AIC) If the limit is five, discard those from Project Partners, Lawless and Pfeiffer. V. Roster of Governing Body (attached) VI. Service Area Map See map on page 3. The area that will serve farmers will actually extend beyond the 8- county region served by Thrive, to include western counties where significant numbers of artisan farms are located, including Lafayette, Grant, Crawford, Richland and Vernon Counties. VII. VIII. IX. Authorizing Resolution (forthcoming via fax) Certification Statement (attached) Verification of Tax Status from IRS (attached) X. Request for Taxpayer Identification (W-9 form) (attached) Also attached: Resumes of Project Team members: Hole, Lawless, Pfeiffer, and Bruner 11

14 12