Kent Whealy's Letter to SSE Members

[PapaVic]

How many of us are listing members of Seed Savers Exchange

The reason I ask is that Kent Whealy apparently has sent out an 8-page letter to all listing members basically giving his side of the story about how his employment was terminated and how he feels the future of SSE programs, livestock and seed collections are endangered as left in the hands of the current board of directors.

The letter is on fire with burning issues ... some personal and some that may be of concern to anyone who is a member of SSE.

Apparently, Whealy only sent the letter to listing members, I guess because those are the only addresses he has access to after apparently being barred from the property and files. But he asks that the letter be forwarded to other non-listing members.

Bill

[lavandulagirl]

I'd be interested in reading that. You don't list, Bill? Paquebot does, he said in one of his posts. 8 pages is long, but it'd be an interesting read, I think.

[PapaVic]

Lavandula,

Yes, I list and I got the letter at the P.O. today. I was just interested whether other SSE members had seen it and what they thought.

Bill

[plantsnobin]

If Kent asked that it be passed along, would someone mind posting it here? I don't know the situation, but I want to support organizations that I can feel good about, where possible. If they have strayed from the original intent, then I would like to find out more before spending money there. Seems strange that the founder can be kicked out, but I guess it happens lots of times when you get big enough to need a 'board'.

[Alan]

I personally would really like to read this letter as well since I am preparing or at least thinking of joining SSE and would like to know exactly what the accusations and what both sides of the story are before investing my money into SSE.

[johno]

I was gifted a membership to SSE a few weeks ago.

I'm an unlisted member so far, but I'd like to know what the heck's going on.

[paquebot]

Yes, there's a major problem in Decorah, IA. The man who founded SSE has been totally removed from the organization. He was even offered close to a quarter million dollars to just leave and be quiet about it. As the letter is evident, he chose neither to take the money nor remain quiet. I'd prefer everyone get a copy of that letter rather than comment further on its contents.

For a copy of the letter, write to: Kent Whealy, PO Box 653, Charlevoix. MI 49720

Or e-mail him at: [e-mail]

He's made the above information public for SSE members and concerned friends since his only access to SSE is a copy of the Yearbook.

The letter was quite an eye-opener despite my having been closer to the SSE organization than most others here. The only SSE store outside of Decorah, IA was in Madison, WI and about 12-13 miles from me as the crow flies. I was in there often beginning in the 1990s and the final time was a week before Christmas 2004. I knew many of the staff. Aaron Whaley was the manager although seldom there. Any question asked about SSE was answered except the final one. Why was the store vacated when I returned in mid-January 2005? As suspected, the reasons were confirmed when I last talked with Aaron this past May and we discussed that and other SSE problems. Location and profit margin were the reasons given for closing that beautiful store. And now they find a spare $240,000+ of non-profit money to tell a man to sit on his hands and keep his mouth shut?

Martin

[Tom Akers]

This is my first year listing so I'm not sure if I will get the letter or not. I would certainly like to read it in it's entirety.
Tom

[flowerpower]

Lotta money to keep quiet. Wow! Maybe someone (Alan ) could email Ken and ask him to post the letter here. Or give permission for it to be posted. I think alot of us would be interested in reading it.

[canadamike]

As far as I know a letter at large is public domain, especially when the writer asks for it to be broadcasted, and it is surely his intention if he has refused 250,000$ to keep quiet

[Mischka]

Basing your decision whether or not to "invest your money" in SSE should have nothing to do with Kent's letter whatsoever.

This is a word for word excerpt from it:

"Everyone needs to understand exactly what I am asking you to do, and what you should not do. First and most important, I don't want anyone to do anything that will cost SSE a penny: don't cancel your memberships; don't let this affect your generous donations or decrease your purchases from SSE's catalog; and especially don't do anything that will affect SSE's yearbook exchange."

Please keep in mind that the last thing Seed Savers Exchange needs is for people to stop supporting it and Kent himself has made this crystal clear.

The politics of SSE have nothing to do with the mission that it's founders established.

[glow=red,2,300]Disclaimer: My opinion is no way is meant to express the views of anyone else within the SSE organization.[/glow]

[lavandulagirl]

Mischka - I don't think anyone here is interested in bringing down the SSE in total. I guess what is disturbing is the idea that they felt they had a quarter of a million dollars extra, that could be used to bind Mr. Whealy contractually to silence. Not that it's an unusual offer... but it sounds so very corporate. As others have said, there are two sides, AT LEAST, to every story, right? People who have an interest in seeing SSE move forward positively want to make sure they can help cause that to happen.

[PapaVic]

While Michka's excerpt from Mr. Whealy's letter is accurate and reflects Mr. Whealy's commitment to the basic philosophy of SSE, please note the excerpt is one brief paragraph long. The letter itself is 8 pages long and enumerates many more issues that are of concern to Mr. Whealy and other members of SSE.

Everyone probably already has read the other thread in this forum about the discussion of Mr. Whealy's letter at Garden Web, and you probably have linked to the Garden Web discussion and read it too. If not, do so quickly, as GW probably will take that discussion down or at least edit it severely since it contains discussion of "a competing forum." But if you do read it, before it's edited or censored, you will find that an SSE member claims to have posted a message at the SSE forum board discussing Mr. Whealy's letter.

Now let's put personality aside for a moment. Yes, Zebraman may be persona non grata with some of us, but if he indeed posted a message at the SSE forum board and that message was worded in a non-offensive manner, and it pertained to a subject not verbotten by the currently posted rules, and it was a subject of interest to SSE members, then why was it deleted with no reason given? I read the SSE forum rules this morning, and nothing in there prohibits an SSE member from posting a message or a question regarding the operations at SSE so long as the message is not worded as a "rant." What could be of greater concern, other than the perpetuation of SSE's collections, than the status of the founder and the status of the collections going forward after the removal of the founder?

And for those of you who were "thinking about joining SSE" but don't want to spend the money if there's a problem on the horizon, rather than asking you why you haven't joined thus far, I'll go in another direction and say ...

If you notice a "new direction" in the method by which the seeds are shared between SSE members, then make your decision based on your philosophy of how such a "seed bank" should be operated.

Explanation: A few years back, the price of seed shares was raised to $2.00 between listed members and $3.00 for an unlisted member to acquire a packet from a listed member. When that increase happened, the membership voted on it. Now, according to Mr. Whealy's letter, the Board has revised the bylaws so that the membership no longer enjoys voting rights ... but the letter is not exactly clear on what issues that would affect. But my point is, that the seed exchanges were between individual members. You send me 2 bucks, I send you a pack of tomato seeds or bean seeds or whatever it was you asked for. SSE got no part of that transaction. SSE just got your 35-dollar annual membership fee.

Can you imagine the volume of 2.00 and 3.00 transactions going on between members? How many members, how many varieties of fruits and veggies, how many total transactions? And SSE was getting no cut. Very non-capitalistic, huh? So, if you see a new set-up where say SSE either brokers the transactions or requires a cut in the transactions, then be wary. Otherwise, I say if you intended to join for the purpose of preserving and sharing, then go ahead and join.

Two points I'd like to clearly leave you with.

1) I started this thread to find out if there were any CURRENT members to whom Whealy's letter should be forwarded, because that is his intent. If so, then follow Martin's lead and contact Mr. Whealy at the address or email Martin provided. If Mr. Whealy still intends other SSE members to read his letter, he can then forward it to those who contact him.

2) I'd like someone to explain why it's not deemed appropriate to discuss Mr. Whealy's departure from SSE at the SSE forum. If there are two sides, or more, to the issue ... let's hear them. Or is this just one more example of "not fit for consumption by the peons?"

Bill

[lavandulagirl]

It's too bad that Zman was the author of the question at the SSE forum. Based on his track record, there's an excellent chance that the thread was started in an argumentative manner. I agree, though, BPV, it'd be nice to get the whole thing out and in the sunlight.

I allowed my SSE membership, which was a gift, to lapse out of laziness several years ago, but I'm sure I will one day re-up. I've never listed seeds, though, as I have never had the space to maintain the isolation distances that are commonly accepted. When I trade with friends, I either trade items that have had no chance of crossing, or else I provide the caveat that things may be crossed. But I've never produced enough to feel comfortable listing anything, either.

I am hopeful that this brouhaha is just a blip in an otherwise pretty stellar SSE story.

[Mischka]

billpapavic said:

I'd like someone to explain why it's not deemed appropriate to discuss Mr. Whealy's departure from SSE at the SSE forum. If there are two sides, or more, to the issue ... let's hear them. Or is this just one more example of "not fit for consumption by the peons?"

Bill

Bill,

I honestly see no need to insinuate that the moderators/admin of the SSE discussion forums consider the general membership "peons". Neither the moderators nor admin have ever publicly or privately used that term to describe members.

I am leery to answer this question for fear of having my words distorted or taken out of their original context and used for some nefarious purpose.

I will tell you that the discussion forum moderators/admin at SSE are not authorized by the SSE board to field questions and provide answers in this matter.

For now, please understand that this is a legal matter for SSE and as such, they cannot respond to anything without benefit of being advised by legal counsel beforehand.

Hope this helps folks better understand the current situation.