AAFCO sends an email to attendees specifically about our efforts for transparency in pet food regulatory meetings.
The AAFCO Board of Directors – government representatives of Kentucky, Indiana, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Washington, North Carolina, South Carolina, Colorado, North Dakota, and FDA – decided in November 2019 to ignore the legal requirements of Open Meeting laws. In November 2019, the AAFCO Board of Directors took action to close meetings to select individuals.
It just happens, that those select individuals AAFCO closed meeting attendance for – are individuals that have spoken out against some of AAFCO’s more questionable allowances in pet food. Such as ingredient definitions that violate federal food safety law, and high levels of heavy metals in supplements. It just happens, that those select individuals AAFCO closed meeting attendance for – are every single pet owner and pet owner advocate that has attended an AAFCO meeting over the past two years.
Shocked at AAFCO’s discrimination, many pet owners have taken action to advocate for transparency in the pet food law writing process. Pet owners have written emails, and signed a petition. And then AAFCO responded to our actions issuing this letter to AAFCO attendees on 1/3/20:
AAFCO appears to be confused. I’m NOT a “vocal critic of AAFCO” – I’m a vocal critic of violations of law in pet food, I’m a vocal critic of pet owners being denied Freedom of Information rights to publicly view pet food ingredient definitions and labeling regulations, and I’m a vocal critic of pet food being mislabeled allowing consumers to be misled. Pet owners (and myself) simply want law to be enforced. Lack of enforcement of law is what we are critical of.
AAFCO notified attendees they hired “a communications agency” to handle us. They feel they need “expertise in handling crisis communications“. I wonder…would there be a need to hire a communications agency if law was actually being abided by?
And AAFCO continued with their claim that the pet owners and advocates they closed the meetings to were/are affiliated with the Answers Pet Food lawsuit against FDA, AAFCO and Colorado Department of Agriculture. This is COMPLETELY FALSE. AAFCO and their attorney continues to refuse to provide us evidence of their false claim any of us are affiliated with this lawsuit.
Not giving up on the need for enforcement of law in pet food, today (1/6/2020) we sent emails to each state that the AAFCO Board of Directors reside in, alerting them to further violations of law. This time, we filed a complaint regarding violations of Open Meeting laws.
Briefly, Open Meeting laws require meetings where public business is discussed (such as developing regulations) by government representatives be open to the public. Violations of Open Meeting laws in some states, result in criminal penalties including fines, and jail.
AAFCO – the Association of American Feed Control Officials – is a not for profit 501 (c) (5) entity providing services to governmental agencies including, but not limited to, FDA. In public record, FDA stated in April 2019: “AAFCO is an association of state and federal agencies”. AAFCO provides evidence of their service to government within the “Purpose” statement of various AAFCO Committees. Some examples are:
- “committees for effective educational approaches in support of regulators”
- “development of uniform enforcement policies”
- “develop science- and risk-based regulations. Such regulations would support the implementation of effective inspection and compliance strategies…”
Being an organization that provides services to government agencies, the members of AAFCO (government representatives) are obligated to abide by their state or federal Open Meeting laws.
As example, in Kentucky – the home state of the current AAFCO President Kristen Green. Kentucky Open Meeting laws (61.800 Legislative statement of policy) states: “The General Assembly finds and declares that the basic policy of KRS 61.805 to 61.850 is that the formation of public policy is public business and shall not be conducted in secret and the exceptions provided for by KRS 61.810 or otherwise provided for by law shall be strictly construed.”
Kentucky 61.805 Definitions defines “meeting” as: “Meeting” means all gatherings of every kind, including video teleconferences, regardless of where the meeting is held, and whether regular or special and informational or casual gatherings held in anticipation of or in conjunction with a regular or special meeting.”
As a member of AAFCO’s Board of Directors – serving as a representative of Kentucky government – Ms. Green ignored her requirements of Kentucky Open Meeting laws when the Board “restricted access” or closed AAFCO meetings to multiple consumer advocates, multiple pet owners and a veterinarian. Kentucky law requires a complaint of Open Meeting laws to be filed with the agency (in this case the Kentucky Division of Regulatory Services) head. Which was sent today.
Click Here to read the complaint filed with Kentucky Division of Regulatory Services.
And we filed similar complaints in the states that every other Board of Directors member reside in as well as with FDA.
Click Here to read the complaint filed for Indiana Office of the State Chemist.
Click Here to read the complaint filed for Missouri Department of Agriculture.
Click Here to read the complaint filed for Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture.
Click Here to read the complaint filed for Washington Department of Agriculture.
Click Here to read the complaint filed for North Carolina Department of Agriculture.
Click Here to read the complaint filed for South Carolina Department of Agriculture.
Click Here to read the complaint filed for Colorado Department of Agriculture.
Click Here to read the complaint filed for North Dakota Department of Agriculture.
Click Here to read the complaint filed for FDA.
We don’t know if regulatory authorities will ignore these laws (similar to how so many laws are ignored in pet food). But we will keep trying (no matter how many crisis control experts AAFCO hires).
The facts remain: Multiple pet owners and pet owner advocates were banned from AAFCO meetings for NO legal cause. Each state and federal agency that participates in any AAFCO meeting are complicit to denying millions of pet owners their Freedom of Information/Open Meeting rights. Any and ALL pet owners and advocates deserve to have a voice in the pet food regulatory process. Each and EVERY pet owner deserves public access to pet food regulations and ingredient definitions. Pet owners can show their support to open pet food regulatory meetings by signing the petition to FDA – Click Here.
Wishing you and your pet(s) the best,
Susan Thixton
Pet Food Safety Advocate
Author Buyer Beware, Co-Author Dinner PAWsible
TruthaboutPetFood.com
Association for Truth in Pet Food
Become a member of our pet food consumer Association. Association for Truth in Pet Food is a a stakeholder organization representing the voice of pet food consumers at AAFCO and with FDA. Your membership helps representatives attend meetings and voice consumer concerns with regulatory authorities. Click Here to learn more.
What’s in Your Pet’s Food?
Is your dog or cat eating risk ingredients? Chinese imports? Petsumer Report tells the ‘rest of the story’ on over 5,000 cat foods, dog foods, and pet treats. 30 Day Satisfaction Guarantee. Click Here to preview Petsumer Report. www.PetsumerReport.com
Find Healthy Pet Foods in Your Area Click Here
The 2020 List
Susan’s List of trusted pet foods. Click Here to learn more.
jan blanco
January 6, 2020 at 5:05 pm
wow! AAFCO’S cojones just get bigger and bigger, don’t they!!!
T Allen
January 6, 2020 at 7:20 pm
Great job Susan! Talk about getting under their skin… They had to hire a “CRISIS Communications EXPERT” to counteract you (and us). It would be hilarious is it weren’t so telling. So this is good, it’s costing them lots of money to try to shut us out. But we aren’t going anywhere and the truth is on our side so eventually they will loose. I see new people on FB all the time that are being converted, usually after their pets get sick. 🙁 But the word is spreading!
Dianne & Pets
January 6, 2020 at 8:05 pm
Here’s a thought. Send consumers not previously known by AAFCO and have them ask if they will be banned from future meetings if they ask a question. Preface the question with a statement that they have no connection to the answers lawsuit because they neither work for nor feed the food. Does Canada still send representatives?
Purrrfectly Holistic
January 6, 2020 at 8:54 pm
Oh my goodness–I wonder what kind of shenanigans they will pull next?! Hiding behind attorneys is cowardly. There’s an article in PetIndustry.com magazine titled “AAFCO Keynote discusses how to gain consumer trust.” Apparently that was a wasted speech because they’re doing just the opposite. I don’t see an effort on AAFCO’s part to truly want to bridge that gap.
Donna
January 6, 2020 at 9:37 pm
If they have done nothing wrong and are abiding within the law, it’s interesting they feel the need for crisis management.
Their crisis management team is handling their public relations. Public Relations is about telling the public what you want them to know …… that does not always translate to telling the truth.
This was a final straw for me. I would never trust an agency that is not open and transparent.
And if I am correct about open records, the moment a communication is sent to any government employee it is subject to open records. And I believe that includes notes taken at meetings.
Michele Little
January 6, 2020 at 9:39 pm
If you have to shut the people you represent, out of an open meeting, something stinks and needs light and fresh air to see what the real problem is. Come out of the dark and fix the problem, don’t keep feeding it. We love our pets and the law can correct these wrongs. Follow the money folks.
Judi Cullina
January 6, 2020 at 10:51 pm
It’s not just AAFCO. Did anyone see the report on TV last week about the pork industry not allowing FDA inspectors to check farms out so the FDA told them to hire their own inspectors? Somehow, the collusion seems to be more than just for pet food.
jan blanco
January 7, 2020 at 9:48 am
WOW, now THAT is really scary! hello disease and pestilence!