Following a September decision from Country Financial to no longer require nonfarmer memberships in Illinois Farm Bureau, harvest pressed on across Illinois farmland as emails, threats and accusations flew back and forth among county, state and national Farm Bureau organizations.

That correspondence included a warning from Zippy Duvall, American Farm Bureau Federation president, that the federation could expel Illinois Farm Bureau if it doesn’t immediately change course and require Country Financial, its affiliate company, to require memberships. If IFB does not comply, it could see a drop in membership from nearly 400,000 to 78,000.

IFB founded Country Companies Insurance in 1925, which later became Country Financial. Today, Country Financial operates across 19 states and is the largest farm insurer in Illinois.

AFBF blames IFB leadership for refusing to counter Country Financial’s decision, claiming they have the power to do so. IFB President Brian Duncan has said the decision was Country’s alone. Still, the same board governs both IFB and Country Financial, including Duncan as president, Evan Hultine as vice president and 18 district directors, all elected by Farm Bureau members.

Illinois Farm Bureau says in a statement to Prairie Farmer, “IFB is not looking to remove itself from AFBF. IFB values the partnership it has with AFBF and will continue to strongly advocate to remain a member of AFBF, while upholding agreements between the two organizations. We remain dedicated to the process of discussing and resolving the misunderstanding with AFBF.”

IFB declined to answer further questions from Prairie Farmer.

What happened

In mid-September, Country Financial notified its customers that beginning Jan. 1, 2025, it would no longer require Farm Bureau membership for nonfarm policies. It would continue to require an active Farm Bureau membership for farm-related policies.

IFB currently has nearly 400,000 members, of which about 74,000 are farmer-members with voting rights. Those farmer-members represent about 75% of Illinois farmers.

According to Country Financial CEO Jim Jacobs, the decision was made by Country management and supported by its board. In his Oct. 2 statement to AFBF, Jacobs said inflation, supply-chain challenges and severe weather disasters “have created untenable cost pressures for our company.”

He added that many nonfarm clients don’t understand why they need to join a farm organization and don’t tolerate the friction of the membership requirement, even in the digital age. He explained that some clients have lost coverage in their time of need because they didn’t pay their Farm Bureau dues on time, leading to frustration and panic.

“We have reached a point where the benefits of a membership requirement for non-ag products do not outweigh its challenges. Despite significant efforts to remove the friction caused by this requirement — including investing more than $15 million to combine the Farm Bureau dues with premium notices — we have not been able to entirely remove this point of frustration for our clients.”

AFBF fallout

AFBF Executive Vice President Joby Young says the national organization’s main concern is to ensure that farmers are in control of decisions that affect the overall organization. They believe in grassroots leadership from farmer-members and believe IFB has the power over its affiliate company to reverse the membership decision. They also believe Illinois farmers may not know the entire story.

“Farmer control is core to our entire organization,” Young says.

Membership is a big deal in Farm Bureau, and by counting both farmer and nonfarmer memberships, they are the largest farm organization in the U.S.

“We enjoy strength in numbers and appreciate the opportunity to share agriculture’s story with members who are not farmers, especially at a time when the public is more disconnected than ever from farming. Many nonfarmer members are supporters and allies of agriculture, so Farm Bureau’s connection to them is important,” Young says.

Declining membership also has a financial impact, which can account for tens of thousands of dollars in many rural counties — even more in counties with metro areas. “Membership dues fund county, state and national operations, so a decline in membership also has a financial impact on all levels of the organization,” Young explains.

Across the U.S., various state Farm Bureaus have partnerships with independent insurance companies, and others like Illinois have affiliated companies. Young says some of the independent insurers have changed the membership structure, but that the situation in Illinois is unique because “these are decisions Illinois Farm Bureau has the ability to control.”

IFB and AFBF will enter into a third-party mediation session on Nov. 11, following a protracted series of communications. Young says that while he can’t comment on the mediation itself, “AFBF’s top priorities in this situation are farmer control and prioritization of members.”

Regarding AFBF threats to expel IFB from the national organization, Young says he can’t speculate on the AFBF board’s potential actions.

“The last thing any of us would want is to lose IFB as a member of the federation, which would be most unfortunate for Illinois farmers and ranchers, who would lose a voice in the national policy setting of the largest general farm organization in the country and lose representation in Washington,” he says. “We hope for a resolution that keeps the Farm Bureau family together.”

Losing a state from the federation wouldn’t be a first for AFBF. The Alabama Farmers Federation left AFBF in 1981 and returned in 2005.

Still, Young believes disagreements can be overcome.

“We are the largest general farm organization in the nation, and it’s not surprising that we have disagreements from time to time,” he says. “The important thing is to try to work through them, which is exactly what we’re doing. It is our sincere hope that the matter will be quickly resolved so we can continue working together to build a bright future for farmers, ranchers and rural communities.”

Timeline of correspondence

Here’s a look at the timeline and correspondence shared with Prairie Farmer, which may be incomplete:

Sept. 17. AFBF’s executive committee sent questions to IFB regarding the change and requested IFB President Brian Duncan come before the Oct. 2 AFBF board of directors meeting in Madison, Wis.

Oct. 2. Duncan attended the AFBF board meeting and said he contacted Duvall before Country Financial made its decision, the IFB board was not involved, and Country would not make any payments to IFB to offset potential loss of membership dues. According to his statement, “We do not expect this change to impact IFB’s financial strength, either now or in the future. IFB remains financially strong. We do not anticipate any disruption to the important programming and services provided by IFB and its county Farm Bureaus to their farmer members.” He also acknowledged that “our delegate strength at the national level may be impacted,” and added that AFBF delegate rules don’t differentiate between farmer and nonfarmer members.

Oct. 3. AFBF general counsel called IFB General Counsel Jennifer Vance to discuss meeting. Vance requested discussion topics.

Oct. 9. Duvall and the AFBF executive committee emailed the IFB board of directors with discussion topics and requested a meeting by Oct. 31, “to try to restore the long-standing trust and cooperation between our organizations, and maintain the strength and unity of the Farm Bureau family.” Duvall’s email said that dramatically cutting IFB’s membership by hundreds of thousands would cause long-lasting harm to Illinois farmers and county Farm Bureaus. “To harm Farm Bureau simply to serve the business interests of a for-profit affiliate company is deeply offensive,” Duvall added. He alleged there was no advance communication from IFB to AFBF about the decision. And he reiterated that IFB has ultimate control over Country Financial and can exercise its power — “whether the board actively approved it or passively condoned it.” Duvall added that if IFB chose not to reverse the Country decision, AFBF would discuss options for terminating IFB’s membership in AFBF, because the decision violates the AFBF bylaws and membership agreement.

Oct. 16. Duncan contacted county presidents, managers and IFB staff to refute Duvall’s claims. Duncan said he communicated the change to Duvall on Aug. 23. He communicated that IFB has not breached any obligation to AFBF and that IFB’s membership in the national organization is protected by a 1990 settlement agreement, which was incorporated into a 2008 membership agreement between IFB and AFBF. That agreement said it would not terminate IFB’s membership based on business activities of its affiliates. “These circumstances are not the first time AFBF has attempted to interfere with IFB affiliates,” Duncan wrote.

Oct. 19. AFBF’s executive committee contacted Illinois county presidents directly. “The AFBF board has determined that IFB leadership’s decision to allow Country Financial management to voluntarily and unilaterally drop hundreds of thousands of Farm Bureau members violates the AFBF bylaws and membership agreement.” They shared that in response to their Oct. 9 request for a meeting, they received “a letter from a Chicago law firm to AFBF’s general counsel saying the IFB board will not meet with us and that future communication should go to the lawyer. That is not the Farm Bureau way. This development has raised even deeper concerns about trust, cooperation and a possible loss of farmer control at IFB. So, we are taking the unusual step of writing directly to you to ensure you have the full picture of what is happening and what is at stake.”

The letter explained that a dramatic drop in membership would reduce counties’ policymaking influence and would weaken the Midwest farmer voice in AFBF through loss of an AFBF board seat. They encouraged Illinois members to maintain control of affiliated companies to serve and benefit Farm Bureau members. They also explained that “losing membership in AFBF would mean losing the right to use the Farm Bureau name, to participate in the AFBF resolutions process in December, and to seat voting delegates at the AFBF convention in January 2025.” And they stressed they did not want that outcome. “We wish you strength and confidence in your own power as grassroots county Farm Bureau leaders in the coming weeks. We encourage you to talk among yourselves and with other peers across Farm Bureau and determine how to move your organizations forward.”

Oct. 24. AFBF and IFB agreed to meet in Bloomington, Ill., on Nov. 11, and agreed to third-party mediation if that meeting doesn’t successfully resolve the dispute. AFBF agreed to maintain membership status quo until after mediation, provided mediation is completed before Dec. 31.

Oct. 26. Duncan emailed county presidents and managers to refute Duvall’s Oct. 19 email, referencing “misleading statements about IFB made by AFBF.” IFB attorneys sent AFBF a cease-and-desist letter and requested mediation with a third party. “While we were hopeful a farmer-to-farmer meeting was possible, AFBF’s last communication to the IFB community convinced us otherwise. We now believe that meeting through mediation is the best way forward, so a neutral party can guide the discussions … we will not stand for these repeated attempts to disrupt and defame our organization. I refuse to believe this is the type of leadership farmers and ranchers deserve. IFB embodies what farmers stand for. We keep our word. We do the right thing. We follow the rules. We know a deal is a deal,” Duncan wrote. “Despite our efforts to protect our organization, AFBF’s untruths are likely to continue — AFBF’s playbook of scare tactics and fist-pounding rhetoric is what we’re up against.”

He concluded: “AFBF is right about one thing — there is a threat to Farm Bureau. But that threat lies in the words and actions of AFBF. Let’s come together as Illinois farmers to protect our great organization. This is our defining moment.”

Nov. 1. Duvall emailed county presidents and IFB board members. “There is no fist banging on our side of the table. We haven’t even gotten to the table with Illinois farmer leaders,” he wrote. “We trust that you see through these accusations. Everything we have written to you is true. We and the full AFBF board are farmers from across the country who have the highest respect for the federated structure and grassroots power of Farm Bureau. We do not want AFBF to control any state Farm Bureau. We only want farmers to control every Farm Bureau. And we fear that critical Farm Bureau membership decisions in Illinois are being made by affiliate company management.”

Nov. 1. Tennessee Farm Bureau emailed county presidents to express concern about Illinois’ decision to reduce nonfarmer membership, sharing that their insurance company had experienced similar concerns but remained committed to membership and offering TFB members exceptional service.

Nov. 11. Third-party mediation is scheduled to take place between AFBF and IFB in Bloomington, Ill.