Salamonie Mills grain elevator failed in March 2020 after a period of poor financial standing. Although records show the elevator was in trouble since as early as 2013, the Indiana Grain Buyers and Warehouse Licensing Agency continued to reissue a license.

The grain elevator should not have had a license during that period from 2013 to 2020, says Brianna Schroeder, an attorney and partner at Janzen Schroeder Ag Law. During that time, the farmers had no idea that the elevator’s financial standing was so poor. But Schroeder says that IGBWLA would have known the entire time.

“The farmers never got to see any of that, and I understand why,” Schroeder says. “But that means the agency, as the watchman, has to do its job because it’s the only one who has access to these financial records.”

Room for improvement

Schroeder shares that this situation could have been handled better. She understands that IGBWLA is busy working with a couple hundred licensees across the state, and she believes this was not an intentional oversight.

“They work really hard over there,” Schroeder says. “They’re doing the best they can with what they’ve got. We’ve never suggested that it’s out of any kind of malice. It just got sloppy — it got very sloppy. And maybe that’s a function of not having enough people or enough training, or losing sight of the mission, or not remembering the focus.”

Related:Salamonie Mills failure leads to closure

Those suggested areas for improvement are being addressed following an audit of the agency last year. The state Legislature requested an audit after wrangling with the fallout from Salamonie Mills’ failure. No. 1 on the list for improvement is more manpower, says Clark Smith, the new director of IGBWLA. Smith was not director during the time of the failure. He replaced Director Harry Wilmoth, who oversaw the agency during Salamonie Mills’ failure. Smith now wants to ensure that his team has the skills it needs to thrive.

“One of the things that came out of the performance review was looking at human capital and talent development,” Smith says. “So, part of that was adding head count, which is always a good thing, but also making sure we knew exactly what those folks will be doing.”

The specific measures that Smith is taking to meet that goal include holding monthly calls to touch base with the team, having additional trainings to sharpen skills and sending the team out into the field more regularly to develop stronger connections with the licensees. That last point will help create an open line of communication, something that Smith hopes will help mitigate any troubles that should arise with a licensee.

Related:Consider flexible cash lease for next year

“I think it’s sure going to catch things on the front end,” Smith says. “If a problem arises, there’s not going to be any question of, ‘Should the agency do this?’ or ‘Should the agency do that?’ It’s going to be: ‘Here is the situation. What is the agency going to do next?’ And then we’ll communicate first with the licensee, then communicate in whichever way that we feel is best with the public.”

Additional changes

IGBWLA also has assigned two new roles for analysts in the central office to create more focused positions. Before the audit, there was just a deputy director and an assistant in that office. Now, there is the deputy director and two analysts. Smith shares that having those specific roles and cross-training the people in those roles will help keep issues from slipping through the cracks.

“We have multiple eyes on those licensing documents that come in, and then the deputy director saying, ‘Hey, we’re going to give you the stamp of approval,’” Smith says.

Additionally, IGBWLA is implementing software improvements to allow for more accurate recordkeeping. Smith shares that this is part of an effort to terminate some of the paper-and-pencil recordkeeping that was previously widespread across the agency.

Related:Indiana Farm Bureau takes stance on ag issues

“I’m excited to see what efficiencies that can gain because some of the things that we’re doing by paper and pencil and by hand now, the software can just flag it with these changes,” Smith says. “But then we can spend more time, once we get that flag, picking up the phone and saying, ‘Hey, we probably need to have a discussion about this.’”

The software changes and improvements still are in early stages, Smith says. They are being funded by IGBWLA and the lieutenant governor’s office.

Same focus

Despite the changes to the agency, Indiana State Department of Agriculture Director Don Lamb says the focus of IGBWLA has not changed since its creation in 1975. As with Smith, Lamb also was not with ISDA during Salamonie Mills’ failure. He replaced the previous director, Bruce Kettler, in March 2023.

“I would say the focus is as sharp as it ever has been today, being there to safeguard farmers’ incomes,” Lamb says.

In the wake of Salamonie Mills’ failure, some farmers have shared that their trust in the agency has diminished. Lamb says it is going to take time to mend those broken foundations.

“If there’s trust that has been lost, then the only thing that gets that back is time,” Lamb adds. “I’m confident that over time, that’s what will happen. I’m proud of our people, and our people will earn trust.”

Smith has made it a personal mission to connect with farmers and licensees in his new role. He even includes his personal cellphone number on his business cards, creating a line of communication straight to him should anyone have concerns.

That line of communication is ultimately what IGBWLA will continue to improve as it learns from the Salamonie Mills failure and its audit. Smith encourages folks to pick up the phone and call the agency if something seems off at their elevator. And he will do the same, cultivating relationships with licensees to prevent and mitigate problems should they arise. As Lamb puts it, there is no way for them to communicate too much.

“There can always be more communication, and that comes from both sides,” Lamb says. “We as an agency can do a better job of communication and receiving communication, but that also goes out to the industry, too. We really desire to have that input from the industry. And when something doesn’t feel right, we’d really like to know about it.”

This article is the second piece in a three-part series of stories covering the litigation and outcome of Salamonie Mills’ failure.