Case also claimed representatives were mislead about support for the bill. Someone told Case state representatives were told only four people testified against the bill. Case reviewed the testimony, as did Coffman, and found the submittals were about evenly for
Case also claimed representatives were mislead about support for the bill. Someone told Case state representatives were told only four people testified against the bill. Case reviewed the testimony, as did Coffman, and found the submittals were about evenly for and against the measure, with an equal measure of testifiers asking for amendments to the bill before it is adopted.
“It didn’t seem to be as lopsided as it had been (portrayed),” Case said.
Proponents noted Department of Agriculture budget cuts, which have left coffee growers waiting four to six weeks for a state inspector to grade and certify the coffee. Opponents called on arguments similar to ones used when calling for more stringent labeling requirements for Kona coffee in general, protecting the product’s name and farmers’ ability to charge a premium price for the product.
“We have lost almost any value in the name Kona Coffee because of the lack of support from the state to protect our name,” Randy Phillips of Kona View Coffee in Holualoa wrote in February. “Please try to sell sparkling wine from California with the name ‘Champagne’ and see where it gets you (in a lawsuit). … Please do not abandon one of the few protections the state has deemed appropriate (to) help Kona Coffee growers.”
