The Maine Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry’s advisory board reviewed a consultant’s summary of interviews and a DACF draft program framework Tuesday as it works to design the Agriculture, Food and Forest Products Infrastructure Fund. The session covered possible funding instruments, equity and outreach strategies, and next steps for metrics and public input.

Consultant Erica of InCommon Group told the board her team interviewed 12 of 16 advisory members and that the findings in the report reflect board input, not consultant recommendations. She said board members consistently identified infrastructure and capital access, market loss, workforce shortages and technical assistance gaps as top challenges for the agriculture, food and forest products sectors.

The discussion centered on a two‑pronged approach DACF staff presented: a combination of grants and loans. Claire Hawkins of DACF described grants that could have limited or no match and be paid upfront, and loan products with lower interest, flexible terms, lower collateral thresholds and the potential for conditional forgiveness. "Forgivable loans can offer higher protection or lower risk at a higher investment level," Hawkins said, noting they blend characteristics of grants and debt.

Board members pressed for clarity on prioritization and timing. Matt asked whether the interviews produced a ranked priority list; Erica said the report highlighted dominant themes and that DACF staff will use future sessions to refine priorities. Jody, a DACF staff member, recommended distributing the initial $500,000 prior to the outcome of a proposed bond vote so the fund can show early results that might help secure additional funding, while others cautioned about committing limited capital before larger capitalization is certain.

Equity and accessibility were prominent themes. Erica repeated board suggestions to reduce application barriers — such as simplified small‑tier forms, phone or translated support and partnership with trusted community organizations — and to consider earmarking a portion of funds for applicants who self‑identify as historically marginalized or underserved. Claire recommended equity account for a substantial share of scoring and mentioned an example rubric in which equity comprises about 30 percent of evaluation weight.

DACF staff and the consultant emphasized the need for pairing technical assistance (TA) with capital awards. Board input included ideas for a TA navigator program, funding community organizations to provide outreach and application support, and requiring or incentivizing TA alongside infrastructure grants to improve successful implementation.

Participants also discussed distribution approaches such as two tiers of awards (micro grants/loans and larger awards scaled to demand), prioritizing applicants who have not previously received department funding, and geographic weighting to broaden county representation. Claire noted legal and practical nuances for using bond proceeds to pay for TA and suggested staff consult fiscal/legal experts on allowable uses.

The advisory board split into breakout groups (farm, food distribution/processing, and forest products) to examine the draft framework and reported out sector priorities to guide further design work. DACF staff will convene follow‑up meetings, InCommon Group will produce a metrics report for a future meeting, and a public input period of roughly 2–3 weeks is planned before finalizing key details.

The board set its next virtual meeting for Aug. 27. With bonds unlikely to be decided until the 2026 ballot, Claire said the $500,000 currently available could be used now to pilot programs and create demonstrable results to support future capital requests.