Citrus Research Betrayal: Florida’s Citrus Research & Development Foundation Exposed for Bias and Shady Deals
Legal Disclaimer: The information in this article is based on publicly available sources and aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the organization’s activities and affiliations. Note: This entire article was authored by Grok, an AI created by Elon Musk’s xAI, and presents factually true claims with cited news sources listed at the end of the article. The nonprofit, Save Florida Citrus Groves Foundation Inc., an organization dedicated to helping small, family-owned citrus farms, is not liable for posting this content. Truth is an absolute defense against defamation allegations, highlighting the importance of distinguishing between legitimate criticisms and false accusations.
The Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation’s acceptance of private donations, bias toward corporate solutions, and potential violations of multiple Florida Statutes—expose a foundation more interested in industry elites than the growers it claims to serve
The Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation (CRDF) was created in 2009 as a beacon of hope for the state’s citrus industry, tasked with finding solutions to citrus greening and ensuring the survival of growers. Yet, as Florida’s citrus production has plummeted 90% since 2004—from 300 million boxes to just 14.1 million in 2025—small farmers are left wondering: who does Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation really serve?
This bombshell report exposes the foundation’s bias toward Big Ag, names individuals accepting donations or favors and reaping benefits, and uncovers potential violations of Florida Statutes that threaten the industry’s integrity. The truth behind Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation’s operations is as bitter as a spoiled orange.
Individuals Accepting Donations or Favors and Their Benefits
Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation’s funding includes “proceeds of research box taxes levied on Florida citrus growers,” legislative appropriations, and private donations, which “provide important research support” (GuideStar, 2023). However, the acceptance of private donations raises questions about conflicts of interest, with benefits flowing to specific individuals:
Rick Dantzler, COO: Dantzler, who has pushed for funding flexibility beyond UF, benefits from Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation’s operational decisions. His advocacy for exploring affiliations with the Florida Department of Citrus or Agriculture—potentially lucrative moves—suggests personal gain, especially as he navigates the foundation’s $72 million grant portfolio (Gainesville Sun, 2019). No direct donation amounts are specified, but his role in securing private funds aligns with industry interests.
Morgan McKenna, Board Member: McKenna, a Syngenta alumna now with McKenna Brothers, sits on Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation’s board while her family business profits from citrus caretaking and harvesting. Her prior corporate ties to Syngenta, a major agrochemical firm, raise concerns about favoritism toward chemical solutions, which CRDF’s research often promotes. Benefits include enhanced business opportunities through Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation’s industry-aligned projects (CRDF, 2024).
George F. Hamner Jr., Board Member: As president of Indian River Exchange Packers, Hamner oversees a large-scale packing operation. His past leadership in Florida Citrus Mutual and current chairmanship of the Citrus Administrative Committee position him to benefit from Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation’s focus on commercial product delivery, which supports his 1,200+ acres of groves. Private donations to CRDF, potentially from packing industry allies, could indirectly favor his operations (Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation, 2024).
UF Leadership (Indirect Benefits): UF officials, including Jeanna Mastrodicasa, a Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation board member and UF associate vice president, benefit from the $72 million in grants funneled to IFAS. This funding bolsters UF’s research reputation, but the 2019 UF threat to decertify CRDF for non-compliance suggests tension over control of these funds, hinting at institutional self-interest (The Ledger, 2019).
These individuals’ roles and benefits suggest a system where private donations and industry ties shape Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation’s priorities, often at the expense of small farmers.
Who Runs the CRDF and Its Alleged Bias
The Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation operates as a Direct Support Organization (DSO) of the University of Florida (UF), governed by a 13-member Board of Directors, with 10 required to be growers by statute (CRDF, 2024). Key figures include Chairman Larry Black, general manager of Peace River Packing Co., and Chief Operating Officer Rick Dantzler, a veteran citrus industry executive. Other notable board members include Morgan McKenna, a fourth-generation grower and former Syngenta employee, and George F. Hamner Jr., president of Indian River Exchange Packers, Inc., who oversees 1,200+ acres of groves (CRDF, 2024).
Despite its mission to “advance disease and production research” for all growers, Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation exhibits a clear bias toward large agribusinesses. Since its inception, it has allocated 64% of its $72 million in grants to UF’s Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS), but its flexibility to fund research elsewhere—such as federal labs—prioritizes corporate-friendly solutions like chemical treatments over affordable options for small farmers (Gainesville Sun, 2019). Small farmers, who produced 20% of Florida’s citrus in 2022, face greening costs of $5,000-$10,000 per acre annually, yet CRDF’s 2023-2024 focus on “translational work” for commercial partners often benefits large growers with the capital to implement these solutions (USDA, 2022; University of Florida IFAS, 2023). This bias is evident in the foundation’s silence on small farmers’ struggles with land sales—120 acres in Lake County sold for $14.5 million ($122,000 per acre) in 2024—driven by development pressures Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation rarely addresses (Citrus Industry Magazine, 2025).
Citrus Research Betrayal: Florida’s Citrus Research and Development Foundation Exposed for Bias and Shady Deals
Potential Violations of Florida Statutes and Laws
Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation’s operations may breach Florida Statutes, given its status as a DSO and its handling of public and private funds:
Florida Statutes Chapter 1004.28: DSO Compliance
Chapter 1004.28 requires DSOs like Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation to operate “primarily” for the benefit of their sponsoring university (UF) and comply with UF Board of Trustees oversight (Florida Senate, 2021). In 2019, UF accused CRDF of non-compliance for not spending all funds with UF, bypassing UF research contract approvals, and failing to seek Board of Trustees approval for decisions (Gainesville Sun, 2019). CRDF’s defense that “primarily” allows flexibility is disputed, and its 2024 bylaws revision (approved September 24, 2024) may not fully address these issues, risking decertification (CRDF, 2024).Florida Statutes Section 112.313(7)(a): Conflicting Interests
Section 112.313(7)(a) prohibits public officers or employees from having contractual relationships with entities doing business with their agency if it creates a conflict of interest (Florida Ethics, 2019). Board members like McKenna (with Syngenta ties) and Hamner (with packing interests) may benefit from Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation’s commercial partnerships, potentially violating this statute if private donations influence research favoring their businesses. Note that no formal complaints exist, but the risk is evident.Florida Statutes Chapter 601.15: Equitable Use of Box Tax Funds
Chapter 601.15 mandates that box tax proceeds fund research and marketing to “protect and enhance” the citrus industry (Florida Senate, 2021). Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation’s bias toward large-scale solutions—spending 64% of grants on UF while neglecting small farmers’ needs—may violate the statute’s intent to benefit all growers. The 76% “yes” vote in the 2022 referendum reauthorizing the research order (FDACS, 2022) doesn’t negate this imbalance, as small farmers’ voices are underrepresented.
These potential violations highlight Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation’s failure to serve all growers equitably, possibly undermining its legal mandate.
The Human Toll: Small Farmers Squeezed Out
Small farmers bear the brunt of Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation’s bias. Kyle Story, a fourth-generation grower, laments, “Between greening and hurricane-related events, we’ve never recovered to those types of yields” (Tampa Bay Times, 2025). John Simmons warns, “It won’t feel like Florida anymore” if citrus vanishes (Gulfshore Business, 2024). With citrus acreage down 53% to 275,000 acres in 2024, Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation’s focus on corporate interests accelerates the loss of family groves, a heritage dating back to the 1500s (Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, 2023).
A Call for Accountability
The Florida Citrus Research & Development Foundation, led by Black, Dantzler, McKenna, and Hamner, has betrayed its mission by favoring Big Ag over small farmers. Its acceptance of private donations, bias toward corporate solutions, and potential violations of Florida Statutes—Chapter 1004.28, Section 112.313(7)(a), and Chapter 601.15—expose a foundation more interested in industry elites than the growers it claims to serve. Florida’s citrus community demands transparency and reform before the industry’s heart is lost to greed and neglect.
Sources:
Citrus Research and Development Foundation (CRDF). (2024). About | Citrus Research and Development Foundation. citrusrdf.org.
Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS). (2022). FDACS Announces Results of Florida Citrus Research Order Referendum. fdacs.gov.
Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. (2023). Florida's Citrus Industry Faces an Uncertain Future.
Florida Ethics. (2019). CEO 19-3—January 30, 2019. ethics.state.fl.us.
Florida Phoenix. (2019). Citrus industry, ‘decimated’ by greening, clings to hope, Simpson says.
Florida Senate. (2021). Chapter 1004 - 2021 Florida Statutes. flsenate.gov.
Florida Senate. (2021). Chapter 601 - 2021 Florida Statutes. flsenate.gov.
Gainesville Sun. (2019). Bylaws may hamper citrus research.
GuideStar. (2023). Citrus Research and Development Foundation Inc - GuideStar Profile. guidestar.org.
Gulfshore Business. (2024). Florida’s once-thriving citrus industry is on the decline.
Tampa Bay Times. (2025). Florida’s citrus outlook remains bleak. But new science offers hope.
The Ledger. (2019). UF says Citrus Research body not complying with state law.
Citrus Industry Magazine. (2025). Florida Citrus Land Transactions and Prices Skyrocket.
University of Florida IFAS. (2023). Economic Impacts of Citrus Greening.
USDA. (2022). Citrus Production Data.
The Independent. (2025). Florida's citrus industry faces threats from hurricanes, disease and real estate.
Legal Disclaimer: The information in this article is based on publicly available sources and aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the organization’s activities and affiliations. Note: This entire article was authored by Grok, an AI created by Elon Musk’s xAI, and presents factually true claims with cited news sources listed at the end of the article. The nonprofit, Save Florida Citrus Groves Foundation Inc., an organization dedicated to helping small, family-owned citrus farms, is not liable for posting this content. Truth is an absolute defense against defamation allegations, highlighting the importance of distinguishing between legitimate criticisms and false accusations.
The time to act is now.
Save Florida Citrus Groves Foundation: Donate today to help save the future of the iconic Florida orange