Tuesday, October 24, 2017

One Gro University: Fiduciary Duties of Directors & Officers (VPs)

PROTECTING THE SHAREHOLDERSby Mike Arnold

(From One Gro's Company Leadership Lecture Series - 10/31/17)

Co-Founders Mike & PJ discussing duties to investors.
There are a lot of individual entrepreneurs in Oregon and California who are raising investor money (typically illegally under the SEC rules and Securities Act of 1933), For most of them, particularly those with a black-market past that thrived on creative individuality, this may be the first time in their life they have acted as a fiduciary; that they have duties to others more than themselves; and that they have to act in every way that is loyal and in the best interests of their shareholders/investors. 

If you are an investor, make sure the management team you are investing in has standard operating procedures that cause them to thoughtfully come to strategic decisions and record them.  The last thing you want to do is invest in a company that will in the future be embroiled in petty infighting and minority suits.  This is not only inefficiently bad business but it also makes the company difficult to sell, hampering your investment exit strategy and devaluing the company and thus your shares. Do your due diligence and ask the tough questions about corporate governance.

Here’s some background on how officers/directors of corporations should be acting. Here’s a quick and dirty explanation of fiduciary duties.



From Wikipedia:

I.                  How Directors are Presumed to Act

The business judgment rule is a presumption that in making a business decision, the directors of a corporation acted on an informed basis, in good faith and in the honest belief that the action taken was in the best interests of the company.

The directors of a corporation are clothed with the presumption, which the law accords to them, of being motivated in their conduct by a bona fide regard for the interests of the corporation whose affairs the stockholders have committed to their charge.

To challenge the actions of a corporation's board of directors, a plaintiff assumes "the burden of providing evidence that directors, in reaching their challenged decision, breached any one of the triads of their fiduciary duty — good faithloyalty, or due care".

Failing to do so, a plaintiff "is not entitled to any remedy unless the transaction constitutes waste... [that is,] the exchange was so one-sided that no business person of ordinary, sound judgment could conclude that the corporation has received adequate consideration"
II.                How Directors/Officers Must Act.
A.    What’s a fiduciary relationship?
Carrie, Andy, Brigette and PJ discussing fiduciary duties.
In a fiduciary relationship, one person, in a position of vulnerability, justifiably vests confidence, good faith, reliance, and trust in another whose aid, advice or protection is sought in some matter.  In such a relation good conscience requires the fiduciary to act at all times for the sole benefit and interest of the one who trusts.
B.     What’s a fiduciary duty?
A fiduciary duty, is the highest standard of care at either equity or law. A fiduciary is expected to be extremely loyal to the person to whom he owes the duty (the "principal"): such that there must be no conflict of duty between fiduciary and principal, and the fiduciary must not profit from his position as a fiduciary (unless the principal consents).

From the Oregon Revised Statutes:

III.           FIDUCIARY DUTIES OF DIRECTORS– ORS 60.357
(1) A director shall discharge the duties of a director, including the duties as a member of a committee, in good faith, with the care an ordinarily prudent person in a like position would exercise under similar circumstances and in a manner the director reasonably believes to be in the best interests of the corporation.

(2) In discharging the duties of a director, a director is entitled to rely on information, opinions, reports or statements including financial statements and other financial data, if prepared or presented by:
(a) One or more officers or employees of the corporation whom the director reasonably believes to be reliable and competent in the matters presented;
(b) Legal counsel, public accountants or other persons as to matters the director reasonably believes are within the person’s professional or expert competence; or
(c) A committee of the board of directors of which the director is not a member if the director reasonably believes the committee merits confidence.

(3) A director is not acting in good faith if the director has knowledge concerning the matter in question that makes reliance otherwise permitted by subsection (2) of this section unwarranted.

(4) A director is not liable for any action taken as a director, or any failure to take any action, if the director performed the duties of the director’s office in compliance with this section.

(5) When evaluating any offer of another party to make a tender or exchange offer for any equity security of the corporation, or any proposal to merge or consolidate the corporation with another corporation or to purchase or otherwise acquire all or substantially all the properties and assets of the corporation, the directors of the corporation may, in determining what they believe to be in the best interests of the corporation, give due consideration to the social, legal and economic effects on employees, customers and suppliers of the corporation and on the communities and geographical areas in which the corporation and its subsidiaries operate, the economy of the state and nation, the long-term as well as short-term interests of the corporation and its shareholders, including the possibility that these interests may be best served by the continued independence of the corporation, and other relevant factors

IV.            ORS 60.377 - Standard of conduct for officers

(1) An officer with discretionary authority shall discharge the duties of an officer under that authority:
(a) In good faith;
(b) With the care an ordinarily prudent person in a like position would exercise under similar circumstances; and
(c) In a manner the officer reasonably believes to be in the best interests of the corporation.
(2) In discharging the duties of an officer, an officer is entitled to rely on information, opinions, reports or statements, including financial statements and other financial data, if prepared or presented by:
(a) One or more officers or employees of the corporation whom the officer reasonably believes to be reliable and competent in the matters presented; or
(b) Legal counsel, public accountants or other persons as to matters the officer reasonably believes are within the person’s professional or expert competence.
(3) An officer is not acting in good faith if the officer has knowledge concerning the matter in question that makes reliance otherwise permitted by subsection (2) of this section unwarranted.
(4) An officer is not liable for any action taken as an officer, or any failure to take any action, if the officer performed the duties of the office in compliance with this section

V.               CONFLICT OF INTEREST – ORS 60.361

(1) A conflict of interest transaction is a transaction with the corporation in which a director of the corporation has a direct or indirect interest. A conflict of interest transaction is not voidable by the corporation solely because of the director’s interest in the transaction if any one of the following is true:

(a) The material facts of the transaction and the director’s interest were disclosed or known to the board of directors or a committee of the board of directors and the board of directors or committee authorized, approved or ratified the transaction;
(b) The material facts of the transaction and the director’s interest were disclosed or known to the shareholders entitled to vote and they authorized, approved or ratified the transaction; or
(c) The transaction was fair to the corporation.

(2) For purposes of this section, a director of the corporation has an indirect interest in a transaction if:
(a) Another entity in which the director has a material financial interest or in which the director is a general partner is a party to the transaction; or
(b) Another entity of which the director is a director, officer or trustee is a party to the transaction and the transaction is or should be considered by the board of directors of the corporation.

(3) For purposes of subsection (1)(a) of this section, a conflict of interest transaction is authorized, approved or ratified if it receives the affirmative vote of a majority of the directors on the board of directors, or on the committee, who have no direct or indirect interest in the transaction. A transaction may not be authorized, approved or ratified under this section by a single director. If a majority of the directors who have no direct or indirect interest in the transaction vote to authorize, approve or ratify the transaction, a quorum is present for the purpose of taking action under this section. The presence of, or a vote cast by, a director with a direct or indirect interest in the transaction does not affect the validity of any action taken under subsection (1)(a) of this section if the transaction is otherwise authorized, approved or ratified as provided in subsection (1) of this section.


(4) For purposes of subsection (1)(b) of this section, a conflict of interest transaction is authorized, approved or ratified if it receives the vote of a majority of the shares entitled to be counted under this subsection, voting as a single voting group. Shares owned by or voted under the control of a director who has a direct or indirect interest in the transaction, and shares owned by or voted under the control of an entity described in subsection (2)(a) of this section may be counted in a vote of shareholders to determine whether to authorize, approve or ratify a conflict of interest transaction under subsection (1)(b) of this section. A majority of the shares, whether or not present, that are entitled to be counted in a vote on the transaction under this subsection constitutes a quorum for the purpose of taking action under this section.

Learn More About Investments

For more information about investment opportunities, text or leave a message at 541-525-9117.

Thursday, October 19, 2017

Oregon Cannabis Inhaler Company Creates Investor Value by Educating Labor Through Lecture Series

One Gro University Lecture Series: “Selling Securities in a Start-Up: Federal Rules Designed to Protect Investors” 


Mike, Cat, Randy, PJ, Kirstin, Brandon
Yes, One Gro owns four OLCC recreational marijuana licenses (3 tier 2 outdoor and 1 wholesale, and has another five pending (edible kitchen, dispensary, processing facility, and tier 1 indoor). However, at One Gro one of our most important assets continues to be people and the systems they develop. Consequently, we invest heavily in them just as they have invested in us.

We recognize that today’s team leaders are tomorrow’s middle or upper management. So, we want to cross-train them on the entire marijuana business. Are you a leader on the drying barn construction crew? Come learn about Organic Chemistry and the Science of THC Extraction. Are you a farm laborer? Come learn about how to fund a start-up without violating federal law. Are you a dispensary bud tender? Come learn about HVAC/Drying/Curing.  Want to learn about the growth of our company? Get a crash course in our THC and CBD inhalers we are launching in Oregon and plan to launch in other states in 2018.



We want our company’s leadership to be well rounded and ready to jump into an emerging market or new opportunity or crisis on a moment’s notice. But we also recognize that not everyone is a lifelong One Gro employee. People move on. We want to see our former employees working their way up into the leadership of our nation’s fastest growing industry. We want them to be more than a laborer. We want our talented individuals to be able to do anything and succeed in the marijuana industry like no one else.

That’s why tonight we spent an hour discussing the SEC and the Securities Act of 1933. Now that we are publicly soliciting private investment from accredited investors under 506(c), everyone is potentially going to be asked about the company by potential investors they may know. We want to ensure that the best practices are employed in our standard operating procedures to protect the company and potential investors, thus keeping our company clean and valuable for future acquisition.

We strive to create value for our friends and family that took a risk on our ideas when we had nothing. And we strive to create a labor-management relationship that is respectful and mutually enriching.

Interested in learning more about One Gro Marijuana Stock? 

Email Mike at OneGro dot com or leave a voicemail at 541-525-9117 or a private message on our One Gro Facebook Page.

We are still at $1/share as we close this first round and our first harvest. Accredited investors only. $100,000 gets you 1% at full dilution or roughly 1.6% now (refer to PPM/financials). PM regarding your level of interest and investor status.

One Gro Management Team:  http://onegroinvestments.com/our-business.html



by Mike Arnold

Co-Founder and Chairman of the Board

Mike Arnold is the strategic director and co-founder of one of the area's most successful law firms. As co-founder of Versus Publishing, Mike is the co-author of "Finishing Machine," a true crime/non-fiction book based on one of his most challenging murder cases. His legal exploits have been featured on national media, including forming the basis of a CBS 48 Hours episode entitled, "Trail of Tears." In addition to his legal expertise, Mike has experience in farming/agriculture and media management.