Sebastopol City Council votes to oppose Measure J

The resolution opposing the measure squeaked by on a 3 to 2 vote

On Tuesday night, after almost an hour and a half of public comment for and against Measure J, the anti-factory farming measure on the November ballot, the Sebastopol City Council voted to endorse a resolution opposing the measure.

Councilmembers Jill McLewis and Neysa Hinton, who put the resolution on the agenda, were joined by an obviously torn Mayor Diana Rich in opposing Measure J. Vice Mayor Stephen Zollman and Councilmember Sandra Maurer urged the council not to take a position.

McLewis and Hinton kicked off the discussion.

“This is an agricultural community,” McLewis said. “It is a community that is actually leading the way in so many ways. And the fact that anyone would come in here and bring this measure forth here first is just astounding to me. I mean, multi-generational families would be impacted here. There are many financial implications with this … I went to the grocery store today. I was looking around, and I thought, wow, you know, should this get passed, we could look in refrigerators in the grocery store, and we would not see Strauss, we would not see Clover, we would not see Cowgirl Creamery or Point Reyes,” she said. “I’m proud of these companies. I am proud that they lead the way, and they’ve been doing regenerative farming before that was even a word.”

Hinton concurred. “We’re known for our food-to-table,” she said. “Measure J is going to mean that food is going to have to be delivered from farther away…because we’re not going to start eating differently. We’re just not going to be supplied with as much local product.”

A tidal wave of public comment

So many people wanted to comment on this item, that Mayor Rich had people line up to the microphone by rows. First they took a comment from someone in the chamber, then from someone on Zoom. All in all, 40 people—in chamber and on Zoom—gave comments, including local farmers and ranchers, local environmentalists (who were split between pro and con), animal rights activists, and farm-to-table chefs. Twenty-three of those comments were in support of the proposed resolution against Measure J, while 16 people, supporters of Measure J, opposed to the resolution.

Many people, including the cream of Sonoma County’s animal agriculture community, came to comment on Sebastopol’s resolution against Measure J. (Photo by Laura Hagar Rush)

Local environmental activist Woody Hastings kicked off public comment, opposing the resolution and supporting Measure J, which he called “very limited and measured.”

“It uses the federal definition of a CAFO [Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation], and only impacts about 21 large operations, right? And that’s what the concern is. My wife and I moved to Sonoma County because we love the rural county. We love the sustainable ag and the leadership Sonoma County has shown on sustainability. This is about the large ones that are coming with these big warehouses—you don’t really see them too much. It’s to protect the smaller and medium agricultural folks. It is to protect our environment that we cherish—the water quality in particular—and it’s to have more humane treatment of the animals.”

Chef Krista Luedtke of Boon in Guerneville had a different idea. “I was born and raised a farmer’s daughter and became a chef, and I think one of the things I’m most proud of is the ability to cook with good local ingredients, to be able to get meat, poultry and dairy right in our backyard,” she said. “I can tell you, I’ve spent the last week with a bunch of chefs from all over the country, and every one of them is jealous about our access to really good local family products … I would really love to see this measure shut down.”

Luedtke said she knows there’s room to improve in terms of the treatment of farm animals, “However, I think that we’re going about this in absolutely the wrong way. Being born and raised in Wisconsin, I know what a CAFO is. It’s not in Sonoma County.”

Chef Dusky Estes (formerly of Zazu), who is also a rancher and owner of the Black Pig Meat Company, also spoke up in favor of the resolution against Measure J. “My life’s work has been against CAFOs,” she said. “I was a vegetarian for 23 years, and then decided to launch a restaurant with my butcher husband, and we agreed that all the animals in our restaurant would be pasture raised. This measure would make it that there would be no more Clover, no more Strauss, no more Liberty Duck. Instead, what would be available in the marketplace is all CAFO meat from elsewhere. I wouldn’t want to cook here in this county anymore.”

Dayna Ghirardelli, executive director of the Sonoma County Farm Bureau, spoke in favor of the proposed resolution against Measure J, as did Carmen Snyder of Sonoma County Farm Trails.

“If this very unnecessary measure passes, multi-generational family farms will be forced out of business simply due to undue restrictions on the number of animals they can have,” Ghirardelli said. These very farms are third party certified for animal welfare practices, so they are verified by trained professionals to determine that their animals are well taken care of. In addition, most are organic, which also has an animal welfare component embedded in its rules and production laws, as well as natural resource and environmental elements. The loss of these farms will have a trickle-down effect on ancillary businesses like feed mills, veterinarians and nutritionists, only to name a few. And when these resources are squeezed, so goes the viability of all sizes of farms. Jobs will be lost, not only on the farm, but within the Sonoma County economy.”

Many people, of course, spoke against the resolution and in favor of Measure J. They pointed out the environmental and health dangers of CAFOs, the animal cruelty they said was inherent in large operations, and the veritable flood of big ag money that’s been pouring into Sonoma County to defeat Measure J.

Kathy Cullen of Occidental hit all these points in her public comment.

“I’m a supporter Measure J, and I’d like to share a few reasons why. I want to start with documented animal cruelty. I know I’ve heard people from these small farms say that there is none. I’m talking about large CAFOs. Sonoma County’s Animal Services Department and others have documented criminal animal cruelty at Sonoma County CAFOs, but authorities at the local and state level have refused to act on this evidence. Footage shows sick and injured chickens and ducks, unable to walk to food and water, and dead cows left by the garbage. You can see these on YesonJ.vote website. Unlike the opposition’s website and materials which show stock photos of cute animals who are not even in Sonoma County.”

“Next where’s the money coming from?” she continued. “The opposition to Measure J has received hundreds of thousands of dollars from CAFOs and big ag lobbyist groups. This includes $300,000 from Western United Dairies based in the Central Valley; $85,000 from California Farm Bureau; over $100,000 from various farm credits, such as American Ag Credit; $120,000 between Weber Family Farms and Sunrise Farms…almost $50,000 from the National Pork Producers in Iowa and more. Yes on J was accused of having non-residents—I am a resident of Sonoma County—working on passing this measure. Yet plenty of money to oppose this measure is coming from outside Sonoma County.”

She noted that Yes on J is funded by “volunteers and individuals and has received no money from any PAC.”

“As far the environment goes, CAFOs are defined by the EPA, not by Measure J, specifically because they pose a threat of water pollution, she said. “According to the CDC, the agricultural sector, including CAFOs, is the leading contributor of pollutants to lakes, rivers and reservoirs.”

Multiple speakers discussed the pollution and health dangers of CAFOs.

“My name is Anna, and I’m the granddaughter of an honest farmer from Michoacan, Mexico. I know how it is to depend on animal farming to support one’s family. And now, as a healthcare professional, I see the effects of CAFOs on public health. Unfortunately, they’re a perfect breeding ground for disease. Let’s remember how COVID 19 started. Factory farm meat and dairy products make for a great profit for farmers, but they also are costing us our health and governments trillions of dollars each year to mop up the damage … Change is scary, but it’s important to think about our health and the health of future generations. ”

Another local proponent of Measure J, who didn’t give her name, though she said she worked at a farm in Sebastopol, said, “The 21 factories this measure will affect contain 3 million animals, and the rest of the 750 farms here in Sonoma County contain under 1 million. This is publicly available data directly from the California Agricultural Census. As I’m sure you’re aware, having read it because you are intelligent and educated lawmakers, that the idea that concentration doesn’t affect animal welfare is asinine. Small businesses are defined by the Small Business Act. This is not a nebulous category. It’s clear who is a small farm and who is not.”

Measure J supporter June Brashares accused the opponents of Measure J of exaggerating the economic damage that Measure J would cause—arguing that it’s misleadingly based on the value of all animal agriculture in the county.

“If you read Measure J and actually read your own packet for tonight, you’ll see that the economic frenzy of how bad this is going to get—like we’re gonna get rid of all animal agriculture in the county, and create millions and millions of dollars of damage—is just not accurate.”

Throughout the evening a long line of local farmers and ranchers, representing agricultural enterprises of all sizes, came to the mic to speak in favor of the resolution against Measure J. Some of those who spoke would be directly affected by Measure J’s CAFO ban, others worried about the broader economic impact of dismantling some of the county’s biggest animal agriculture operations.

Doug Beretta owns Beretta Family Dairy, which has been in business for over 70 years. “We run about 280 cows on our organic dairy and ship our milk to Clover. I urge you to read this measure, because there is nothing in here that talks about animal welfare,” he said. “This is all about numbers. And we all know here in Sonoma County that numbers do not mean that we mistreat our animals. Most of us are third-party monitored or certified through animal humane projects. Ninety percent of us now are organic … I started doing this when I was 10 years old. My grandfather taught me how to do it. My father taught me how to do it, and now I have a next generation behind me that I’m teaching. If it wasn’t for us taking care of our animals, we would not be in business.”

Slender, white-haired Kathy Tresch of Tresch Family Farms dairy, which is the largest supplier of milk to Strauss Family Creamery, approached the mic, introduced herself and then thew open her arms, saying “I’m that big CAFO dairy farm.”

Then she gave a little history. “Our farm started in 1905, when my husband’s grandmother came there. She witnessed the 1906 earthquake there. When I came to the farm, we were milking about 350 cows. I was interested in organic agriculture and the environment since I was in high school. When Albert Strauss went organic, I was so interested, and I wanted to do that and we joined him. We were the second dairy in the state to become organic when we followed Strauss into production.”

“At that time, we had about 350 cows. As Strauss grew, our farm grew. Now we actually had two dairies. The reason we’re listed as a big CAFO is these dairy share a fence line. So under the regulations, we’re considered one big CAFO. We milk about 350 Jersey cows at one dairy, about 450 Holstein cows at the other. These cows graze on 2,600 acres,” she said. “We’re a CAFO because, during wet winter storm events, we do lock our cows up in barns to protect the environment so that they’re not trashing the pastures, and it’s not eroding into the creeks.”

Responding to a critique about nitrate levels, she said, “We all are under a program at the North Coast Water Quality Control Board. Our wells are monitored. We’re checked for coliform, we’re checked for nitrates. We do not exceed these levels. We are not endangering your health. We care about our health, our farm and the environment. We’re not a factory farm. I really wish you guys could stop using that term. It’s subjective, and it plays on people’s emotions, and it’s not what the situation is.”

Back to the council

When the issue came back to the council after public comment, Councilmembers Hinton and McLewis reiterated their opposition to Measure J.

Councilmember Maurer urged the council to remain neutral: “Sebastopol is a city with 7,800 residents, and I’m not comfortable with the city being like an activist telling people how to vote, because, frankly, I have friends on both sides of the issue. It feels divisive to say that the city should be voting one way, because the city has 7000-so-many people, and they don’t all feel that way,” Maurer said. “It’s not our job to try to affect the outcome of an election, and we need to respect the democratic process. It’s not a correct use of influence.”

Vice Mayor Zollman agreed with Maurer on this point. He also reminded the council that he’d brought forth a resolution in 2023 about the “right to rescue” animals, including farm animals, without facing prosecution (which passed 3 to 2, Hinton and McLewis dissenting). He blamed the divisiveness of the Measure J debate on the lack of transparency of large farms.

“There were public comments here tonight like, ‘All I want to do is just see where my food is produced.’ … What is the big secret? If everything is hunky dory in all of our farms, open the doors, let us all see. If you got nothing to hide, then just open the doors,” he said. “But apparently there are interests that don’t want us to see. They don’t want to have us see what really is going on on all of these farms. So for me, that is really, really concerning.”

He ended his statement by saying “I would encourage my fellow electeds to actually do what Councilmember Maurer suggested and take no position. But I have a feeling that my other council members will not do that.”

He was right.

The tie breaker vote fell to Mayor Rich. “As an elective I struggle often with the conflict between what I might personally feel and what I feel is best for our community,” she said. “We live in a rural community. We face economic pressures. We hear all the time about losing jobs, about our economy struggling, about the need to support our businesses. We enjoy the benefits of that rural community … So, for me, it’s not about pressure from outside interests. It’s not about big money coming from outside. It’s not about any sort of misguided misinterpretations. It’s about the local needs, and when I look at our local community and the messaging that we need to give as a city council to our local community, that is a rural community, I end up on the side of supporting this resolution to oppose Measure J.”

With that, the die was cast, and, with the final 3 to 2 vote, the resolution opposing Measure J became the official position of the city of Sebastopol.

See the full council discussion and public comment here. The Measure J discussion starts at timestamp 2:28. It is well worth listening to.