CITY OF SEBASTOPOL
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM
Meeting Date: May 2, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
From: Councilmember Zollman
Subject: Resolution In Support Of The Non-Violent Activists Who Attempt To Expose The Conditions Of Animals In Factory Farms
Recommendation: That the City Council approve the Resolution Funding: Currently Budgeted: ______ Yes ____X_____ No _____ N/A Net General Fund Cost: ______
Account Code/Costs authorized in City Approved Budget (if applicable) AK (verified by Administrative Services Department)
INTRODUCTION:
Tonight’s item is for City Council Discussion and Consideration of Approval of Resolution In Support Of The Non-Violent Activists Who Attempt To Expose The Conditions Of Animals In Factory Farms. This item was originally discussed at the April 18, 2023 City Council meeting and was requested to return with an amended resolution.
BACKGROUND
As discussed at the April 18, 2023 City Council meeting, four animal rights activists who are members of the international grassroots activist network Direct Action Everywhere (DxE), will stand trial in a conspiracy and burglary case related to three protests that drew hundreds to Petaluma-area poultry and duck farms in 2018 and 2019. They each face felony or misdemeanor counts of conspiracy and burglary plus misdemeanor counts of trespassing, unlawful assembly and theft. They were among hundreds of protesters who gathered at three different times and locations in 2018 and 2019:
• The first demonstration took place May 29, 2018, at Sunrise Farms, northwest of Petaluma on Liberty Road. About 500 people participated and members rescued dozens of chickens. • A second demonstration took place Sept. 29, 2018, at McCoy’s Poultry Services on Jewett Road and one chicken was rescued from the farm. About 58 people were arrested, including the four defendants.
• A third protest, which happened at Reichardt Duck Farm, west of Petaluma, took place on June 3, 2019, and had 600 demonstrators. Nearly 100 of them were arrested, mostly on suspicion of trespassing and conspiracy, officials said.
One of the defendants was in person at the April 18, 2023 Council Meeting and stated the next court date would be May 8th at which time a trial would set. This trail is for the defendants who were exposing horrific conditions and for being present when others rescued sick, injured, and dying animals from inside California factory farms. Although preliminary hearings have wrapped up, they are facing years in prison for acts of kindness and compassion.
Agenda Item Number: 6
Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: May 2, 2023
DISCUSSION:
The Council reviewed the agenda item and requested a revised Resolution similar to the City of Berkely.
The revised resolution is attached for City Council consideration. It is recommended that the City Council consider passing a resolution disavowing the prosecution, or exercise leniency, and to devote the resources that could be saved from these actions to instead investigate and prosecute animal cruelty in commercial animal operations in Sonoma County.
CITY COUNCIL AND/OR GENERAL PLAN GOALS
Goal 5: Provide Open and Responsive Municipal Government Leadership
5.3.3. Encourage and increase public awareness of City Policies, decisions, programs, and all public processes and meetings, by investigating effective methods of communication and obtaining feedback from the community.
Action CHW 5c: Practice an open-door policy in City programs, and actively engage and encourage participation from all individuals regardless of ethnicity, race, religion, class, disability, sexual orientation, and gender.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is not a project which has the potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, according to CEQA Guideline section 15378.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
As of the writing of this staff report, the City has not received any public comment. However, if staff receives public comment from interested parties following the publication and distribution of this staff report such comments will be provided to the City Council as supplemental materials before or at the meeting. In addition, public comments may be offered during the public comment portion of the consent calendar.
PUBLIC NOTICE:
This item was noticed in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act and was available for public viewing and review at least 72 hours before the scheduled meeting date.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with adoption of the Resolution.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council Approve Resolution In Support Of The Non-Violent Activists Who Attempt To Expose The Conditions Of Animals In Factory Farms.
ATTACHMENT:
Proposed Resolution
Berkeley Resolution
San Francisco Resolution
Agenda Item Number: 6
Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: May 2, 2023
RESOLUTION NUMBER XXXX-2023
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEBASTOPOL IN SUPPORT OF THE NON-VIOLENT
ACTIVISTS WHO ATTEMPT TO EXPOSE THE CONDITIONS OF ANIMALS IN FACTORY FARMS WHEREAS, it is a well-established scientific fact, as supported by 2,500 studies exploring animal cognition, that nonhuman animals have emotions, personalities, and the ability to feel pain, fear, and stress[1]; and WHEREAS, an international group of prominent neurological scientists issued the Cambridge Declaration of Consciousness in 2012, stating that nonhuman animals are conscious beings capable of feeling emotional states such as pain, stating:
"The weight of evidence indicates that humans are not unique in possessing the neurological substrates that generate consciousness. Nonhuman animals, including all mammals and birds, and many other creatures, including octopuses, also possess these neurological substrates[2]; and WHEREAS, the public in California cares deeply about nonhuman animals raised in commercial operations, as evidenced by, among other things, the passage by 62.66% of voters of Proposition 12 in 2018, which established new standards for confinement of farm animals and banned noncomplying products[3]; and WHEREAS, California's animal cruelty statute, California Penal Code Section 597 et seq., does not contain an animal husbandry exemption and thus covers cruelty inflicted on nonhuman animals raised in commercial operations; and
WHEREAS, California Penal Code Section 597(b) makes it a crime to torture, torment, deprive of necessary sustenance, drink, or shelter any animal, or cause any animal to be so tortured, tormented, deprived of necessary sustenance, drink, or shelter,[4] where the words "torment" and "torture" include "every act, omission, or neglect whereby unnecessary or unjustifiable physical pain or suffering is caused or permitted[5]"; and
WHEREAS, California Penal Code Section 597(e) makes it a crime to hold a domestic animal in confinement without providing the animal with sufficient food and water, and also provides a legal defense against the claim of trespass to anyone who enters the area where the domestic animal is confined for the purpose of providing food and water[6]; and
WHEREAS, the massive scale and industrialization of modern commercial animal operations leads to increasing numbers of animals suffering from starvation or dehydration, including piglets, turkey chicks, and egg-laying hens[7]; and
WHEREAS, notwithstanding the fact that leaving nonhuman animals to starve to death violates industry standards[8] and California law, commercial animal operations sometimes allow nonhuman animals to die of thirst or hunger when they are too sick or injured to reach food or water[9]; and WHEREAS, some consumers care deeply about nonhuman animals and are willing to pay a significant premium to purchase animal products from suppliers they believe have treated animals humanely; and WHEREAS, companies that supply animal products have been known to portray their treatment of nonhuman animals in a substantially more favorable light than the reality; and WHEREAS, little or no enforcement of California's animal cruelty statute occurs with respect to nonhuman animals raised in commercial operations; and
Agenda Item Number: 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: May 2, 2023
WHEREAS, peaceful activists have attempted to bring violations by commercial animal operations of California's animal cruelty statute to the attention of the public as well as law and regulatory enforcement agencies, including video and photographic evidence of animals caught in wire cages and left with large, untreated sores, and animals who had died of thirst, starvation, injury, or illness whose bodies were lying among the living; and
WHEREAS, 148 activists have been arrested in Sonoma County while trying to document the conditions of commercial animal operations and rescue nonhuman animals therein from thirst, starvation, injury, and illness; and
WHEREAS, four of those activists, including Sebastopol residents, currently face felony charges in Sonoma County in connection with those investigations and rescues, and additional activists face misdemeanor charges for the same; and
WHEREAS, the act of investigating the conditions of commercial animal operations and exposing abuses to the public and to law enforcement, and providing relief to nonhuman animals who are thirsty, starving, injured, or sick, is in the interests of both those individual animals and the public that cares about them.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Sebastopol that the Mayor and City Council hereby declare that the individuals being prosecuted in Sonoma County were acting under California Penal Code 597(e) to provide domestic animals with sufficient food and water and attempting to expose the abuses of nonhuman animals in commercial animal operations; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Council encourage the Sonoma County District Attorney to dismiss such prosecution or exercise leniency, and to devote the resources that could be saved from these actions to instead investigate and prosecute potential violations of the law in commercial animal operations in Sonoma County; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Council encourage law and regulatory enforcement agencies in California, including the California Attorney General and the California Department of Food and Agriculture, to investigate and prosecute potential violations of the law in commercial animal operations throughout California; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Council urge the California State Legislature to pass laws expanding the protection of nonhuman animals raised in commercial animal operations; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Council affirm the commitment of the Sebastopol City Council to the protection of all nonhuman animals; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution shall be sent to Sonoma County Assistant Sheriff Jim Naugle, Sonoma County District Attorney Carla Rodriguez, Sonoma County Deputy District Attorney Robert Waner, Assemblymember Stephanie Nguyen, State Senator Mike McGuire, Representative Mike Thompson, Senator Diane Feinstein, and California Attorney General Rob Bonta.
IN COUNCIL DULY PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 2nd day of May 2023.
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City of Sebastopol City Council by the following vote:
Agenda Item Number: 6 Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: May 2, 2023
VOTE:
Ayes:
Noes:
Absent:
Abstain:
APPROVED:
Neysa Hinton, Mayor
ATTEST:
Mary Gourley, Assistant City Manager/City Clerk, MMC
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Larry McLaughlin, City Attorney
[1] Mark Bekoff, After 2,500 Studies, It's Time to Declare Animal Sentience Proven (Op Ed), Livescience (Sept. 6, 2013), https://www.livescience.com/39481-time-to-declare animal-sentience.html. [2] Philip Low, et al., The Cambridge Declaration of Consciousness (2012),http://fcmconference.org/img/CambridgeDeclarationOnConsciousness.pdf. [3] California Proposition 12, Farm Animal Confinement Initiative (2018), Ballotpedia, https://ballotpedia.org/California Proposition 12, Farm Animal Confinement Initiative (201B)#Election results. [4] Cal. Penal Code§ 597(b).
[5] Cal. Penal Code § 599b.
[6] Cal. Penal Code§ 597e ("Any person who impounds, or causes to be impounded in any pound, any domestic animal, shall supply it during such confinement with a sufficient quantity of good and wholesome food and water, and in default thereof, is guilty of a misdemeanor.").
[7] A 2015 Coalition for a Sustainable Egg Supply report found that up to 50% of mortality at a modern egg farm was caused by the birds being "emaciated" or "dehydrated." The Center for Food Integrity, Coalition for Sustainable Egg Supply Final Research Results, 8 (2001), https://www2.sustainableeggcoalition.org/document center/download/final results/ResearchResultsReportAppendix.pdf. A 2001 turkey industry study found "starveout" to be a growing problem and noted that this problem should not be considered "normal." Tasheez Aziz, Early Mortality and Starveout in Pou/ts Can Be Reduced, 17 World Poultry 12 (2001), https://www.dropbox.com/s/vzik3fs5pcjxvvb/poult%20mortality.pdf?dl=O. Finally, a 2014 pig industry study found that starvation was becoming a major cause of piglet mortality.
S. A. Edwards & E. M. Baxter, Piglet Mortality: Causes and Prevention, in The Gestating and Lactating Sow (Chantal Farmer, Wageningen Academic Publishers, 2015), https://www.wageningenacademic.com/doi/abs/10.3920/978-90-8686-803-2 11. [8] The Global Animal Partnership's lowest standard (Step 1) for egg farms, for example, indicates that "sick or injured hens must be treated promptly" or "euthanized." Global Animal Partnership, 5-Step® Animal Welfare Rating Pilot Standards for Laying Hens v1.0, 13, (2017), https://globalanimalpartnership.org/wp- content/uploads/2017/07/5%E2%80%90Step%C2%AE-Animal-Welfare-RatingPilot Standards-for-Laying-Hens-v1.0.pdf. The standards expressly indicate that hens who are "lame and unable to easily reach food and water" are included in this category.
[9] See, e.g., Sonoma County Animal Services, Case Report, Sept. 29, 2018, https://www.dropbox.com/s/qzceqj41nqzr2pb/Case%20Report%20SoCo%20Animal%20 Services%20REDACTED%20%20%282%29.pdf?dl=0 ("There are nine living chickens .. . [n]one are able to stand on their own and all are wet and soiled. All of these 9 birds appear stressed and are panting All of living birds are in poor health and are in distress."). This report was produced in response to the activists' attempted removal of nine birds from a commercial facility, which such birds were subsequently confiscated by the Sonoma County Sheriff and delivered to, and examined and ultimately euthanized by, Sonoma County Animal Services. The report listed an individual associated with the commercial facility as a suspect in violation of California Penal Code Section 597.
Agenda Item Number: 6
Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: May 2, 2023
Agenda Item Number: 6
Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: May 2, 2023
Agenda Item Number: 6
Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: May 2, 2023
Agenda Item Number: 6
Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: May 2, 2023
Agenda Item Number: 6
Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: May 2, 2023
FILE NO. 200126 RESOLUTION NO. 261-20
1 [Supporting Activists Facing Prosecution in Sonoma County - Conditions of Animals in Factory Farms]
2 3 Resolution supporting the non-violent activists facing prosecution in Sonoma County 4 over their attempt to expose the conditions of animals in factory farms. 5 6 . WHEREAS, California Penal Code, Section 597(b) makes it a crime to torture, 7 torment, deprive of necessary sustenance, drink, or shelter any animal, or cause any animal 8 to be so tortured, tormented, deprived of necessary sustenance, drink, or shelter, where the 9 words "torment" and "torture" include "every act, omission, or neglect whereby unnecessary 10 or unjustifiable physical pain or suffering is caused or permitted"; and 11 WHEREAS, California Penal Code, Section 597(e) makes it a crime to hold a domestic 12 animal in confinement without providing the animal with sufficient food and water, and also 13 provides a legal defense against the claim of trespass to anyone who enters the area where 14 the domestic animal is confined for the purpose of providing food and water; and 15 WHEREAS, California's animal cruelty statute, California Penal Code, Section 597 et 16 seq., does not contain an animal husbandry exemption and thus covers cruelty inflicted on 17 animals raised in commercial operations; and
18 WHER~AS, The pub!ic in California cares deeply about animals raised in commercial 19 operations, as evidenced by, among other things, the passage by 62.66% of voters of 20 Proposition 12 in 2018, which established new standards for confinement of farm animals ·and 21 banned noncomplying products; and
22 WHEREAS, The increa?ingly massive scale of industrialization of modern commercial 23 animal operations leads to increasing numbers of animals suffering from starvation or 24 dehydration; and
25 Supervisors Haney; Preston
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Page 1
Agenda Item Number: 6
Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: May 2, 2023
1 WHEREAS, Notwithstanding the fact that leaving animals to starve to death violates 2 industry standards and California law, commercial animal operations routinely allow animals 3 to die of thirst or hunger when they are too sick or injured to reach food or water; and 4 WHEREAS, Many San Francisco consumers care deeply about animals and are willing 5 to pay a significant premium to purchase animal products from suppliers they believe have 6 treated animals humanely; and
7 WHEREAS, Companies that supply animal products have been known to portray their 8 treatment of animals in a substantially more favorable light than the reality; and 9 WHEREAS, Little or no enforcement of California's animal cruelty statute occurs with 1 O respect to animals raised in commercial operations; and 11 WHEREAS, Peaceful activists have attempted to bring violations by commercial animal 12 operations of California's animal cruelty statute to the attention of the public as well as law 13 and regulatory enforcement agencies, including video and photographic evidence of animals 14 caught in wire cages and left with large, untreated sores, and animals who had died of thirst, 15 starvation, injury, or illness whose bodies were lying among the living; and 16 WHEREAS, 148 activists, some of whom are San Francisco residents, were arrested in 17 Sonoma County while trying to document the conditions of commercial animal operations and 18 rescue animals therein from thirst, starvation, injury, and illness; and 19 WHEREAS, Six of those activists currently face felony charges in Sonoma County in 20 connection with those investigations and rescues, and an additional seven activists face 21 misdemeanor charges for the same; and
22 WHEREAS, The act of investigating the conditions of commercial animal operations 23 and exposing abuses to the· public and to law enforcement, and providing relief to animals 24 who are thirsty, starving, injured, or sick, is in the interests of both those individual animals 25 and the public that cares about them; now, therefore, be it Supervisors Haney; Preston
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Page2
Agenda Item Number: 6
Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: May 2, 2023
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14 I
15 1
16 !
17 [
18 !
t
19 1
20 J
21 22
23 24
25 RESOLVED, That the San Francisco Board of Supervisors hereby declare that the 13 individuals being prosecuted in Sonoma County are non-violent activists who were investigating and attempting to expose the abuses of animals in commercial animal operations; and, be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors encourage the Sonoma County District Attorney to dismiss such prosecution; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors encourage the Sonoma County District Attorney to devote the resources that could be saved from these actions to instead investigate and prosecute potential violations of the taw in commercial animal operations in Sonoma County; and, be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors encourage law and regulatory enforcement agencies in California, including the California Attorney General and the California Department of Food and Agriculture, to investigate and prosecute potential violations of the law in commercial animal operations throughout California; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors urge the California State Legislature to pass laws expanding the protection of animals raised in commercial animal operations; and, be it
- FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors affirm the commitment of the Board of Supervisors to the protection of all animals; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, That a copy of this Resolution shall be sent to Sonoma County District Attorney Jill Ravitch, Sonoma County Deputy District Attorney Robert Waner, Assembly Member David Chiu, Assembly Member Phil Ting, State Senator Scott Weiner, Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, Senator Dianne Feinstein, Senator Kamala Harris, and California Attorney General Xavier Becerra_
SupeNisors Haney; Preston
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Page 3
Agenda Item Number: 6
Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: May 2, 2023
Tails
City and County of San Francisco City Hall
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
San Francisco, CA 94102-4689
Resolution
Resolution supporting the non-violent activists facing prosecution in Sonoma County over their attempt to expose the conditions of animals in factory farms.
File Number: 200126 Date Passed: June 09, 2020
May 28, 2020 Public Safety and Neighborhood Services Committee - RECOMMENDED June 09, 2020 Board of Supervisors - ADOPTED
Ayes: 11 - Fewer, Haney, Mandelman, Mar, Peskin, Preston, Ronen, Safai, Stefani, Walton and Yee
I hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution was ADOPTED on 6/9/2020 by
the Board of Supervisors of the City and
County of San Francisco.
File No. 200126
Clerk of the Board
Angela Calvillo
London N. Breed Date Approved
Mayor
City and County of San Francisco Page 1 Printed at 9:01 am on 6/10/20 Unsigned 06/19/2020
I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution, not being signed by the Mayor within the time limit as set forth in Section 3.103 of the Charter, or time waived pursuant to Board Rule 2.14.2, became effective without her approval in accordance with the provision of said Section 3.103 of the Charter or Board Rule 2.14.2.
06/19/2020
_______________________________ __________________________ Angela Calvillo Date
Clerk of the Board
Agenda Item Number: 6
Agenda Item Number: 6
City Council Meeting Packet of: May 2, 2023