For the first time in 16 years, our District 2 Supervisor position is up for grabs. Here are my thoughts on which of the candidates will be better for local agriculture.

The two candidates that made it past the primary election in June are Cotati Mayor Sylvia Lemus and Petaluma School Board Trustee Joanna Paun, and there may be more similarities between them than differences. Both oppose developing farmland and prefer to build near existing public transportation and services. Both advocate for law enforcement accountability and non-cooperation with ICE, although Lemus has softened her stance on that issue in recent weeks. Both candidates support local food and agriculture, at least in theory. Neither candidate has any real background or experience in agriculture, so let’s look at what we do know.

Sylvia Lemus has cited her family wine business, her grandfather’s life as a farmworker, and her oversight of Cotati’s city-owned Veronda-Falletti Ranch as her agriculture bonafides. On paper, these facts seem relevant, but they don’t indicate any actual knowledge or experience. It’s clear that she values food and agriculture, which is an important quality in one of Sonoma County’s potential leaders, but that may not be enough.

As the interim manager of Veronda-Falletti Ranch from July 2024 to February 2025, I had the chance to observe her leadership regarding this unique operation. As a city-owned demonstration farm, the ranch provides opportunities for the public to learn from, and interact with, various aspects of farm production, from veggies to livestock.

From my first meeting at the ranch, it was clear that it had been overstocked for quite some time, which means that there are too many animals for the available space and resources. As a result of this management, the health of the soil, vegetation and animals had become quite negatively impacted. 

During my six months as interim manager, I gathered information and created a new management plan that would increase the health of the ranch, as well as the public’s interaction with it. A cornerstone of this plan included rehoming the ranch’s two cows, Nani and Nellie, to a farm sanctuary where they would have space and resources appropriate to their size. Moreover, the sanctuary was in desperate need of a friend for their recently bereaved single cow. This plan would cost the city nothing and solve problems on both ends. But when I presented the plan at a city council meeting on December 10, 2024, the city council was not in favor of rehoming any animals, for any reason. They voted to approve my three-year contract and my plan in every other regard, but the final word was: all the animals stay.

After consulting other regenerative ranching professionals, I had already accepted that it wouldn’t be possible to manage the ranch sustainably without reducing the stock (number of animals). For reference, the average recommended stocking rate for cattle in this area is about 2-4 acres per cow. To keep two cows, and graze in a sustainable manner, you would need 4-8 acres of pasture. Veronda-Falletti Ranch has about 2 acres of pasture…with 5 sheep, 3 goats, and 2 cows living on it. The numbers don’t lie. And this isn’t just a matter of the cost of feed; some city council and community members asked if we could just feed more hay. This is a valid question, and the answer is yes- that would keep the animals alive. But what about their quality of life? 

The ranch is not sized to keep cattle, and for that reason the city doesn’t own a truck and trailer, a squeeze chute, or a barn. This makes both regular and emergency medical care for the cows prohibitively difficult and unnecessarily stressful. The cows do not have any shade at all during long periods of time. The fly population causes constant physical and emotional stress due to the overabundance of manure on the property.  To put it simply, Nani and Nellie do not have a great quality of life, and they never will, as long as they live there.

I didn’t see a way forward. I was being directed to mismanage the environment I was responsible for, and to provide substandard animal care, which I wasn’t willing to do. I felt I had no choice but to decline the contract. My second in command took over management of the livestock and is doing a great job under the circumstances. The entity ultimately responsible for improving conditions on the ranch has been given the relevant information and chosen to do nothing. I see that as an absence of leadership. 

Lemus has said she’s proud of being endorsed by the Sonoma County Farm Bureau, but I’m not clear on why that endorsement is warranted. She’s never worked in any farming or farming-adjacent capacity, and the only clear connection between Sylvia Lemus and the Farm Bureau is that they are both represented by the same political strategist, Muelrath Public Affairs. 

Now let’s look into the other candidate’s lack of agricultural background; Joanna Paun has no track record to analyze, so we have to look at her comments on the subject. At one debate this summer she said, “Farmers are some of the best stewards of the land,” and went on to add that their leaders should give them the support they need to continue doing a great job. She has also said firmly, “Sonoma County’s water is not for sale.” And, responding to community concerns about unchecked development of farmland, she vowed to limit development to areas near existing services. Lemus has made statements to the same effect, but she’s accepted over $100,000 from developers and construction companies. That’s more than Paun’s campaign has raised in total, and a noticeably large sum for a local political campaign. 

A review of campaign donations for both candidates shows that Lemus’ top donors are developers and law enforcement agencies, with agriculture coming in third. However, only $1,000 out of almost $30,000 in ag-related donations came from entities not associated with the Farm Bureau. For that matter, only 3 out of 57 current Farm Bureau members are engaged in food production, according to their website. So a Farm Bureau endorsement might not be as meaningful as Lemus is hoping.

Paun’s campaign has raised $88,000, with labor unions providing the largest share ($39,000+). In the next-highest category of donors, $38,000 came from individuals (43% of donations). Lemus’ individual donors have only provided 5% of her campaign donations.

Since neither candidate has professional or personal agricultural experience, we must look at their donors and supporters, as well as their public comments and statements on their websites, to choose the best candidate for the job. While Sylvia Lemus has demonstrated knowledge and experience in many aspects of public affairs, she missed a good opportunity to show leadership in ag, and gives every indication of prioritizing developers over farmland. Joanna Paun has repeatedly expressed support for the ag community and has a grassroots campaign not beholden to business interests.

One thing is certain: regardless of who wins this election, District 2 will be represented by a woman of color, showing that Sonoma County values diversity and female leadership.