The Golimbieski family, with Brenda at lower left, Joseph at upper right, with their children.
Agriculture authorities signaled a new determination to restrict herdshares in a new attack on Michigan raw milk.
The Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development filed a civil suit against Hill High Dairy, along with its owners, Joseph and Brenda Golimbieski, and its herdshare, BJ’s Cow Boarding, charging them with selling raw dairy products like cream and butter, along with other non-dairy products like honey, without the proper dairy and food licenses. Hill High was the dairy that produced the raw milk confiscated by Michigan authorities just a year ago from My Family Co-Op, and forced the producers to unceremoniously dump nearly $4,000 worth.
Michigan was the first state in the country to ban the sale of raw milk, back in 1947. But in 2007, its attorney general agreed to allow herdshares to operate, as a result of an outcry that resulted when the state seized raw milk in 2006 from farmer Richard Hebron as he was delivering it to an Ann Arbor herdshare. In 2013, the state formalized that policy with a written statement. The court suit puts it this way: “MDARD in consultation with raw milk proponents and the milk industry, developed a policy under which MDARD exercises its enforcement discretion and does not take enforcement action against herd shares if they operate pursuant to the policy.”
The civil suit indicates that the food confiscation action against My Family Co-Op last July was part of an ongoing investigation against Hill High Dairy. Because Hill High Dairy also sells milk to a processor for pasteurization, it is subject to twice yearly inspections by the state. It was during the course of those inspections, according to the suit, that MDARD inspectors became aware of the non-fluid-milk products Hill High was making available to the herdshare members.
The suit indicates as well that My Family Co-Op folded its herdshare into the Hill High Dairy after the July 2014 confiscation/dump. The combined herdshare has expanded its member base, adding two dropoff locations in May, so it now has 18 dropoff locations around Michigan.
After last July’s confiscation of food, the MDARD focused all its enforcement attention on Hill High Dairy. According to the suit, farm owners Joseph and Brenda Golimbieski put no-trespassing signs around the dairy indicating that the area of the farm devoted to herdshare activities was private and off-limits to inspectors. The MDARD then went and obtained a search warrant to gain access to those areas. Here is how the situation is described in the suit:
“On or about September 23, 2014, MDARD received a document from Mr. Golimbieski entitled ‘Legal Notice NO TRESPASSING.’ The document stated that ‘[MDARD was] hereby advised and put on legal notice that [its] unauthorized invasion of the Private property described herein shall cease and desist…’ The notice threatened both criminal and civil penalties for the ‘entry or invasion’ of the private property described in the notice. Although MDARD has authority under the Grade A Milk Law to conduct routine inspections of licensed dairy farms and enter onto property where licensed dairy farms are located without a warrant…given Mr. Golimbieski’s notice, MDARD obtained an administrative inspection warrant to conduct its next routine inspection” in December.
“Upon arrival, Insecptor Parolee and Deputy Director Philibeck presented Mr. Golimbieski with the administrative search warrant and their identification. Mr. Golimbieski initially indicated that Inspector Parmelee and Deputy Director Philibeck could inspect the dairy portion of the facility but would not be permitted entry to the cow share portion of the facility.” When the MDARD officials “informed Mr. Golimbieski that the warrant allowed them to inspect the entire dairy operation, Mr. Golimbieski reluctantly allowed them to proceed with the inspection of the entire operation.” That was when the officials not only “observed honey products on display” but also “signage on a refrigerator indicating the price of cheese, milk, and eggs and found cheese, milk and eggs on display inside the refrigerator.” Further signage showed what “appeared to indicate orders placed by individuals for cream and butter products.”
There are definitely shades of the Wisconsin enforcement effort against Vernon Hershberger and the Minnesota efforts against Alvin Schlangen, seeking to prevent the private sale of food, outside of the existing regulatory structure. Except the Michigan authorities are perhaps being shrewder than those other states, by filing civil charges, and refraining from filing criminal charges. That way, the case will be decided by a judge, rather than a jury, as was the case for Hershberger and Schlangen, who both heard “not guilty” verdicts.
Michigan also seems to be trying to communicate a message to the dozens of herdshare operations that have sprung up as a result of the policy allowing private sale of raw milk, that the policy statement will be narrowly interpreted to allow only fluid raw milk. The MDARD knows that raw milk consumers usually want more than raw milk—they want related products like butter, buttermilk, cream, kefir, and yogurt. They also want to be able to buy eggs, honey, and other non-dairy items. If that is what Michigan is doing, then it is essentially trying to limit raw dairy producers from growing and expanding their business opportunities.
Definitely one of the immediate lessons to come up here is that dairy producers, at least in Michigan, shouldn’t try to sell milk both for processing and raw. Because dairies are subject to inspection for the pasteurized milk, the state can at its whim clamp down on sale of other products, which is what it is doing in the Golimbieski case.
Another lesson is that so-called policy statements by regulators are only as good as the regulator in charge when the statement is negotiated. A new team has moved into the MDARD, and it’s an anti-private-food-sales team. That’s bad news for Michigan raw dairy producers.
David, I may have asked this before but I forget, how do regulators in charge get to be that, and who are they accountable to? case will be decided by a judge, rather than a jury sounds very unAmerican. Also. is ther any way to stay logged in rather than having to type user name and email every time? Please fix, and editing own comments would be awsome.
Hi Ora, I can see that you are not logged in because it says “guest” under your picture. If you were logged in, it would say “member” under your name. I think mine says “admin.” But when you are logged in, you can edit your own comments. If you are not logged in, the system won’t recognize you and won’t let you edit any comments.
I’m checking on being able to stay logged in, how that works… I stay logged in so I know it’s possible.
Ora, regulators in charge of a department are sometimes political appointees (big contributors or otherwise influential in state government) and sometimes Civil Service people who rise through the ranks. They are part of the Executive branch of government, thus accountable to the governor, as well as to the legislature that funds them.
I’ll have to check on how you stay logged in to the site.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Those amendments above come from a document called the US Constitution, for those that don’t know. Before their Constitution they had written another document outlining the reasons for revolting against England, The Declaration of Independence. Here’s an interesting line from it: “For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:”
As I’ve said before, I don’t believe clubs such as “the US Government” have any right to exist. It is based on mass murder. It stole every square inch of the homelands of Native nations. But I realize being against mass murder is considered “radical” these days. For people being assaulted by that horrid club, knowing their rules might (or might not) help you defend yourself. Their Declaration of Independence was written by Thomas Jefferson. If anyone doesn’t understand the simple English I’ve posted above, this is what Jefferson is on record as saying:
“‘Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything or nothing at pleasure.’
Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, June 12, 1823”
Is it really that difficult to understand what the right to “trial by jury” means?
Tomm, I was referring to the Sixth Amendment when I said the Michigan authorities had cleverly avoided filing criminal charges; that amendment specifically limits itself to “criminal prosecutions.” As for the Seventh Amendment, I haven’t heard that invoked in a number of other civil cases brought against farmers, such as against Morningland Dairy in Missouri, Meadowsweet Dairy in New York, and Farmer Dan Brown in Maine–all these cases were decided by judges….who each ruled against the farmers. Wikipedia says this about the Seventh Amendment: “While the Seventh Amendment’s provision for jury trials in civil cases has never been incorporated (i.e., applied to the states) almost every state voluntarily complies with this requirement.” Not sure exactly what that means; maybe a lawyer can help us out.
I don’t think we need a lawyer, David, as Thomas Jefferson already was one. “Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything or nothing at pleasure.”
The 7th Amendment says, “In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved…”
I don’t think you could word it more clearly than that.
Well, 35 of the 55 delegates to the Constitutional Convention, which wrote the U.S. Constitution, were lawyers. They didn’t agree easily on much of what came to be the Constitution, and lawyers still disagree mightily about its nuances (witness the 2nd Amendment on guns). As I said, I’m not sure why the 7th Amendment hasn’t been applied in these food rights cases–perhaps because there is no $$$ “value in controversy”. The controversy is over the rules and laws at hand.
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_founding_fathers_overview.html
Well I’m sure all 55 delegates would have had no problem understanding the simple English of the 2nd Amendment, which says “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”, means people living in cities like Chicago are entitled to have rifles and handguns, and local laws against this are clearly in violation of the Constitution, any way you look at it.
Btw the 4th Amendment says:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Nowhere in there does it say state governments can voluntarily go along with this or not, this is a right given to all the people. And so it is with the right to trial by jury.
Indeed the right to trial by jury was intended to be a check against government officials grabbing ever more power at the people’s expense, using their “metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything or nothing at pleasure”.
Last I checked, the Fully Informed Jury Association had some helpful information showing the real meaning of “jury trial” when the Constitution was written. I know amendments have been proposed to force judges to stop lying to jurors about their rights and role as jurors.
The constitution also promises that in order to have your rights taken away, you are guaranteed a jury trial. If you have your possessions taken away, you have the right to a jury trial.
If the state does not grant you these rights – they are INALIENABLE – which means they cannot be taken from you – then they are not acting in accordance with the US Constitution. I would guess this makes their laws and rulings invalid and not to be followed according to the instructions of the founding fathers. Really, if the US laws are abandoned then the people trying your case are not your legitimate authority. They are something not American or valid.
Thanks for sharing, David. As a former Michigan resident this is very disturbing. Can you suggest actions concerned citizens could take to let the MDARD know our our position? Thanks and keep up the great work. You’re amazing!
Thank you, Julie. My immediate suggestion is to contact members of the Michigan Commission of Agriculture and Rural Development. Their names and contact information are on this page:
http://www.michigan.gov/mdard/0,4610,7-125-1572_2878-8251–,00.html
I’d also suggest Michigan residents let their elected state reps know about their unhappiness about MDARD’s actions.
Dean Foods, mainly.
Just one question? Just who is greasing these corrupt bureaucrats & Politicians palms with Payola?
Dean Foods, mainly.
Thank you, David, for covering this disturbing turn of events and for making useful suggestions for action. It’s so frustrating that the state of Michigan is interfering with people’s private property. As the herdshare policy states, ” . . . [raw] milk is not for sale or resale.” Thus, laws about retail sales of butter and cream do not apply. If herdshare members want to hire the farm to turn *their* milk into cream or butter, it is no one else’s business.
It’s also infuriating to see MDARD belie its own words, “MDARD fully supports the growing movement for residents to obtain local, healthy and safe food. ” How do actions like this support the farmers and raw dairy end consumers of Michigan?
re “..to restrict herdshares in the state to selling only fluid raw milk” – Isn’t the point of herdshares that they are NOT selling anything other than animals? That they’re not selling or distributing raw milk because the consumer already owns the animal? If herdshares are selling raw milk, then how can they operate legally anywhere that sales are banned? This is what convicted Michael Schmidt — he called it a cowshare but the judge ruled that it wasn’t, that he was still selling raw milk because it wasn’t a real cowshare.
Sam, you are correct–I probably shouldn’t have used the word “selling.” If you look at the MDARD’s policy statement that I linked to, under “Key Points,” it says products like yogurt, butter, and cheese “are not considered to be part of a herdshare operation” and fall under other Michigan regulations. Now, I’m not saying that is right, or even legal. As you suggest, the herdshare owner has an ownership interest in the cow. And that may be the tack Hill High Dairy needs to take in fighting this suit–that it never agreed to any such policy statement, and that the case is about whether herdshares are legal in their own right, apart from any policy statement, as a contractual arrangement between consumers and farmers.
mark was here!!
David, I don’t know if you saw this posted on FSN today. It answers some of the questions that have been discussed here about illness, the age of who becomes ill regarding foods susceptible to contamination with E.coli 0157:H7. http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2015/07/cdc-releases-analysis-of-a-decade-of-e-coli-o157-outbreaks/#.Vahr3v3bKpo
the questions NOT answered by that CDC piece, are : how come, with twice as many incidents of harm from leafy vegetables, as from raw milk from all causes, we don’t see such produce categorically outlawed? And : of the 16 incidents of harm from raw milk, how many of those involved raw milk consumed by people on dairy farms, in which the milk was produced on condition that it’d be par-boiled on its way to market?
As usual ; statistics can be cooked so as to suit whatever someone’s agenda is. The agenda of the CDC being = to hide the truth about the consequences of the crimes perpetrated America by race traitors in high places.
Mary,
There are only three words in the article that have any real credibility and substance, “FURHTER RESEARCH IS NEEDED”.
That being said the incidence of such illnesses and their complications will remain the same and/or continue to get worse despite measures to reduce them, if tptb persist with measures, mandates, and protocols in medicine, agriculture and food processing that further assaults peoples immune systems.
As I’ve said before, they are pursuing a mistaken or misguided line of thought or course of action. In other words, “they’re barking up the wrong tree”.
Anyone who reads Food Safety News or Mary McGonigle-Martin’s fake raw milk website deserves what they get. Food Safety News is that disinformation rag that posted that “Why I Will Never Give My Kids Raw Milk Again” disinfo piece last year. Another crazed story making wild claims that no one independent has ever bothered to investigate. See my comments under that story (they’re buried waaaay down) for a thorough debunking of this government hatchet job.
Mary,
I take great exception to your ecoli illness data assessment. The data shows no deaths from dairy products when at least 7 consumers have died from pasteurized dairy products since 2007. Listeria is completely ignored yet it is a major killer for consumers and is directly related to pasteurized dairy products!! Ecoli may be rarely related to raw dairy….but listeria is exclusively related to pasteurized dairy products. Sad to see that studies do not look at the whole picture and only focus on part of the illness story.
Mark, this is an analysis of E.coli 0157:H7 outbreaks, not Listeria. If it was an analysis of Listeria outbreaks then it would have the data you are mentioning.
The only way to deal with health bureaucrats is to defy them and force them to impose criminal charges.
The following case is a good example and stems from the fact that the owner of the dog, rather then relinquish the animal to be euthanized as per a court order, decided to send it south of the border to a shelter in New York state. This didn’t sit well with health officials. The head of the district health unit has already resigned because of what has transpired and there are likely to be others who will undoubtedly find themselves squirming in their seats.
http://www.nugget.ca/2015/07/16/battle-with-dog-owner-costs-health-unit–22000
test
I have added a link to the actual suit filed by Michigan authorities against Hill High Dairy, in the post. Here it is as well:
http://davidgumpert.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/MI-HillHighDairy-FILED-Summonses-Complaint-2015-07-14.pdf
When one’s rights are taken away – the people doing it are personally responsible and thus open to lawsuits against them as individuals. A really good lawyer could bankrupt every person making those decisions.
Damn straight!
David it looks like there’s a bug. “Recent comments” often don’t appear correctly, for example my comment yesterday on the Fully Informed Jury Association doesn’t show up in the right place, if anywhere. It used to be you could follow comments by looking at “Recent comments” and see where you left off, now it doesn’t work, you have to read through all the comments in the article to find if you missed any.
Also, I’m posting as a guest because I don’t see anywhere marked “log in”.
I logged in a different way because I couldn’t find it either. I finally located ‘login’ just a bit ago. It’s below “subscribe to our mailing list” subscribe button, and right under where it says “Need an avatar? Login or use Gravatar”.
I made the word Login bigger so it will be easier to find!
Thanks, Sally!
There is a bug on the comments showing up in order and I’m working on that now. It has to do with the migration from the old blog to the new one. I shall never give up 🙂
I like the new format
Around OPDC nowadays we have coined a new phrase. Citiodiots. A Citiodiot is a person that works for an institution that regulates farming….but has not one clue about farming, cows, water, food or the air we breath. They are robotic idiots that are supposed to serve us all and end up dis- serving everyone in the society.
Great example….OPDC is building a new dairy barn and parlor. The permit process is complete except for the fire department sign off. The state, the local health departments, the air board, the water board….everyone has been courted and have signed off on literally 8 pages of comments that would blow your mind if I shared them here. Last…it is the fire department. What do they want….they want a 20,000 gallon pressurized water tank and fire sprinklers for the entire 12,000 sq foot milk barn and cow shade area….that does not have walls, is built of steel and concrete block and could not catch fire if satan himself torched it!!! I do not think that cows burn. There is literally nothing inside of the parlor that can burn and they want fire sprinklers!!!!
Citiodiots…such a great new word. The fire department….as much as I love them, this is ridiculous. What is the first thing to go in a fire..the electricity of course. They want pressurized water….yet, they have no back up concept for how water gets pressurized. Cause…cities have water that flows from some sacred source. Not on the farm. The well and pump is electrically powered, yet…..they can not conceive of the farm system and why sprinklers are a crazy idea. The 20,000 gallon water tank is also crazy….why do they need 3.5 truck loads of water to fight a fire that can not start. No hay,,..no grain…no fuels….no oily rags….nothing. Just concrete and steel!!!
Citiodiots….I guess people that run into burning buildings may be short of a few brain cells….why else can they not conceive of common sense? Why not sprinklers in just the offices and enough water to fight a fire for 30 minutes until a water tender can arrive. It is impossible to put 20,000 gallons of water through afire hose in just a few minutes. It takes 30 minutes to fill a water truck with 5000 gallons of water from our full blast domestic high pressure pump and well. Where did common sense go.
I guess they think cows blow up….or cow farts are extremely dangerous. The darn barn does not even have sides….it is a glorified shade structure!!
What ever it is…..I just do not get it??!! This same example can be applied all through government. When people lose touch with earth, water, dirt, food and real toil….they lose their brain function in the grand trade. I am convinced.
Good word! My only question is, how is it pronounced? At first, when I looked at the word, I thought it said “Citidiots”, (as in ‘city idiots’) but there is an extra ‘o’ in it. Reminds me of some inspectors I’ve had contact with over the years, along with stories I’ve heard from others who have had issues with them as well.
DD, maybe the extra o was borrowed from oops or a pronouncianting issue, sittiot idiots would be a great name for a band of sitters
Mark, thanks for sharing the info and agree on absurdity of it all. Cows are very dangerous that’s why the Indians worship them unlike the modern day warmongers bowing to the war machinery.
However you spell it, it’s a great word. Personally, I liked “darn barn”!
Just more regulated gubmint red-tape hooey.
Because City Idiots is a new word….spell it anyway you like.
Cool!
Cidiots, or maybe Citiots? I’m not sure. I’ve tried sounding it out, and this is the best I can come up with.
Do you want them to know they are the ones you are referring to? Or, would you rather have some sort of ‘code’ word?
I know…Cidiotards. I number of years ago, I participated in a blog that came up with new words for the blog’s dictionary. It was a lot of fun, and I got on a roll with one word after another.
Citiots is a code word….
So this doesn’t surprise me but i will always find a way to receive raw milk for my family..it keeps us healthy and “they/money grubbers” don’t want us to be healthy!
Just for the record tomorrow in a Michigan Courtroom a Judge will hear motions in the case against Hill High Dairy. I have filed a motion to be part of the case in what is legally known as an Intervention. I have filed in court documents that I am valid shareholder in a valid cow share agreement with Hill High Dairy. As such I am entitled to Cream from the cow I own. When I last checked only a Cow can make Cream. A Farmer may be good but not that good to make Cream. A Farmer and many others can make butter but only the Cow can make Cream. Cream is not a processed food. In the State’s response they actually said I could go purchase cream from the store. Hmmm I guess I could do that but how about my right to get the Real Cream from My Cow – can I not also do that. Anyway a Judge will hear the motion tomorrow. I don’t think the State will like the publicity of not letting a law abiding individual have the simple freedom to get the thicker part of the milk from a cow that he owns I am hoping the court is not rigged in favor of anything the State does.
The Golimbieskis have their first court appearance today. They did not receive much notice, so we haven’t had a lot of time to organize support. However, if by chance you can make it to Lansing this afternoon (Wednesday, September 2, 2015), here are the details:
30th circuit court
313 w Kalamazoo Street
Lansing M i48901
James S Jamo look for judges room
at 2:30 p.m is the schedule time
Also, we have a new Facebook page to organize announcements about the case and raw dairy in Michigan in general. Please visit:
https://www.facebook.com/rawmilkmi
Thank you for supporting food rights in Michigan!