Opinion: The Case Against Denver's Slaughterhouse Ban, and Debunking False Claims

After reading the September 8 opinion piece written in support of the slaughterhouse ban on November’s ballot, I felt the need to respond. Superior Farms, the facility being targeted by the ban, is located in Globeville, which is a part of the district I represent on Denver City Council.

I do not support the ban and find a number of problems with the piece I read, which cites debunked, outdated statistics.

The piece states that animal agriculture is responsible for “around one-fifth of climate-warming greenhouse gas emissions,” but this figure was actually retracted by the organization that originally published it, information that was shared in the same article cited by the author — but omitted from this piece.

And according to the EPA, all of agriculture (beyond just meat) represents 10 percent of U.S. emissions. Transportation has the largest emissions at 28 percent. At 4.3 percent of total emissions, livestock emissions were down 2.1 percent from 2021. I find this discrepancy in the data (20 percent vs 4.3 percent) to be sloppy and irresponsible on the part of volunteers for Pro Animal Future, which is the organization behind the ban. Such an oversight seems to be done in the service of hoping that voters won’t check the facts.

Speaking of the EPA, Superior Farms is working in partnership with the agency to upgrade the refrigeration system at the Denver facility. This effort marks a four-year partnership with the EPA to maintain highly efficient operations and act responsibly as Denver neighbors.

The author of the piece says that it’s “laughable” that those of us against the ban want to keep local food local, but banning a single Denver business that processes local meat for local markets won't improve local food sourcing: It will make it worse. Denverites are not going to stop eating meat if the ban passes, but livestock that would have been processed in Denver will need to be shipped to processors further away, increasing stress on the animals during the transportation process and producing higher carbon emissions.

The people behind this ban are hoping to drag this facility through the dirt while hoping that voters not only don’t fact-check them, but also that they don’t think about the workers at this facility.

Many Denverites probably don’t even realize that there is a slaughterhouse in Denver. So that’s also why I am writing today. The public should know that there is a slaughterhouse here, and it’s been in operation since the 1950s. It’s got 160 workers. This is a proudly employee-owned facility, with workers who have been there for decades.

The advocates for the ban don’t want to talk about that, though, because when they do, they sound incredibly misguided and out of touch. Just the other day, one of the people behind the ban said the city “will prioritize them and help them find new work.” And a few weeks ago, another organizer told a local radio host that when the workers at this facility lose their jobs, “they could do construction or different types of jobs.” These folks are coming in to test out their thoughts, ideologies and beliefs on a community that, quite frankly, has had enough of this nonsense.

But I’m here as a city councilmember, as a representative of the City of Denver, to tell you that there are no guarantees on that front. The City of Denver does what it can to support workers in transition, and we have funds for this work, but Measure 309 by no means compels or “requires” (as the ballot language says) the City of Denver to do anything — even if we wanted to — to support these workers. Measure 309 is incredibly misleading to voters on this front. This language tries to lull voters into thinking that even as they close this facility and end the investment, and the ownership stake, and the financial security of these skilled Superior Farms workers, that they will somehow be compensated and supported in that process.

I think it’s unfair and wrong that we’re voting to close a single business and put 160 people out of work, and I hope Denver voters join me in voting it down.


Darrell Watson represents District 9 on the Denver City Council. He is the vice-chair of the Land Use Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and a member of the Safety, Housing, Education & Homelessness Committee and the Boards and Commission Committee. He is the vice-chair of the Metro Area County Commissioners.

In the weeks leading up to the November 5 election, westword.com will continue publishing commentaries on the various ballot measures...both pro and con. Have one you'd like to submit? Send it to [email protected], where you can also comment on this piece.