Superior Farms’ Denver Slaughterhouse: A history of harm, scandal, and misinformation.
Denver, Colorado is home to the largest industrial lamb slaughterhouse in the United States. Denver citizens recently placed a ballot measure, Initiated Ordinance 309, on the 2024 general election ballot to change that. This one-of-a-kind initiative would ban the operation of industrial slaughterhouses in Denver. The citywide ban would also mean the closing of a facility riddled with scandals — Superior Farms.
In response to the ballot measure, Superior Farms has put forward a wide range of claims about their ethical practices in relation to workers, animals, neighbors, and the environment. They also claim to be an important part of Colorado’s economy. However, an investigation by the Fair Agriculture Council has found nearly all of these claims to be exaggerated, misleading, or downright false.
The resulting investigation, published below, includes key information Denver voters should have as they head to the polls to decide how to vote on 2024 initiated ordinance 309, the slaughterhouse ban. This investigation is based on publicly available material, including federal and state open records act requests.
Holding Industrial Slaughterhouses Accountable
Industrial, corporate-owned slaughterhouses in the U.S. are notorious for pollution, worker abuses, and inhumane conditions, not to mention being terrible neighbors. Headlines from the last few years involved child labor scandals, mass deaths from Covid-19 at meat packing plants, revelations of vast quantities of water pollution, and numerous animal cruelty exposés.
But Superior Farms Inc., owner of a lamb slaughterhouse in Denver with the dubious honor of the largest lamb slaughterhouse in the country, is asking voters to believe that they are different. In election-related messaging opposing initiated ordinance 309, Superior Farms has focused on concerns around their employees (nevermind the fact that this measure provides funding to transition workers into green industries). Crucially, Superior Farms claims to be an employee-owned business, conjuring an image of empowered employee-owners taking breaks from the grizzly labor on the kill floor to participate in key decision making at the corporate level.
The Fair Agriculture Council decided to conduct an independent investigation of these claims. We present our full findings below so that Denver voters can reach their own conclusions about the Superior Farms lamb slaughterhouse and the upcoming slaughterhouse ban.
The Reality Behind Superior Farms: Anything But a “Small, Local Denver Business”
A major misrepresentation being told, in large part due to Superior Farms and its partners’ messaging, is that the slaughterhouse is a local and small business. Comments by Superior Farms’ own executives, along with their corporate filings, reveal the truth. The reality is that Superior Farms’ Denver slaughterhouse is an imposing monopoly that slaughters lambs from “every farm West of Iowa,” as CEO Rick Stott said in a recent interview with meatingplace.com.
Headquartered in California, Superior Farms operates industrial slaughterhouses across the United States, from Boston, MA to Dixon, CA. The Denver facility alone has an estimated annual revenue of $80 Million, while the entire network of slaughterhouses nationwide generates $250 Million annually. The Federal Small Business Administration defines the threshold for “small business” at $8 Million, meaning that Superior Farms is over 30 times too large to qualify.
Superior Farms is incorporated in California, and their CEO lives in Texas. FAC was unable to find evidence that any of its executives live in Colorado.
“Employee Ownership” Claims Mislead Denver Slaughterhouse Workers
Denver voters might still consider Superior Farms a company worth celebrating if most of that $250 Million in annual revenue were accruing to employee owners, but FAC found this claim to be highly misleading. A former employee of Superior Farms, Jose Huizar, confirmed that workers need to stay at the slaughterhouse for an extended period of time before gaining owner status. While the exact length of time varies, Mr. Huizar confirmed that turnover is high and very few employees stay long enough to become owners. Mr. Huizar believes this arrangement is by design, providing the company reputational cover without a significant amount of ownership being held by the mostly immigrant workers on the kill floor. However, Mr. Huizar acknowledged he could not prove that was the corporation’s intention.
Employee turnover in the slaughterhouse industry is notoriously high, with rates commonly reported between 80% and 100% annually. That means that on average, almost none of the workers at a given slaughterhouse in January will still be employed there by December. This high turnover is attributed to the demanding and hazardous nature of the job, which includes repetitive motion injuries, exposure to dangerous machinery, and the psychological stress of killing animals daily. The combination of poor working conditions and low wages leads many workers to leave their positions quickly, contributing to the industry's high turnover rates.
Denver Slaughterhouse Employee Reviews: The Truth About Working Conditions
In response to the 2024 ballot measure prohibiting slaughterhouses in Denver, Superior Farms has been peddling a narrative that the company provides 160 "well-paying jobs" at its Denver processing facility. An FAC investigation into employee reviews on Indeed reveals a stark contrast to the company's rosy claims. A manager at the facility didn't mince words: "The company does not have a good culture. High turnover, low pay, and long hours." This damning assessment is echoed by a Denver slaughterhouse mechanic who described the job as "Low pay, high hours, and a rough working environment by normal standards."
The investigation uncovered a disturbing pattern of disregard for worker safety. A meat processor at the Denver slaughterhouse bluntly stated, "This place cares more about numbers than anything, including safety of employees." This cavalier attitude towards worker well-being is consistent with the numerous violations of federal laws uncovered elsewhere in our investigation.
Perhaps most alarming are the allegations of illegal hiring practices. A former employee claimed that Superior Farms not only hired undocumented workers but also provided them with fake identification. This explosive accusation, if true, would constitute a serious violation of federal labor laws and further tarnish the company's already questionable reputation.
Superior Farms Investigation Reveals Humane Slaughter Act Violations
The Federal Government of the United States has passed laws setting basic standards for slaughterhouses. While most advocacy groups agree that these requirements are too lenient, Superior Farms has proven itself unable even to follow these basic standards inside its lamb slaughterhouses.
The most recent investigation into Superior Farms found numerous violations of the Humane Slaughter Act. This information was revealed by watchdog group Animal Outlook after a whistleblower informed them of regular animal welfare violations. In an animal cruelty investigation eventually published in the New York Times, this Animal Outlook worked with the whistleblower to document negligence in the stunning of animals before slaughter, resulting in animals regularly being sent to the kill floor and dismembered while still fully conscious, contravening the Humane Slaughter Act’s requirement that animals “be rendered insensible to pain before slaughter.” (The footage is published here, but viewers should be advised that it is graphic and disturbing.
The violations were so egregious, and the evidence so compelling, that the normally recalcitrant US Department of Justice joined Animal Outlook in a lawsuit against Superior Farms for deceiving consumers under the False Claims Act, resulting in the slaughterhouse having to pay a $200K settlement to the United States government. However, since then, no watchdog organization has been permitted entry to a Superior Farms slaughterhouse. This means the public has no way of knowing whether the company has reformed its slaughter practices.
But the Humane Slaughter Act isn’t the only federal law Superior Farms has been ignoring.
Environmental Impact: Denver Slaughterhouse's Clean Water Act Violations
The Superior Farms slaughterhouse in Denver, CO is located just 80 feet from the South Platte River, a major waterway that winds through much of the city and feeds the Chatfield Reservoir, a common recreation site and drinking water source. The Federal Clean Water Act requires all industrial facilities on important waterways to obtain a discharge permit limiting the volume of important pollutants they can discharge into public water.
But in the case of Superior Farms, these safeguards appear to have totally failed. Superior Farms’ Denver slaughterhouse has been completely disregarding its reporting requirements under the Clean Water Act for at least four years. The EPA’s own website shows that Superior Farms is engaged in “significant noncompliance” with the Clean Water Act by failing to submit the required regular reports of discharge into the Platte River.
This should be alarming to neighbors downstream from the slaughterhouse, because industrial slaughterhouses are notorious sources of air and water pollution. The Center for Biological Diversity reports that “In 2018 slaughterhouses released over 55 million pounds of toxic substances into waterways,” especially nitrogen, phosphorus, and E. Coli, for which “meat and poultry processing facilities are the second-largest industrial point source.”
According to the City of Denver, “Nitrogen, phosphorus, and E. Coli” are precisely the three largest pollution concerns in the South Platte River. Water pollution from industrial runoff is concerning enough to the Denver Department of Public Health and Environment that the entity advises all Denver residents to avoid swimming, wading, or playing in the Platte River.
Is it fair to assume that Superior Farms’ slaughterhouse, the largest industrial lamb slaughterhouse in the United States, is the main source of water pollution in the South Platte River? We can’t know one way or the other as long as Superior Farms’ Denver facility continues to ignore their water discharge reporting obligations under the Clean Water Act.
Consumer Deception: Selling Spoiled Meat, Manipulating “Best By” Dates
Another revelation of the Animal Outlook investigation subsequently joined by the Department of Justice was that Superior Farms had a formal policy of changing the “best by” date on packaged meat to make it appear fresher than it actually was. On more than a dozen occasions workers were documented changing “best by” dates on refrigerated meat labels, deceiving consumers about the freshness of those products as much as 15 days. In several cases captured on video, the dates were changed by more than two weeks.
Disturbingly, these revelations were not mentioned at all in the consent decree eventually reached between Superior Farms and the USDA to resolve the lawsuit against them. This means Superior Farms did not even need to commit to ending this practice in order to get out of the lawsuit.
Who's Really Opposing the Denver Slaughterhouse Ban?
This summer, a media company based in Colorado published a story framing the initiative to ban slaughterhouses in Denver, as a fight between a “national animal rights group” from out of state versus “Colorado ranchers” who just want to be left alone. In a revealing instance of media disinformation, these claims turned out to be the opposite of the truth.
The committee responsible for getting the Denver slaughterhouse ban on the ballot appears to be a volunteer organization headquartered in Boulder, Colorado. City records show that the organization used only volunteers (rather than paid circulators) to get the 30,000 signatures to place their measure on the ballot.
Meanwhile, campaign finance disclosures from the slaughterhouse ban opposition campaign tell a very different story. The largest donor is Superior Farms (a nationwide corporation based out of California). The second and third largest donors are the American Industry Sheep Association and the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, two prominent nationwide lobbying organizations representing industrial farming corporations. As of our investigation, these entities collectively were on track to spend more than $1 Million campaigning against the slaughterhouse ban in Denver, an outstandingly high amount for ballot measures in Denver compared to historical examples.
Corporate Lobbyists Take on the Slaughterhouse Ban
While the sources of funding for the opposition campaign are revealing, how they are spending the money is equally revealing. According to campaign finance disclosures, Superior Farms has engaged the lobbying firm CRL Associates, Inc to manage their campaign. CRL Associates lists multinational corporations like Comcast, Lyft, and Airbnb as among their top clients along with dozens of Denver real estate firms.
Colorado Public Radio describes CRL Associates as “among the most powerful unelected people in the city government.” Investigating deep relationships between these lobbyists and the highest officials in the state and local governments, CPR found “it was sometimes difficult to know where the city ends and the lobbyists begin.” CPR’s investigation of CRL Associates revealed the deeply entangled ways that corporate power exercises influence over the government, and this lobbying firm is at the center of it. So it’s no surprise that the national industry associations behind the “Stop the Ban, Protect Jobs” campaign chose them to orchestrate it.
Discrimination and Religious Fraud at the Denver Slaughterhouse
Speaking of lawsuits, the Federal Department of Justice and USDA are not the only entities to have sued Superior Farms. Despite the slaughterhouse’s insistence that they are looking out for their workers, Superior Farms has been the subject of lawsuits by current and former employees. In numerous lawsuits, Arab workers alleged racial and religious discrimination as well as another case of false advertising.
Here’s the background: according to statements from Superior Farms, they first implemented Halal slaughter at their Denver facility one day per week to meet demands for Halal lamb meat among immigrants from Muslim countries. After a short time, they decided it would be more economical to simply transition the full operation to follow Halal standards, so they wouldn’t have to track different meat separately.
The story doesn’t end there, though. According to several Imams formerly hired at the slaughterhouse to certify the meat as Halal, Superior Farms was not willing to actually follow halal slaughter protocol. Mohammed Sayed, the lead plaintiff on a lawsuit in 2021, documented repeated cases in which Superior Farms asked him to sign off on lamb that had not been slaughtered according to Halal standards. On at least two occasions, Muslim employees were fired by Superior Farms for refusing to fraudulently certify meat as Halal.
This discrimination against Denver slaughterhouse workers raises serious concerns about the company's labor practices and respect for religious beliefs, which are important factors to consider when evaluating the pros and cons of the Denver slaughterhouse ban.
Fraudulent “Halal” Claims, Deceiving Religious Consumers
The same 2021 lawsuit by former employees shows that, Muslim employees at the Denver slaughterhouse were discriminated against. The lawsuit states that ‘Halal Bleeders’ were verbally harassed and forced to endure racist slurs while on the clock as well as being repeatedly denied breaks and rest periods or time off on Fridays, the Islamic holy day, to attend MosqueTo make matters worse, while Mohammed Sayad was ultimately fired for speaking up and refusing to certify non-Halal meat as Halal, Superior Farms still succeeded in selling meat fraudulently certified as Halal. As a result, countless Muslim consumers have been deceived into buying meat that violates their religious convictions.
The lawsuit eventually settled out of court, and the details of the settlement were not made public. Because of this, the public has no reason to think that anything has changed at Superior Farms, meaning that they could be continuing to mislabel meat to this day.
Employee Whistleblower: Denver Slaughterhouse Tied to Gang Activity, Drug Dealing
The citizens committee behind the initiated ordinance to ban slaughterhouses in Denver published an explosive interview with a former worker at Superior Farms’ Denver location. The worker, Jose Huizar, described a link between the slaughterhouse and organized crime in Globeville, the majority Latino, economically neglected neighborhood where the slaughterhouse is located:
“Drug use at the slaughterhouse leads to the formation of malicious groups that start creating havoc in the neighborhood. That’s how it spills out into the community, as small-scale organized crime. Gang stalking, people getting shot. I’ve seen shit that you would never have to see anywhere else except for Globeville.”
While this may seem incredible, existing research already demonstrates a statistical link between the presence of slaughterhouses and increased rates of violent crime. Slaughterhouse workers often resort to drugs and alcohol to cope with the extreme abuse they witness and experience in the industry, leaving them vulnerable to organized crime. Jose’s description of the Denver slaughterhouse as an important transit point for cocaine into the neighborhood is consistent with available research.
Superior Farms vs. Local Businesses: Legal Bullying in Denver
The slaughterhouse in Denver has a troubling record of suing local businesses, encumbering them with onerous legal costs and forcing them to settle out of court on terms favorable to Superior Farms. Most recently, Superior Farms sued a local scrap metal recycler in Globeville, Denver Scrap Metal, in 2020. As in other cases, the lawsuit was settled out of court. The details of the settlement are not public, and Denver Scrap Metal could not disclose them due to a nondisclosure agreement present in the settlement (they also could not give further comment). While we can’t know the details of the suit, such lawsuits by large national or multinational corporations against local businesses are a common bullying tactic.
Foreign Meat Imports: Undercutting American Producers and Denver Jobs
Despite claiming a commitment to protecting the American lamb industry, Superior Farms’ parent company (Transhumance Holding Company, Inc) has a history of importing lamb meat from Australia and New Zealand, at the expense of domestic businesses. The fact that Superior Farms itself has profited off importing lamb meat from overseas contradicts their recent claims that Denver’s slaughterhouse ban will raise meat prices (particularly lamb prices) for consumers in Colorado. The truth is that lamb meat from New Zealand is cheaper than American lamb—even after shipping.
When the US International Trade Commission determined that imported lamb meat posed a threat to the domestic U.S. lamb industry, Transhumance Holding Company fought against a petition by lamb growers to impose tariffs and import restrictions on imported lamb. This dynamic perfectly illustrates the conflicted interests of small domestic growers vs. large farming corporations, with Superior Farms falling squarely into the latter category.
Conclusion: The Denver Slaughterhouse’s “Stop the Ban, Protect Jobs” Campaign Is Dishonest and Deceitful
Superior Farms’ carefully cultivated public image stands in stark contrast to its actual operations and impact. The findings presented paint a picture of a corporation that has repeatedly engaged in misleading practices, legal violations, and questionable business tactics.
From false claims about being a small, local business to misleading statements about employee ownership, Superior Farms has shown a pattern of misrepresenting itself to the public. The violations of federal laws, including the Humane Slaughter Act and Clean Water Act, raise serious concerns about the company's commitment to ethical and environmental standards. The alleged ties to gang activity, racial and religious discrimination, and the undermining of local businesses and American producers further tarnish the company's reputation. These issues extend far beyond the walls of the slaughterhouse, affecting workers, consumers, and the broader community of Denver
As Denver voters consider how to vote on the nation’s first initiated ordinance to ban slaughterhouses, they now have access to crucial information that challenges Superior Farms' narrative. This investigation underscores the importance of looking beyond corporate messaging and delving deeper into the realities of industrial slaughterhouse operations.
Ultimately, how Denver residents vote on this initiative will have significant implications for Denver's future. Voters must weigh the purported economic consequences against the documented environmental, ethical, and social costs associated with Superior Farms' presence in the city. Ultimately, the Denver slaughterhouse ban environmental impact could be significant, potentially leading to cleaner water, reduced air pollution, and improved quality of life for nearby residents.
On the other hand, the Denver slaughterhouse ban’s economic impact is minimal, but the workforce training program included in the initiative offers a path forward for current Denver slaughterhouse employees, aiming to mitigate job losses by transitioning workers to green industries. As Denver residents prepare to vote on the slaughterhouse ban Denver, they now have a clearer picture of the complex issues at stake, allowing for a more informed decision about the future of their city.