Skip to content

Iconic urban farm at risk of city fines

on March 30, 2011

Oakland urban homesteading celebrity Novella Carpenter could face fines from the city for unpermitted agricultural activities and lose the animals she keeps at Ghost Town Farm, a West Oakland garden that helped make local, sustainable food popular in the East Bay.

Carpenter says she received a notice that she was being fined about two weeks ago from the city’s Animal Services department based on a complaint against her selling rabbit meat. After a follow-up inspection on Tuesday from the city’s planning department, she was also warned that she must also acquire a conditional use permit for her agricultural activities.

Carpenter is a graduate of the UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism, where Oakland North is based, and her 2008 memoir Farm City details her efforts to grow produce on the vacant lot next door to her apartment and raise animals in her backyard. Carpenter only recently purchased the lot, and for many years had been squatting on the property, asserting that the garden was a benefit to the public. Since publishing her book, Carpenter has travelled worldwide to talk about growing food in urban settings. Carpenter raises goats, chickens, ducks and rabbits and gives demonstrations on raising and butchering animals at Ghost Town Farm.

Carpenter said she purchased the corner lot next to her apartment last year, and that the area where she grows vegetables—mostly on raised beds—is zoned for mixed commercial and residential use. Currently, she does not have a permit to grow crops or raise animals for sale on the property. But Carpenter said when she bought the property she checked with the planning department to ask whether she would need any permits and was told to wait until April when new zoning laws will loosen restrictions on urban farming throughout the city.

As a result, she said, the notice from Animal Services took her by surprise. “They said they were going to fine me $1,000 and take away all my animals unless I ceased my activities,” she said. “I didn’t know—I guess there is a law against selling rabbit products.”

Carpenter said that the follow-up visit from city planning inspector Chris Candell resulted in a warning that because she had been operating without a permit, she could be charged double the price of a conditional use permit for agriculture, which is typically $2,500. That would be a $5,000 fee on top of the $1,000 fine from Animal Services, according to Carpenter.

Candell said he was not able to comment because the inspection is still underway, and he is currently discussing the matter with a supervisor. Asked if Carpenter’s estimate that she would face $6,000 in fees was correct, Candell said that total was not accurate.

Carpenter said the Animal Services citation was related to a potpie containing rabbit meat she donated to a fundraiser, and that she didn’t realize this constituted a “sale.” Furthermore, she said, follow-up calls to the city have left her unclear on what is allowed in Oakland. “I can’t raise rabbits? I can’t sell rabbits? I don’t even know,” she said.

Esperanza Pallana, who also grows food at her home in Oakland, said laws are not clear enough for people who want to grow food or raise animals in the city. Pallana, who runs the urban farming blog Pluck and Feather, distributes information to other urban farmers to help them get started, including information on local regulations. “It’s important to me that we do it legitimately,” she said. Nevertheless, Pallana says that often the laws aren’t clear. “I don’t understand at what point growing a garden on your lot is an agricultural activity,” Pallana said.

Robert Merkamp of Oakland’s city’s planning department was unable to comment on Carpenter’s situation, but said restrictions involving conditional use permits can apply to lots where people grow crops or raise animals for sale and that residents cross the line between gardening and agriculture when they offer products for sale. The city’s zoning regulations say that crop and animal activities that could require city permits “include the raising of tree, vine, field, forage, and other plant crops, intended to provide food or fibers, as well as keeping, grazing, or feeding of animals for animal products, animal increase, or value increase.”

Carpenter said she is holding out on challenging the fines until updates are added to the city’s zoning regulations in April, in case she is exempted under the new regulations. However, she cancelled a “pop-up farmstand” event for Wednesday night over concerns that the city would send an inspector to the event, which she publicized on her blog.

Carpenter said the effort to write her up was an over-reaction, writing indignantly on her blog, “I’m supposed to get a Conditional Use Permit for growing chard.” Furthermore, she said that she doesn’t understand why the city would write her up weeks before its regulations change. “Why is Oakland sending this guy?” Carpenter asked. “The answer to that is that no one knows what the fuck is going on in the city of Oakland.”

For now, Carpenter said she is vexed that one complaint could bring some of her urban homesteading activities to a halt. “Okay, so I decide I don’t like someone, so I can call the city of Oakland on them,” she said. “You could spend your whole life just fucking with people.”


  1. FloodedByCEDA on March 30, 2011 at 8:48 pm

    The city is out of money.
    should the city A) Fine the urban gardener several thousand dollars to pay the city inspector’s salery,or B) fire the city inspector?

  2. deprogrammed on March 30, 2011 at 9:58 pm

    There are far worse things happening everywhere, much less West Oakland, than people trying to feed themselves.

  3. Mark Fargo on March 30, 2011 at 10:19 pm

    Re: “City of Oakland Shuts Down Novella Carpenter’s Urban Farmstand”
    Oh please… Novella Carpenter should really be called “Cruella Carpenter”.
    For someone so “mild-mannered” she sure has a thing for killing cute, fluffy critters and get this… “empowering” others to do the same. oh yeah…she says it’s green and eco-friendly to do that. Just so you know…it’s not.

    Going dumpster diving , raising your own plants and respecting nature is all well and good. But this is NOT what Novella Carpenter is all about. At the core, her actions have become a narcisstic, publicity seeking venture and a blight on the community and environment.

    The real situation is that Carpenter is not some sort of innocent, “victim”. She believes herself to be superior to everyone else and entitled to make her own rules regarding cruelty to animals and basic hygiene and sanitation.

    In reality, what she practices is a schizophrenic view of what it means to be a responsible, caring guardian of the Earth. Want to truly be green and low impact on the environment? Let’s see if Ms. Carpenter decides to start trapping, breeding and teaching to slaughter feral cats, street rats, homeless pitbulls, etc…Oh, there’s also plenty of roadkill. A ready-made, low-impact, eco-friendly protein source. Sound ridiculous?
    It actually makes a lot more sense than breeding new animals and using precious resources for their care. Growing plants are one thing, but this is NOT what Carpenter is doing. Thank you to the city of Oakland for showing common sense, by not allowing an individual who causes so much pain and suffering in the community to go rogue.

    • Courtney on March 30, 2011 at 11:34 pm

      So, are you the complaintant??

  4. shyla on March 31, 2011 at 8:10 am

    Sounds like she is doing the same thing those of us who live in the country are doing: trying to raise our own food. I think it is great. Rabbits are a great meat source. Feral dogs and cats are not because they are carnivores and scavengers. We should be careful what we feed the animals we eat. They must be healthy if they are going to keep us healthy.

    Anyway if someone was to go about ridding the city of the feral animals They would be fined for cruelty to animals

  5. Tim Anderson on March 31, 2011 at 8:36 am

    Operating a garden is one thing but operating a farm with rabbits, ducks, chickens, and sheep is another. Seems like the city is saying that if you’re growing food for sale you need a permit. Seems pretty straightforward. What are the rules governing raising and slaughtering animals?

    • Auntie Em' on April 1, 2011 at 12:51 am

      it is against the law to slaughter animals which you then sell to the public unless you get the necessary permits and pass inspections based on recognized health standards for this industry.

      same goes for dairy products.

      These laws protect the public from animal parasites and pathogens like e.coli and salmonella.
      If someone wants to dumpster dive for food for their animal or pick weeds from the side of the road – the same road which is traveled by dogs and cats who poop and pee wherever they want without embarrassment or shame – and is perhaps sprayed with weed poisons and insecticides- more power to ya – but expect that the city may not feel like issuing a permit to sell that meat raised under these dubious methods…

      It is not against the law to raise and consume these animal products for yourself as long as one is in compliance with regulations which protect neighbors from nuisance issues like smells, noise, etc.
      Raise chickens or rabbits or ducks. take their eggs, kill them if you like. I have no idea if it is against the law to kill an animal in Oakland. I suspect it is but I would not be surprised to find out that there is no law on this beyond ones regarding cats and dogs.

      But don’t sell animal products to the public without first complying with health regulations regarding sanitation and animal husbandry.

      I can go fishing down by the pier all day long and eat what I catch – but I cannot sell that fish unless I am licensed and inspected. Same goes for killing a deer. I can’t sell the meat but I can eat it myself.

      Everyone knows this and I find Novella Carpenter’s wail that ““I can’t raise rabbits? I can’t sell rabbits? I don’t even know,” to be unbelievable and absurd.

      AFAIK, it is not against the law of the city to have animals on one’s property nor is it against the law to eat them or drink their milk.

      But it is against the law to sell milk, eggs, meat, cheese, yogurt, or their flesh without permits, inspections, and certifications from the relevant public health departments.

      and no, this is not creeping fascism or because of those gol durned libruls.


      • Jason on April 1, 2011 at 4:23 pm

        “and no, this is not creeping fascism or because of those gol durned libruls.”

        you are right, it is the flowering of an open and free society. it really is. thank god we have someone protecting us from the horrors of Novella Carpenter. without the excellent work done by the planning office cracking down on the likes of novella carpenter, we might have outbreaks of bacteria and disease in the food supply.

        if i choose to buy something from someone like novella carpenter, it really is of no concern to you. you may think it is, but given that it’s my choice…you can take a hike.

  6. chris karma on March 31, 2011 at 11:29 am

    typical liberal response from the city of Oakland. The part of the Constitution that says “excessive fee’s and fines shall not be imposed” doesn’t apply to California’s fascist liberals.

  7. Oakland Girl on March 31, 2011 at 1:30 pm

    Slaughtering animals has long been illegal in Oakland, and Novella has been flagrantly breaking the law by slaughtering rabbits, chickens, and other animals, and it’s about time that the city did something about it.

    Novella can grow as much chard as she likes.

    Rabbits are really wonderful animals and have individual personalities, just like cats and dogs. So do the other animals that she kills. Every goat, chicken, duck, and rabbit in Oakland, just like every cat and dog, deserves the chance to live and not be illegally killed.

    There are so many food choices that people have that do not necessitate this kind of cruelty. Support all the wonderful community-oriented non-profits that support truly life-enriching urban gardening, such as People’s Grocery and City Slicker Farms. But don’t support Novella Carpenter.

  8. Max Allstadt on March 31, 2011 at 6:37 pm

    There are issues here with Ms. Carpenter not complying fully with the law.

    However, it’s clear that at least some of the law needs to be changed. If there’s no exemption for a small farm stand that does occasional sales, perhaps there should be one.

    Also, it’s becoming increasingly clear that the complaint against Ms. Carpenter was brought by some self-righteous vegan absolutists like the above commenters Oakland Girl and Mark Fargo.

    If in fact the complaint wasn’t brought by a nearby neighbor and is a political statement by PETA douchebags, I’m rather disgusted. So disgusted, that I think I’ll be eating veal for dinner, and I may even stop by the Game Exchange and pick up some Kangaroo tenderloins next week. Nomnomnom.

  9. Know Your City on April 1, 2011 at 7:45 am

    Did you know?:
    1) It is legal to slaughter livestock for personal consumption in Oakland.
    2) It is legal to sell raw agricultural products from your own property, provided you have the standard permits for sales. Exact required permitting varies by the zone you are in.
    3) Eggs are considered raw agricultural product.

    While it sounds like some of Novella’s activities may require permitting, it also sounds like much of what she is doing is legal. To “Auntie Em’s” concern about feeding an animal from a dumpster, I wonder if she has seen how most animals are fed, handled and treated at factory farms. If you eat meat, raising and slaughtering your own is a sustainable way to do it.

  10. Sarah on April 2, 2011 at 4:41 pm

    From the Oakland code: “8.40.080 – Offensive places and occupations. It is unlawful for any person to establish or maintain any slaughterhouse, to keep any hog, to cure or keep hides, skins or peltry, to slaughter cattle, sheep or any other kind of animal, to pursue, maintain or carry on any other business or occupation offensive to the senses or prejudicial to the public health or comfort, within the limits of the city.”

    I don’t understand why this is a controversial issue. The woman is in clear violation of the law. Her feelings on the matter and her lack of awareness about the law are irrelevant. She broke the law, and therefore gets a fine. Just like the rest of us.

    If she and her supporters feel that it’s a bad law, it is their right to try to change it by going through their elected representatives. But whining about getting slapped with a fine when you broke the law is like whining when you get a ticket for running a red light. Take responsibility for your actions.

  11. Sarah on April 2, 2011 at 4:47 pm

    p.s. I have to admit I’m disappointed in the tone of this article. Usually Oakland North does great reporting, but this article was far from unbiased. The choice of title alone, the crafting of the story to make the farmer into a victim, all culminated in making it clear where the journalist stood on the issue. I know she’s an alum of the J-school and involved in very exciting food movement, but c’mon Oakland North – you can do better in terms of even-handed story management!

  12. Auntie Em' on April 6, 2011 at 12:48 pm

    Thanks Sarah for showing us code 8.40.080.

    Apparently, it is illegal to raise ANY animal for slaughter and to slaughter them in the city of Oakland.
    I assume the laws are similar in most other cities.

    And it most certainly is illegal to SELL animal meat and other animal products to the public without licensing and following appropriate codes which the health department has in place to protect public health.

    Imagine if someone got e.coli or salmonella from this meat.
    Everyone would be howling at the city for allowing this person to sell tainted meat or dairy.

    The USDA codes and standards and local laws are there for a very good reason.

    I don’t care if Carpenter sells chard or not or even sells chard to the public.

    I do care that she raises and sells animals and animal products without first being certified by the health department. And I know that the various codes regarding animal husbandry and slaughter cannot be satisfied by someone on a small plot in the city (even if the city did not have the above code).

    And yeah, I am aware of factory farming and the awful conditions which livestock endure and the inherent cruelty of these methods.

    This does not mean that ever person with a plot of land can now raise, slaughter, and sell animals from their backyard without following codes and standards.

    • Auntie Em' on April 6, 2011 at 4:38 pm

      then there’s this

      8.14.010 – Supervision of meat preparation.

      It is unlawful for any person to sell, have in possession, keep or expose for sale for human food, the flesh of any cattle, hogs, sheep, swine, goats, rabbits, or any other animal, poultry, fish, or meat food products, unless the same shall have been slaughtered or passed under the supervision of the United States Government Inspector, in accordance with the regulations relating to the inspection thereof as prescribed by the Department of Agriculture of the United States, or under the supervision of the state of California, Department of Agriculture Inspector, in accordance with the regulations relating to the inspection thereof as prescribed by the Department of Agriculture of the state of California, or under the supervision of the Health Officer of the city of Oakland, in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.

  13. […] in March, Novella Carpenter, who runs Ghost Town Farm in West Oakland, was warned that she could be fined for selling agricultural products without a permit. Carpenter is the author of Farm City, a memoir about establishing her own urban farm where she has […]

  14. […] The uncertainty over what can be raised and sold came to the forefront in March when urban farmer Novella Carpenter—who has raised goats, chickens and ducks at her Ghost Town Farm in West Oakland and is the author of the book “Farm City”—donated a rabbit pie to a fundraiser and was then warned by the city that she could be fined for selling agricultural products without a permit. […]

  15. Pluck and Feather » Media Coverage on October 9, 2011 at 9:28 am

    […] March 30, 2011 Iconic urban farm at risk of city fines (Oakland North) […]

  16. […] ban on shark fins, and the levying of citations and possible fines against urban homesteader Novella Carpenter’s Ghost Town Farm, which kicked off a much broader citywide debate about backyard agriculture and animal husbandry, […]

Oakland North welcomes comments from our readers, but we ask users to keep all discussion civil and on-topic. Comments post automatically without review from our staff, but we reserve the right to delete material that is libelous, a personal attack, or spam. We request that commenters consistently use the same login name. Comments from the same user posted under multiple aliases may be deleted. Oakland North assumes no liability for comments posted to the site and no endorsement is implied; commenters are solely responsible for their own content.

Photo by Basil D Soufi
Oakland North

Oakland North is an online news service produced by students at the UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism and covering Oakland, California. Our goals are to improve local coverage, innovate with digital media, and listen to you–about the issues that concern you and the reporting you’d like to see in your community. Please send news tips to:

Latest Posts

Scroll To Top