Woodland dairy battles state two years after E-coli
Monday, October 15, 2007 7:20 AM PDT
By Barbara LaBoe
Printable version
E-mail this articleThe case of the Woodland dairy that caused a 2005 E. coli outbreak has taken a bizarre turn.
The state is threatening to turn the farm over to a collections agency because its check, made in partial payment of a state fine, bounced and no other payment have been received.
But the owners of Dee Creek Farm accuse state officials of being too demanding and uncompromising. And, in an odd twist, they also blame the state for not cashing their first check quickly enough.
In December of 2005 the farm's raw, or unpasteurized cow's milk, sickened 18 people with E. coli. Five children were hospitalized, including two who were on life support.
The farm, on Little Kalama River Road, is owned and operated by Anita and Mike Puckett and their adult daughter and son-in-law, Summer and Michael Steenbarger.
Ultimately, the state Department of Agriculture fined Dee Creek $8,000 and set up a payment plan in July that required the full amount to be paid by September.
The dairy owners did make one payment -- for $4,000 in June -- but that check later was returned for insufficient funds, Department of Agriculture spokesman Jason Kelly said Friday. He said the agency has received no further payments.
If the Dee Creek Farm owners don't pay up, their case could be turned over to a collections agency by the end of the month, he said
Dairy representatives, though, say they fully intend to pay the $8,000 fine but have run out of money and just haven't had time to make other arrangements.
They also expressed annoyance at a Sept. 6 letter from the state demanding payment in full and rejecting their request for a new payment plan of $100 a month. At that rate, it would take the dairy six years to pay off the fine.
"This most recent refusal of the department to work with us has been characteristic of their actions from the beginning," co-owner Anita Puckett wrote in an e-mail response to questions.
Puckett wrote that she had the money when the $4,000 check was mailed in June but that the state didn't cash it until August, when the farm had suffered setbacks and failed to receive a second mortgage.
She also said the farm owners spent $30,000 on improvements they had been "wrongfully led to believe would appease the department and allow the civil charges to be dropped," according to an Aug. 29 letter she sent to the state.
"When the check was sent, funds were available," Puckett wrote in Friday's e-mail. "It is unknown why (the state) waited a month and a half to attempt to cash the check."
Puckett said a check for $2,000 -- one quarter of the amount owned -- was mailed to the state Friday morning.
"Our attorney will be following up with the department when they have received that payment," she wrote.
Summer Steenbarger said by telephone Friday that she is annoyed and concerned that she and her husband are now being held liable for the debt as well as her parents. Steenbarger said she had not heard from the state until the Sept. 6 letter, but acknowledged her parents may have.
As for not paying the fine on time or responding to the Sept. 6 letter, Steenbarger said she and her husband operate on a limited, one-income budget and that this is the farm's busy time of year.
She reiterated that they plan to pay the fine and said her lawyer would be contacting the state.
The state fine was for procedural violations, such as distributing raw milk without a milk processing license and not testing cows for tuberculosis or brucellosis.
When state inspectors visited the farm in 2005, though, they found numerous health violations that would have caused the dairy to be shut down immediately even if it had operating legally, according to the state report. Because the dairy was not licensed, the state was unable to fine the owners an additional $43,000 for those violations. New state laws resulting from the case rectifies that problem for future cases.
This spring, the farm was licensed by the state to legally sell raw goat's milk, including participating in regular state inspections. Farm owners still are barred from selling raw cow's milk because their facility isn't large enough to meet state standards.
The farm's website says the owners hope to receive state approval to sell raw cow's milk this fall. They have not yet received a license to do so, Kelly said Friday.
Past Month's Most Commented Stories