By Donna Westfall – Credit to CLARK MASON, The Press Democrat – August 26, 2016 –
In a second attempt at the ballot box to halt fluoridation of the water through a moratorium, the City of Healdsburg has lost in court because they misconstrued the initiative language. Their “Shall the City of Healdsburg stop fluoridating its water supply?” was struck down by Judge William Harrison when he found the city’s wording “misleading, inaccurate and biased,” because it did not accurately convey the language of the petition that qualified for the November ballot.
Leading the fight is Dawna Gallagher-Stroeh, former Rohnert Park City Council member. From personal knowledge, she is a force to contend with.
The ballot initiative was worded similar to Crescent City’s. Shall the voters decide whether a moratorium on water fluoridation be instituted until the “manufacturer of the fluoridating chemical provides information regarding identification of any contaminants in the fluoridating chemical batch, and a toxicological report and verification of safety for the fluoridating chemical.”
Dawna is a nutritionist. She is an avid opponent of fluoride in the public water because she believes it’s tantamount to drugging everyone who signs up for water service. Why pay the City for “clean” water only to ingest something that is potentially harmful?
Dawna also approached the Board of Supervisors and got the issue of fluoride on the agenda. She says, “We had 2500 signatures, 125 businesses and 60 medical professionals against prior to their vote. The Supervisors wisely took it off their agenda and tabled it “indefinitely”. So, then the renegade City council voted 4 to 1 to alter the wording of our Qualified Ballot Measure, broke election code by using 90 days instead of 10 (to run out clock). I spent a couple hours in the Law Library and convinced my attorney to do a Writ of Mandate then ex parte. Accomplished in the nick of time.”
Out of all the cities in Sonoma County, only Healdsberg fluoridates their water.
