Council Clashes Over Hens

Council President, and Ward IV Councilwoman, Mary Louise Madigan called the November 3, 2014 Council meeting to order at 7:32 P.M. For a civic meeting that tends to have little to no audience, the City Hall Auditorium was quite full of people. The topic of interest that brought them all there and was sure to be the main topic of the meeting? Chickens.

The meeting started off simply enough with a report from the Committee of the Whole presented by Councilwoman Madigan. Three topics were discussed in the meeting. First an update from the Planning and Development Department was presented by Director Dru Siley. The second item was discussion on the report from the Civil Service Commission that was received over the summer regarding mayoral and council salaries - a topic that was discussed in great length in the August 21 issue of this column. Based on the recommendation by the Commission, Councilwoman Madigan submitted a draft ordinance that would increase Council's salary for consideration. The last item discussed was the proposed third amended charter. All members of Council had reviewed the document and they discussed the next steps. There will be a number of ordinances coming forth from the process and lots of public education that will take place before it is placed on the ballot in November of 2015.

Council filed the report.

The next topic on the agenda was the reason everyone was there. Councilman David Anderson (Ward I) delivered a report from the Housing Committee on a resolution that would create a pilot program for domestic hen-keeping in Lakewood. He began his report by summarizing the process. The Housing Committee met four times to discuss this topic. All members of the Committee attended all the meetings and all the members of Council attended most of them. Several members of the community attended the meetings and offered their thoughts on the topic in both verbal and written statements, all of which have all been placed into the public record. 

Councilman Anderson said that after much deliberation and serious consideration the Housing Committee unanimously recommended that Council pass the resolution approving the 18-month pilot program. However, he also did something he said he had never seen done in his time on Council. Councilman Anderson included in his report a list of caveats for the administration to consider when administering the pilot program. There were about 30 points split into three main topics: criteria for participant selection, criteria for evaluation, and a report-out of participants and community group inspections. Some of the points included having participants receive approval from the Hens in Lakewood group, making sure their house is rated a 2 or above by the City, having all taxes and fees paid with both the City and the County, the orientation of the coop placement in relation to neighbors, spreading participants throughout the city, performing regular inspections by the Hens in Lakewood group, and that all participants submit a report at the end of the program with their thoughts on the program.

Council filed Councilman Anderson's report and then Councilman Tom Bullock (At-Large) made a motion to substitute the version of the resolution they created in the Housing Committee, with all changes, for the original.

Before acting on the motion Council provided the chance for members of the audience to make statements and let Council know what they thought of the pilot program. Over an hour and 10 minutes, 22 residents gave their opinions. There was an even split of 11 in support and 11 against the pilot program.

For those who were against the hen-keeping pilot the #1 complaint was the size of the lots in Lakewood. All agreed that a minimum lot agreement should be made. However, while some agreed it could be made to work for some lots in Lakewood, others maintained that all lots in Lakewood were too small. In relation to lot size one person complained about the provision requiring a coop to be at least 3 feet from any property line, maintaining that three feet is not far enough. Others were concerned that there was no recourse for neighbors and even suggested that approval should have to be granted from the three immediate neighbors in order for someone to keep hens. Some stated that not everyone takes as good of care of their property as they do. They feared that if this goes beyond a pilot it will certainly be abused and there will not be adequate enforcement. Several people cited fears of property depreciation. One said he has spoken to several realtors who all said it would have a negative effect on property values, while another said he was a licensed realtor and he likewise believed it would have a negative effect on value.

Another commonly raised concern was that hens are known carriers of salmonella and it is recommended that absolutely no one under the age of five come in contact with them - same for the elderly. They fear it could cause illness and even leave the City vulnerable to related lawsuits. Several people said they also feared that the hens will smell, make a lot of noise, and attract pests.

One woman who did a lot of research reading articles in support and against said that even those who kept hens cautioned about the numerous issues that can arise. Likewise the same woman cited a pros and cons list she found that had seven pros and 14 cons. Others cited articles where there were issues with similar programs around the country. In one example people bought into the idea before realizing that hens only produce eggs for the first couple years of their life but can live to be around 10. This has caused many of the chickens to be given up to shelters and sanctuaries which have quickly run out of room.

A few of the people who opposed it said that they did not think the idea would have popular support if the general public was really aware of the issue. Some went so far as to say they think it should be an issue on the ballot, rather than for Council to decide. Some merely oppose the idea because Lakewood is an urban environment. They decided to live here because it wasn't the country, and therefore do not want hens, or any other livestock, around them.

In terms of those who supported the pilot program the sentiments that have been discussed ever since this topic was brought forth for the first time three years ago, continued at this meeting. People wanted to be able to know where their food is coming from. Many claimed home grown eggs taste better and chickens eat food scraps decreasing household garbage. Several people mentioned that chicken manure can be used as a very good fertilizer, as part of compost, and that it breaks down fast. Also, several chickens produce far less waste then a medium size dog. As for the smell, it was noted by many that if properly cared for, a coop often has very little to no smell.

On the topic of sound, it was pointed out that chickens really only tend to make a lot of noise when they are laying an egg or feel threatened, and they actually produce far less noise than your average dog.

In response to all those worried about salmonella, one woman pointed out that her kids have a guinea pig, which is known to carry salmonella, not to mention many other household pets who are also known carriers. The same goes for hens as any other animal. It is important to teach people the importance of washing your hands both before and after handling them.

The proponents of the pilot noted a long list of communities around the country that have made urban hen-keeping work, including several in the area. In response to the issues that have been encountered elsewhere, with people not knowing what they are getting into, several people said that those communities did not have any formalized barriers to enter into hen ownership. They believe that the resolution being voted on by council will avoid many of those issues for Lakewood. By requiring hen keepers to take a thorough training course and apply for a permit it helps weed out those who won’t take it seriously. Between the time and cost for the training and permit, and the cost to build a coop and purchase the hens and other supplies, they do not feel anyone will enter into the endeavor uneducated or take it lightly.

One person said that they grow 90% of their food from their garden and would like to be able add eggs to further their food independence.

Three people who are not involved with Hens in Lakewood nor have any intention to keep hens also showed up to lend their support for the issue, saying that they think it would be a great addition to the community and would raise property values. Speaking of property values, one person discussed that all the research Hens in Lakewood did, including several peer review articles, showed that allowing hen keeping actually shows an increase in property values.

After the members of the public were done speaking, each member of Council was given time to explain their view points. First was Councilman Anderson.

Councilman Anderson said he only had a couple points he wanted to make. First, he wanted to make it clear that there was a stipulation stating that the coop had to be a minimum of 20 feet from the main structure on the property. This alone would eliminate several properties. Next, he said any time someone said the word coop he kept thinking "dog house." There are no restrictions as to where someone can put a dog house on a property, and, he said in jest, he has a few neighbors that if they were to replace their dog house with a coop with a couple hens, he would be thrilled. He ended by saying that this would be a change for Lakewood, but he doesn't think it is a change that Lakewood and its residents can’t handle. He believes they created a good resolution and it will help the program work.

Next, Councilman Bullock started off by saying despite what some might think this topic has been around for quite a while, which has allowed the proponents of it to do their homework. They started discussing the idea about five years ago and the ordinance that is currently being considered was put together over six months ago. He says he has personally visited several urban hen sites, looked at a lot of coops, and done a lot of reading on the topic.

In regards to property values, he said it is hard for anyone to tell if hens will cause them to go up or down, just as it is hard to say if someone who owns a dog or a bunch of cats will cause a change in value.

Councilman Bullock went on to list some of the standards used to help make this successful and tolerable for everyone. He started by mentioning that the permit for hen keepers is revocable, and depending on the seriousness of the violation can be revoked for a first time offense. Other restrictions include no roosters, a fence requirement to shield from neighbors, quality and humane space for the hens, no outstanding housing citations, and training for all owners.

He highlighted the importance of the pilot program to first see if it can work in Lakewood and second to gather further information on how the program can be improved for both participants and community members.

Councilman Sam O'Leary (Ward II) began his statement by saying when the topic of hens in Lakewood was first brought to his attention a few years ago he didn't believe it was a well thought out idea. However, he said he now has the exact opposite position. He thinks the pilot program is a well thought out, reasoned, and rational approach to the issue. He echoed the sentiments made by his Council colleagues and many of those in the audience in favor of the program. He believes that they have reached the point where they have learned as much as they can from just research and now have to move into a practical experiment to see if the idea will work in our community or not - that is what the pilot program is for he explained.

Councilwoman Cindy Marx (At-Large) began by saying to all the people who felt blindsided by the topic that they should really check the Council and committee meeting agendas, which are posted on the website, to keep up to date on what is being considered in the City. She said she also does not take her decision on this topic lightly. She has been considering it for a few years now and has spoken to many people in Lakewood. She said the people who support it are not just the small group who organized it, but there are people across the community. The majority of the issues she heard when discussing the topic with people were about people not keeping up their property. She pointed out that people who are already breaking Lakewood codes and ordinances are being handled in the appropriate way in the resolution. These are not people who would have hens, as all violations need to be corrected before one can participate. In terms of the property values, she cited that values in Tremont and Ohio City have gone up in recent years even though they started allowing backyard hens. She also reiterated that the bacteria issue can be handled by regular hand washing. In addition, the County Board of Health has reported that cases of salmonella have actually gone down in recent years in communities that allow hens.

Upon the completion of Councilwoman Marx's remarks, Councilman Shawn Juris (Ward III) made a motion to refer the substituted resolution to the Committee of Health and Human services.* This is the Committee Councilwomen Madigan and Councilman Juris originally tried to get the topic moved to when it was first introduced, but they were overridden by their fellow Council members. Councilman Bullock tried to object because there was a motion to substitute already on the floor, but it was confirmed by Law Director Kevin Butler to be a proper motion.

Councilman Juris began his statement with an allegory of a man stating it is his right in a free country to swing his arms about, but it is pointed out to the man that in a civil society his right to swing his arms ends when his arms collide with another person. Juris used this to illustrate his point that a 20 foot set back from a neighbor’s house and a three foot setback from the property line is not enough space to prevent the neighbor from being hit by the smell, the noise, and other possible issues that could permeate from a coop. He continued to say that he does not agree that the resolution is well crafted, citing that it conflicts with at least seven chapters of the Codified Ordinances. He says that there are an estimated 25,000 cities in the country and that it is not a good idea to try and do something just because a hand-full of them have done it. He said they should evaluate it for how it will work in Lakewood, not how it has worked elsewhere.

Councilman Juris' main points of concern for hen keeping were in regards to the health and safety of it. First and foremost, were his concerns over children and salmonella. He also commented that urban backyards may be contaminated with lead and that by allowing chickens to graze on that land, he believes this could cause eggs to be contaminated with lead. At the very least, he said, a soil test should be done; however, that stipulation is not included.

To all the statements from Council members and the community saying that it is time to see if it can work, Councilman Juris said he is not comfortable using real people, and more importantly their neighbors, as guinea pigs to see if it can work. He is also afraid the enforcement of the program will be very difficult for the City to do properly.

Finishing his statement, Councilman Juris said that he would withdraw his motion to send the resolution to the Health and Human Services Committee for the time being.

Councilwoman Madigan began her statement by thanking Councilman Anderson for running organized and thoughtful meetings, and she thanked all those from the community who attended the meeting. She then applauded the Hens in Lakewood group for all their hard work and patience with the process; however, she told them, she does not agree with them. She said, “This is not personal. This [decision] is not based on fear. This is not a litmus test. This is not a test to determine who’s good, who’s bad, who’s progressive, who’s the greenest. It’s an experiment. It’s an introduction to barn yard animals into our city of 52,100 people.” She continued, saying that she had to make her decision on what would be best for the residents in her ward, and she believes that the people in the east end would have a lot of challenges with this. “This is for those who can afford this very expensive hobby. Lots of yards [in the east end] cannot accommodate a coup. We have the most renters on the east end, by the way, and most of them will be excluded because they either don't have the money or don't have the yard. It is on the east end where the haves and the have-nots will be most apparent,” she said.

The way the resolution is currently crafted Councilwoman Madigan believes it relies heavily on luck. She says they need more leverage then luck. She continued, “The current resolution does not give neighbors ways to object, it potentially puts the coup closer to a neighbor’s house than the keeper’s house, it does not define what a coup should look like or what types of materials it should be made of...We don't have the room.” She closed by saying she recognizes there are enough votes for the resolution to pass; however, she does not agree with it and does not think it is right for “us.”

Councilman Ryan Nowlin (At-Large) joined his Council colleagues in applauding the work that the members of Hens in Lakewood have done; however, he would not be supporting the resolution. As a fourth generation Lakewoodite he believes that the city's housing stock is its greatest asset and believes that maintaining housing values is paramount to moving the city forward. Even by their own admission, he said, some in Hens in Lakewood said the impact of hens on property values is at best a neutral. Also, they just heard from a realtor during public comment that said it will bring values down. He also thinks there are some legitimate health concerns. Even though it is a pilot program he does not like that there are up to 36 unwilling participants in the program, i.e., the neighbors of those who will have chickens. Without minimum lot requirements and neighbor approval, Councilman Nowlin said he could not support it.

After all the Council members had spoken they voted on the motion to substitute the resolution and it passed 3 against -4 for. Councilman Bullock then made a motion to adopt the resolution, which was seconded by Councilman O'Leary. However, before any action could be taken, Councilman Juris resurrected his motion to move the matter to the Health and Human Services Committee as a subsidiary motion. Councilwoman Madigan seconded Juris' motion and put it to a vote. It was defeated 4 for - 3 against.

Since his motion to move the issue to the Health and Human Services Committee was denied, Councilman Juris made a motion to amend the current resolution. Councilman Bullock asked for specifics of his amendments in order to entertain the motion.

Juris asked that the resolution be changed to include the following: setbacks for the coop be at least 25 feet from the rear and side property lines, manure storage be at least 30 feet from property lines, soil testing be required, proof of insurance is required, letters of support from all adjoining neighbors, and approval from Hens in Lakewood be replaced with the ward councilperson.

Councilman Bullock asked if Councilman Juris had any legislative language for the amendments or indication as to where they would fit into the resolution. Councilman Juris responded saying that he did not believe that Council would not want to discuss the health impact of the resolution in the Health and Human Services Committee, so he did not prepare any language. Councilman Bullock then asked if Councilman Juris could layout where in the resolution he would want those amendments to go and they spent the next five minutes doing so.

Councilman Bullock responded saying that he would have been willing to consider some of the points made by Councilman Juris; however, he was not comfortable considering them or passing them “on the fly.” Considering the fact the meeting had been going on for over two hours at this point, Bullock said he was not willing to deliberate each point at the late hour. At this point Councilman Juris tried to speak over Bullock, and Council President Madigan was going to allow it, but Councilman Bullock forcefully asserted that he was not done speaking. Bullock offered the suggestion that Juris bring the amended language to the next Council meeting to be considered for amendments of the passed resolution, but that he did not intend to allow it to delay adoption.

After nearly twenty minutes down the path of amending the resolution, Councilmen Juris resolutely decided to withdrawal his motion. The audience was noticeably incredulous at what all they had just witnessed, including scoffs, laughs, and blank stares of amazement.

After a brief explanation from Council President Madigan that the movement to amend the resolution had been withdrawn, but that they still had to act on the motion to adopt, they took a vote.

The resolution to create a backyard hen keeping pilot passed down the same lines as the previous votes, 3-4, with Juris, Madigan, and Nowlin against, and Anderson, Bullock, Marx, and O'Leary voting for it.

After the passage of the resolution Council took a recess before moving on.

Upon returning from the recess, the remainder of the agenda was short. The first item of new business was a list of appointments that will have to be made for the New Year. Council referred it to the Committee of the Whole for discussion.

Next, Councilman Bullock asked that Council revisit two items he introduced some time ago but have yet to be acted upon. The first is an ordinance that would offer rewards for tips that lead to arrests in cases of graffiti. The next was an ordinance that would change the fees for registering a dangerous dog to reflect the actual administrative cost rather than a yearly flat rate.

Council referred both items back to the Public Safety Committee for consideration.

After a nearly three hour meeting, with no one from the public left to speak, and no announcements any one from the administration or Council was willing to make, Council President Madigan adjourned the meeting at 10:17 P.M.

*It is important to note that the Health and Human Services Committee is made up of Councilman Juris and Councilwoman Marx who are on opposing sides of this issue. The Council President, in this case Councilwoman Madigan, is a defacto member of all committees and therefore is allowed to vote. This role becomes important when an item in a committee cannot be decisively agreed upon and a vote is needed to break a tie.

Christopher Bindel

I have been a Lakewood resident my entire life and have been covering the Council meetings for the LO since March of 2009. I am a Mayoral appointee to the Citicens Advisory Committee, as well as a member of Pillars of Lakewood and president of Eaters of Lakewood.

Read More on City
Volume 10, Issue 23, Posted 12:53 PM, 11.11.2014