Showing posts with label chickens. Show all posts
Showing posts with label chickens. Show all posts

Thursday, March 19, 2015

to the editor....again

is every blog post about chickens?  well, maybe...

here's my most reason letter to the editor...well, sort of.  the paper has a 250 word limit (um, who can keep to THAT?) so since they won't publish the entirety of my thoughts and arguments, i'll do it myself.



If you walk into a local farm and garden supply store today, you’ll likely discover displays of small chicken coops and dozens of little fluffy animals waiting for their new homes.  Coops designed for just a few laying hens, and taking up less space than a typical dog kennel.

The benefits of backyard chickens include a providing a healthy, sustainable source of fresh eggs, nitrogen-rich fertilizer, and non-pesticide bug control in your backyard. It also provides opportunities for families to teach their children about sustainability, healthy food sources, and the care and keeping of pets (this includes being able to join organizations like 4-H).
In August and September, 2011, the City of Midland Planning Commission proposed the following Zoning Text Amendment No. 153 that would:
- Allow up to 6 laying hens or ducks, in single-family districts
- Require issuance of a permit by the City of Midland
- Prohibit the sale or advertisement of fresh eggs
- Regulate the construction materials of enclosures
- Prohibit the slaughtering of animals on site
- Prohibit roosters

Zoning Text Amendment No. 153 was put before the City Council of Midland, Michigan in October, 2011. Despite the recommendation of its approval by the Planning Commission, and significant resident support, the Council voted down this amendment.

In the time since this vote, I have exchanged letters back and forth with the City.  I started an online petition that garnered over 150 signatures.  I was interviewed by the Midland Daily News about my efforts.  I started the Backyard Chicken Keepers of Michigan Facebook page, which now has over 800 ‘likes’, with new folks joining every day.  And I started a GoFundMe account that has solicited nearly $100 in donations in just a few days, to help defer some of the costs associated with re-submitting the Petition for Zoning Amendment fees.

The continuing movement in the region, state and nation, is to live a greener lifestyle, and continues to support and promote the keeping of backyard chickens.

Backyard chicken keeping can enhance our community. The concern of ‘bad apples’ can be addressed with the following two quotes:

Every kind of peaceful cooperation among men is primarily based on mutual trust and only secondarily on institutions such as courts of justice and police.
— Albert Einstein

This world of ours... must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be, instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect.
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

I have petitioned the Planning Commission to re-consider the Zoning Amendment.  And I’m requesting that Midland residents write letters, call the Planning Commission, and show up at Public Hearings.  It will take a landslide of support to sway them.  But I think the time has come. 

Saturday, July 27, 2013

the fight continues...

if you're reading this it may be because you read an article today in my local paper...

i hope you're here because you support the chicken cause...and are not being biased by myths and misconceptions...

thank you for taking the time to read...and please help our cause...our fight....our rights...

sign the petition to the City of Midland City Council here!

Monday, June 17, 2013

petition-o-rama

you'll find below, a support document for my petition on change.org related to passing a zoning ordinance change...

I encourage you to read it - whether you are for or against backyard chickens - and if you are a resident of the City of Midland, take some time to sign the petition if you support the change...and pass it along to every other resident you know!  thank you!

Tuesday, June 04, 2013

viva la chicken - the fight continues

so start here ...

then read this ...

so...

a year has passed.  in that time i have followed several chicken ordinance-related cases in other cities throughout the state. i decided it was time to write another letter (and to be honest, i'm not sure why, as it didn't really go well the first time!)

here was the letter i sent last week - this time, to the City Attorney, Mayor, and Director of Planning and Community Development -


Dear Sirs and Madam,

Let me first thank you for your prompt response to my letter dated May 21, 2012, regarding raising chickens and planting a garden at my residence in the City of Midland.

While I understand that your letter represents the position of the City, I find it wholly inadequate that you might fail to recognize and counsel the City Council that such opinions are in direct contrast to stated law, and court precedence. 

While just over a year has passed since I last wrote, several developments have arisen that compelled me to write again, and further address this issue.

First and foremost, I would like to cite a court case, decided in late 2012, that further supports commercial farming in all areas, regardless of zoning.  Several points you made in your letter are directly addressed in this court case, one which required much time and many resources, including financial, that became the responsibility of the township.  The decision in Buchler v. Forsyth Township, from the Circuit Court for the County of Marquette, Michigan, filed by the Hon. Thomas Solka on December 18, 2012, specifically addresses issues related to GAAMPS for Site Selection and residential zoning.

The Solka opinion states:
  • Despite the Buchler property being zoned Lake Residential, with no allowance for commercial farming or livestock production in zoning regulations, their commercial farming operation is protected under the MRTFA.
  • “The Right to Farm Act at MCL 286.474(6) clearly and unambiguously expresses a legislative intent that the state law preempts “any local ordinance” and bars enforcement of local ordinances against any farm that complies with the Right to Farm Act.  The GAAMPS, themselves, are not administrative rules adopted pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act with force of law.  The GAAMPS are described in the statute as “policy”. MCL 286.473(1).”
  • Hon. Solka’s decision also cites several other court decisions, including Charter Township of Shelby v. Papesh – concluding that “…the RTFA no longer allows township zoning ordinances to preclude farming activity that would otherwise be protected by the RTFA.  Rather, any township ordinance, including a zoning ordinance, is unenforceable to the extent that it would prohibit conduct protected by the RTFA.”

An article about this case is enclosed.  A copy of this decision can be found at -  http://www.farmtoconsumer.org/news_wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Buchler-v-ForsythTwp-Solk-opinion2012-12-18.pdf

In addition, the more local Lincoln Township Planning Commission recently approved a request for chicken keeping on a residential lot, at their March 19, 2013, and indicated that future requests would also be granted.  J******* L******, a resident of Lincoln Township, addressed her Planning Commission in much the same manner that I did the City of Midland.  The Planning Commission consulted their attorney, who provided a response (see attached), indicating that the Lowe’s chicken keeping is protected by the MRTFA. 

Once again, I believe it to be indisputable that the Michigan Right to Farm Act allows me to establish a farm in a residentially-zoned area.

Secondly, I would like to recommend that the Planning Commission and City Council revisit an ordinance change in Midland, to allow for ‘backyard chicken keeping’ in a manner that does not have to meet requirements for the Michigan Right to Farm Act (specifically referring to the commercial nature).  Planning Commission meeting minutes dated January, 2011, indicated significant interest by residents, which was then further supported by the efforts of community members speaking on-behalf of an ordinance change when the proposal was addressed in the case of Mr. Joseph Fiordaliso.  I have heard that city staff state that the public opinion was against this ordinance change.  However, I strongly believe this is NOT the case.  No one spoke in opposition of the change at the August 23, 2011 Planning Commission meeting, with eight households showing support.  At the September 13, 2011 Planning Commission meeting, written opinions were one in support, and one in opposition, with three households speaking in favor of change, and only one in opposition.  Again, it is clear; the voice of the people was speaking in favor of an ordinance change.

I believe this is why, after much due diligence and research of other ordinances in the state, that the Planning Commission recommended an ordinance change at that time.  The City Council vote on October 24, 2011 was not representative of the residents those members represent.  Once again, multiple households spoke in favor of the change, while no one spoke in opposition.  Written opposition was received from three households at this time, per a Staff Memorandum pertaining to the ordinance change, but again, articles supporting backyard chicken keeping were also provided.

I am sure that the council is concerned with issues related to non-traditional animals on residential property, including food storage, sizes of coops and building requirements, odors, pests and predators, noise, and disease.  However, all of these issues can also apply to household pets, such as cats and dogs. There are 11,000 – 12,000 single-family homes in the City of Midland.  With nearly 20,000 registered dogs in the city, only approximately 60 complaints are noted annually.  I am certain that a fewer percentage of residents will opt to raise backyard chickens, making the likelihood of complaints even lower.  This makes backyard chicken keeping in the city a non-issue.

I also believe that there is much interest in responsible backyard chicken keeping in the Midland area.
There is a growing, renewed trend of the people to be closer to their food and to know where it came from.  It is evidenced every week, a couple of times as week, at our very own Farmer’s Market, where vendors fill every available space, and parking is at a premium.

In summary, I firmly believe in my right to raise chickens for eggs on my own plot of land, regardless of its location and zoning designation.  This is supported in multiple court decisions in the state, including the most recent decision in Buchler-v-Forsyth Twp.  I plan to establish a small backyard flock, under the protection of the Michigan Right to Farm Act.  Secondly, I urge the Planning Commission to bring their recommendation for an ordinance change back to the City Council for approval.  This will provide Midland residents guidelines for establishing a small flock within the City, even if they are not commercial in nature, and do not intend to research and/or adhere to GAAMPS.

I thank you for your attention to this matter, and hope that once again, this proactive attempt to avoid any zoning violations and/or nuisance complaints is appreciated.

Best regards,


Enclosed                Victory in Michigan! Shady Grove Farm Protected by Right to Farm Act

Letter to Kevin Wray, Lincoln Township Supervisor, from Peter Poznak, Attorney representing Lincoln Township, Michigan


in the over 18 months since i've started this venture, i've met many people in support of backyard chicken keeping.  one of them lives just outside the city of midland, in a nearby township.  she wrote a letter to their planning commission, much like i did, and they forwarded it on to their lawyer, much like the city of midland did.  HOWEVER, their lawyer (in my opinion) actually DID HIS JOB - and this is the letter that i reference, and included, in my second correspondence.  his letter was lengthy and thorough, and includes the following points :

  • The current state of judicial interpretations of the RTFA supports their position, generally, with a caveat.  Those judicial interpretations are Charter Township of Shelby v Papesh... and Papadelis v City of Troy...
  • The foregoing confirms the generality of the ******'s underlying claim of conflict between the Zoning Ordinance and RTFA.
  • Currently, if a property owner such as the *******s seeks the benefits of the RTFA it is incumbent upon them to do so with the intent to produce a profit.  If they do so, they will have the protection of the RTFA without amending the Zoning Ordinance.
hmmm...so he referenced the same court cases i did....and acknowledges that there is a conflict between the ordinance and the RTFA....and says that if their farm is commercial it is protected (he specifically states to make a profit - here's where i disagree...there is no court precedence that the farm has to be profitable, just commercial....)  so...they get to keep their chickens...because the township's lawyer did his job.

and me.  guess i'll keep fighting.

on to the next step...


Monday, June 04, 2012

seize the day

just returned from lilly's "disney pops" choir concert...and her choir director pretty much handed me my battle cry for the day thru song...which is kind of ironic, since she's anti-neighborhood chicken ;)

Seize the Day from "Newsies"

Music by Alan Menken.
Lyrics by Jack Feldman.

Open the gates and seize the day
Don't be afraid and don't delay
Nothing can break us
No one can make us
Give our rights away
Arise and seize the day

Now is the time to seize the day

Send out the call and join the fray

Wrongs will be righted

If we're united

Let us seize the day


Friends of the friendless, seize the day

Raise up the torch and light the way
Proud and defiant
We'll slay the giant
Let us seize the day

Neighbor to neighbor

Father to son
One for all and all for one

the city says....

well, it was what we expected, but terribly disappointing....

here's the response we received from the city...(and I say we, because even though the letter is from me, Jason is one the that technically owns the house, and therefore, the response came to both of us....)

This letter will acknowledge receipt of your letter dated May 21, 2012.

I appreciate your proactive stance and fully understand that your letter is not written with the intent of asking permission, but more in line with telling the City of Midland (City) what you're going to do about chickens in a residential area.

It is not my intent to address each paragraph of your letter or debate cases or statutory citations that are included in your correspondence.  My response represents the City's position and will be made very clear in the following.

The raising of chickens for egg production and sale in an area zoned residential is a clear violation of the City of Midland Code of Ordinances, specifically Section 3-40. (See Attachment 1)  A violation of this ordinance is a misdemeanor offense that has a maximum penalty of 90 days in jail and/or $500.00 in fines that is charged against the property owner,  The listed property owner is J**** B*****.

Further, the Right to Farm Acti is intended, in large part, to protect "pre-existing agricultural uses" from violating local zoning laws.

Simply put, the property at **** K******* is zoned residential. (See Attachment 2) It has never been zoned agricultural.  It has never been a commercial operation of raising chickens for egg production.  Therefore, the Michigan Right to Farm Act does not apply.  Further, the GAAMP (Generally Accepted Agricultural Management Practices) clearly describes excepted site selection practices for new and expanding uses to be zoned agricultural.  Again, your home is zoned residential and therefore, the GAAMP does not apply.

You have also indicated in your letter the following, "I have several friends and acquaintances who intend to purchase my farm fresh eggs from me, thus making my farm a commercial operation, and I will keep records and file taxes accordingly."  The city has a home occupation zoning ordinance, specifically Section 3.06 (A)(4) (Attachment 3) which clearly states, "No such home occupation may be conducted in any accessory structure or attached garage."  Therefore, your proposed commercial chicken operations outside of your home would not be allowed in your residential neighborhood even if chickens were to be allowed.

Also keep in mind that the Planning Commission, which is an advisory commission only to the Midland City Council, proposed an amendment to the City of Midland Zoning Ordinance regarding chickens and it was voted down by the City Council with a 5-0 vote on October 24, 2011.

In summary, chickens are not allowed to be kept in a residentially zoned area within the City.  Violations subject the home owner to court related actions and penalties as found in our local ordinances.

This reply has nothing to do with your statements in your letter of growing a garden.  This deals only with the issue of chickens.

I do appreciate you proactive approach and hope you fully understand the City's position as well as the penalties associated with zoning and ordinance violations.

Sincerely,

*City Attorney*

Wow.  (needless to say, Jason is not thrilled at being threatened with a $500 fine and up to 90 days in jail...)  As I posted on backyardchickens.com...my basic thoughts (after some tears and some time to settle down) are this:
First, I am completely dismayed that the city attorney found the case law and precedents set by current MRFTA to be so irrelevant that he did not address them in any way in his return letter to me. Is it just me, or isnt that THE WHOLE POINT. A judge has rendered their interpretation of the law - and the city is clearly totally ignoring that. I would have thought that the attorney would have been instructed to at least check out those cases and my reasoning and then address them - rather than state that he wasn't even going to try.

Second - to point out to me that there was an attempt to change the ordinance and that it didn't pass - DUH - did you READ my letter?? I opened with that information! It's why I'm resorting to MRTFA protection!

 In reference to the home occupation - I'm going to have a small flock of 6-10 birds.... I have four children, and we eat a lot of eggs wink.png ....we won't have many eggs to sell and I literally think that I will be hand delivering them to friends when we gather at social events. I think, given that, I don't need to worry about that ordinance or the GAAMPS associated with a farm market - correct?

So my question to you all is - do I send a response to the city attorney with a copy of the MRFTA and more case law and do the same thing he did to me and basically say "I'm not going to address each of your ordinance citations because none off them are relevant...." and wait for a further response.....or do I see if I can find a lawyer that will send that letter on my behalf - as the city basically indicated they intend to disregard state law and threatened fines and jail time??


Also - as an FYI - here's the local paper article that ran the day after the ordinance was voted down
http://www.ourmidland.com/news/article_f8c8fca6-ff13-11e0-8436-001cc4c03286.html

To me, it's a matter of misinformation and snootiness.....

It just doesn't seem like a small flock of chickens should be such an unreasonable request.....

I'm working on my next step....

chicken crusade

So I'm not entirely sure why and when my obsession with backyard chickens started...but it did....and now, i'm fighting city hall (literally and figuratively!)

Late last summer, a local gentleman with chickens and ducks as pets in our city was cited for a zoning violation - you apparently can't have anything other than typical 'pets' in our city limits.  His story ran in our local paper and I started doing some research into the backyard chicken 'movement'....I also have a couple of friends with backyard chickens, so at some point it had gotten into the back of my mind already.

I followed the case via the internet and local paper.  The "chicken gentleman" filed a motion to amend the ordinance to allow chickens.  The Planning Commission did their dutiful job and researched other backyard chicken ordinances throughout the state and made a recommendation to the City Council to approve a change in the zoning ordinance...this would allow for chickens with stipulations (like several other Michigan cities have done....Traverse City, Ann Arbor, Grand Rapids, East Lansing, etc....)  Given the recommendation by the Planning Commission to the City Council to approve the amendment, I didn't go out of my way to press the issue...doh.  The City Council voted down the change, thereby affirming the current ordinance not allowing any animals other than 'typical pets' and forcing the "chicken gentleman" to give up his animals.

Truth be told - I was really upset.  I'd now spent a month or two getting to know chicken care.  I researched city-appropriate coops and plans, etc.  I found hatcheries and studied different breeds and picked the ones I wanted.  (Jason had already warned me not to name them...I'd get too attached...)  I found myself on a website and forum called backyardchickens.com that has been incredibly helpful.  And there, I learned that Michigan has one of the strongest Right to Farm Acts in the United States...and low and behold, if done properly, my backyard chickens would be protected.  Agriculture has, and will likely continue to be for quite some time, a leading economy in our state.  And while I don't intend to become a full-time farmer, the law, as it is stated now, dictates that I can farm anywhere.

I have been on a crusade since the ordinance didn't pass.  And by I, I literally me "I" - not Jason and I.  He has been very understanding and supportive...however, he also stands by the feeling that he really doesn't want to take care of anything else that consumes oxygen (which I can't understand why...all we have now are 4 kids, 2 dogs, 2 cats and 2 gerbils....plenty of oxygen left!)  I've stated my 'chicken case' to him over and over...chickens make great pets, provide many benefits (eat bugs...make great poop for fertilizer...) and, most importantly, lay eggs - which our family consumes A LOT of.  I've got coop plans drawn up and I'm ready to start building...

He blessed my attempts to get chickens (I think only because in the back of his mind he doesn't think it will ever happen....)  Funding my plan is an issue, of course...but I'll work on that (seems my sponsorship plan was well-received when first announced...).  Right now, the real issue is dealing with the City.  And Jason has said - no chickens until we hear from the city that it's 'okay'.  So I have been working on that.

I spent weeks doing research and drafting my letter.  I sent it to the City (the Planning Commission, the Mayor, the City Attorney, and the Zoning Board of Appeals).  Here is what I sent - 

Dear Sirs and Madams,

I am writing to have protection under the Michigan Right to Farm Act to establish a farm on my residential lot within the City of Midland, Michigan.  I intend to have a small vegetable garden and to raise chickens for egg production.

In August, 2011, a petition was brought before the City of Midland Planning Commission seeking to amend the Zoning Ordinance to permit chickens and ducks on residential lots in the city.  The Planning Commission made a recommendation to the City Council to permit chickens, with certain standards.  In October, 2011, the City Council voted to NOT amend the Zoning Ordinance, thus upholding the ban on poultry/fowl in the city.

Since that time, and with much research of cases of similar issue in the State of Michigan, it has become clear to me that I can continue with my plan to raise chickens in my residentially-zoned yard, and have protection under the Michigan Right to Farm Act, both to ensure I am not in violation of current Zoning Ordinances, and also any nuisance complaints that might arise.

As a courtesy, I am providing my justification for my actions, in advance of establishing my farm.  I believe that I am entitled to establish a farm on my residential lot for the following reasons:

The August 23, 2011 minutes from the Planning Commission meeting state the following:

This section shall not regulate the keeping of chickens in those areas zoned Agricultural district, where the raising of poultry is a permitted principal use when conducted in compliance with the Michigan Right to Farm Act (MRTFA) and the Generally Accepted Agricultural and Management Practices.  The MRTFA is not applicable in municipalities with zoning when the property is zoned single family residential.

It was the view of the Planning Commission that the MRTFA does not apply to properties zoned single family residential.  Court rulings in the State of Michigan support the opposite, as highlighted on Page 6 of the attached resource, Land Use Planning and the Right to Farm Act, as prepared by Dr. Patricia Norris, M.S.U. and Dr. Gary Taylor, M.S.U. Extension.  In summary, the Michigan Right to Farm Act was amended in 1999 to read:

Beginning June 1, 2000, except as otherwise provided in this section, it is the express legislative intent that this act preempt any local ordinance, regulation, or resolution that purports to extend or revise in any manner the provisions of this act or generally accepted agricultural and management practices developed under this act.  Except as otherwise provided in this section, a local unit of government shall not enact, maintain, or enforce an ordinance, regulation, or resolution that conflicts in any manner with this act or generally accepted agricultural and management practices developed under this act.


This amendment was upheld in the following court cases:
  • Milan Twp. V. Jaworski – concluding that a Milan Twp. Ordinance that limited hunting preserves to areas that are zoned agricultural conflicted with the RTFA “to the extent that it allows the township board to preclude this protected farm operation.”
  • Village of Rothbury v. Double JJ Resort Ranch – concluding that “an ordinance provision that only permits single family dwellings, playgrounds, and parks would prohibit farming operations, the ordinance provision conflicts with the RTFA and is unenforceable.”
  • Charter Township of Shelby v. Papesh – concluding that “…the RTFA no longer allows township zoning ordinances to preclude farming activity that would otherwise be protected by the RTFA.  Rather, any township ordinance, including a zoning ordinance, is unenforceable to the extent that it would prohibit conduct protected by the RTFA.”
  • Papadelis v. City of Troy – concluding that a zoning ordinance “…limiting such activity to parcels with an area no less than five acres is preempted by the RTFA and is not enforceable.”

In addition, Page 2 of the enclosed Right to Farm Act Policy Platform by the Michigan Association of Planning, summarizes recent court decisions that provide nuisance immunity in newly established farms in residential areas.  While the Michigan Association of Planning is recommending changes to the RTFA, they acknowledge that the court decisions currently on file with regards to the RTFA support both newly established farm operations, including residential areas, as well as preemption of local zoning ordinances, so long as the farm uses GAAMPs.

I believe it to be indisputable that the Michigan Right to Farm Act allows me to establish a farm in a residentially-zoned area.

To be clear, the Michigan Right to Farm Act only provides protection from nuisance complaints if said farm meets the criteria of a farm, as defined by the RTFA.  These criteria are as follows:
  • The activity is a “farm or farm operation” – definitions provided on the attached resource, page 2.
  • The activity is engaged in commercial production of its farm product
  • The farm complies with the Generally Accepted Agricultural Management Practices

My farm will produce vegetables, as well as eggs from chickens.  I have several friends and acquaintances who intend to purchase my farm-fresh eggs from me, thus making my farm a commercial operation, and I will keep records and file taxes accordingly.  I also intend to comply with all relevant GAAMPs, including, but not limited to those pertaining to Manure and Animal Care.  Prior to farm operations commencing, all GAAMPs and other related regulations and resources will be on file in my home office.  Copies of the Michigan Right to Farm Act and GAAMPs can be found on the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development website.

In order to maintain positive neighbor relations, I intend to raise chickens under many of the guidelines suggested by the Planning Commission in the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, including but not limited to:
  • Not keeping a rooster
  • No slaughtering of chickens on the premises
  • Providing an covered enclosure that will house the chickens at all times
  • Locating the covered enclosure in the rear yard, no closer than 10 feet to any property line and/or within 40 feet of any neighboring residential structure
  • Constructing a covered enclosure with traditional building materials, that will prevent rats, mice and other rodents access to the chickens.  All feed will also be stored in a rodent-proof manner.
  • Not install signage with regards to eggs for sale.

I firmly believe in my right to grow a garden and raise chickens for eggs in my own plot of land, regardless of its location.  I will do so responsibly and with respect for the animals involved, and my neighbors.

I thank you for your attention to this matter, and hope that this proactive attempt to avoid any zoning violations and/or nuisance complaints is appreciated.

Best regards,
*me*

Enclosed                Land Use Planning and the Right to Farm Act, Norris and Taylor
                                Michigan Association of Planning, Right to Farm Act Policy Platform

Several members of backyardchickens.com suggested that I proceed with my chicken plans and deal with a zoning violation when it comes.  I'm nearly certain that it WILL come (i have some lovely neighbors), but my agreement with Jason is that we must receive some sort of acknowledgement from the city that my plan is acceptable before any money or construction, and most definitely chick arrival, happens.

There is already much case precedent set for the Michigan Right to Farm Act.  I am hoping for the best...and I have promised Jason that I won't spend any money, or an unreasonable amount of time, in my fight.  Basically, we can't/won't go to court over the issue.  Several others have already done that before us...and even though they've won their cases, it was years and time and money.

So....let's see what the city says....