LoginBackyard chicken issue ruffling feathers in Beverly Hills
Nine years after Racheal Hrydziuszko first asked the Beverly Hills Zoning Board of Appeals for a variance to keep her backyard chickens, the village is rewriting its ordinances concerning animals.
ZBA members were puzzled, believing she didn’t need to ask for a variance, Hrydziuszko said.
Frustrated by the lack of clarity on the issue, Hrydziuszko ran for a seat on the Village Council and began serving in 2018.
Later, Hrydziuszko said, there was a change in enforcement philosophy in the village administration, and she and her husband, Damon, received a violation notice. The Hrydziuszkos filed an appeal in Oakland County Circuit Court.
At the time, a village ordinance specifically allowed 11 animals, such as cats, dogs, gerbils, hamsters and others that are “similar” and “commonly kept as pets.” The ordinance did not prohibit chickens or other animals.
Judge Kwame Rowe declared the ordinance “unconstitutionally vague” last year; the ruling allowed the Hrydziuszkos to keep their half dozen hens in a garage on their nearly half-acre property.
The judge’s ruling prompted the ordinance overhaul, said Village Manager Warren Rothe.
Hrydziuszko serves on a committee that is reviewing the village’s chicken rules, looking at specifics such as the minimum acreage needed to keep chickens.
The debate has attracted pro- and anti-chicken forces to recent council meetings, with both sides claiming the majority of residents support their view.
While still being tweaked, the council will likely continue its review of two rewritten ordinances at its Sept. 2 meeting.
Several anti-chicken handbills have appeared on doorsteps; pro-chicken residents say the flyers contain misleading information. For example, one flyer claimed the Village Council could allow “your neighbors to keep chickens only a few steps from your back door.”
Backyard chicken proponents say their birds produce eggs that are healthier than those available in stores. They say that keeping poultry provides an educational experience for their children. And they say chickens are good pets.
“They’re fun. They’re very gregarious. They have personalities.” Hrydziuszko said. “It’s just a different kind of pet.”
Many Beverly Hills residents say they don’t want to own chickens, but don’t want the government preventing their neighbors from keeping them.
Opponents say the birds and their droppings could create odors and could attract rodents. Chickens belong on a farm, detractors say.
“I’m going to get a few pigs. Why not? Maybe a small herd of cattle as well. If you want to have a farm, move to the country,” one opponent said on a Beverly Hills Facebook page.
As backyard chickens have grown in popularity, other Oakland County cities, like Southfield, have revised rules that advocates say would prohibit most people from keeping the birds. Additional Oakland County cities are researching changes to their rules.
Based on community Facebook posts, it seems almost everyone in Beverly Hills agrees on one thing: The chicken debate has ruffled feathers for too long. There are other things to worry about, like cars speeding in residential areas, senior citizens who need help with lawn upkeep, maintenance of parks and more, commenters have written.
Hrydziuszko agrees.
“It’s time to put this to rest,” she said.
The situation has ruffled even more feathers as Facebook commenters say Hrydziuszko should recuse herself from the chicken debate, claiming conflict of interest since her court case prompted the ordinance rewrite.
She disagrees, saying the Village Charter describes a conflict of interest as being financially vested in an issue. For example, a council member recused himself from a vote on buying patrol cars for the Public Safety Department from Ford Motor Co. because he worked for Ford.
“I have no financial interest in this,” she said, adding that the village attorney has not advised her to recuse herself.
“That is his job, to let us know when we should recuse ourselves,” she said.
To complicate the village’s chicken debate, two bills pending in the state Legislature would supersede local ordinances and allow residents to keep hens as long as they meet certain generally accepted agricultural and management practices.
State Rep. James DeSana, R-Carleton, introduced House Bills 4049 and 4050 in January. They would eliminate the need for special land use approvals from local governments as long as the poultry is kept on a property that is at least a quarter of an acre and the number of hens is limited to five per quarter acre or 25 hens, whichever is less. Property zoned as farmland falls under separate guidelines.
The bills have been in the House Agriculture Committee since February.
Backyard chicken proponents say most municipalities already have general ordinances that would allow them to address poultry that created an odor or became a nuisance in some other way.
Oakland Co. judge declares community’s ordinance against chickens ‘unconstitutionally vague’
Oakland County communities rethinking backyard chicken rules
