Keep the original urban hens ordinance in place
So, here we are, the city of Bakersfield and the world, in the midst of a horrific pandemic, and the Bakersfield City Council is using its time, efforts and citizens’ tax revenue to modify what has been a perfectly working 102-year-old ordinance.
Enacted during a pandemic, the ordinance prohibited chickens in R-1 zoning, to not allow disease-carrying and disease-creating chickens to exist in what is now 85,000 single family R-1 residences within the city limits.
In 1918, Bakersfield was then a very rural agricultural accepting community of only 18,000 citizens.
Even then it saw the wisdom of prohibiting chickens inside of a then-agricultural city environment, even when horses still existed inside city limits.
The basics of that 1918 ordinance prohibiting poultry in R-1 have served the city well. As a very good old adage goes, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!”
Even Kern County itself to this point in time does not allow chickens in its R-1 zoning.
Has the council readily and seriously made all of the residents in the 85,000 R-1 parcels aware of this ordinance change that is about to seriously affect their health and property values, not for the better, but only negatively per the science and facts?
Has an environmental impact report itself duly noted that there truly will not be a negative impact on 85,000 single-family R-1 resident parcels, which would affect approximately 221,000 residents at 2.6 people per average residency?
The majority of the City Council, which is promoting this ordinance change, is showing itself to be a fact and science denying council bent to override science in lieu of a very small group of feel-good chicken huggers.
If this modified ordinance is ultimately passed by the City Council, and when the first citizen outbreak of salmonella is contracted and spread and the first vulnerable senior citizen dies, who on the council will take the lead to be interviewed by “20/20” to account for the council’s irresponsible actions?
Data clearly and readily shows that both the elderly and those less than 6 years old are particularly susceptible to chicken-carrying disease infections.
Neither the factual data nor science is on the council’s side to allow chickens in 85,000 R-1 residences.
The council is just plain decreasing the health conditions of the citizens of Bakersfield.
You are not looking out for the betterment of the majority of the citizens of Bakersfield.
A plain read of this situation certainly makes it appear that you are totally representing and pandering to some minority group, not the majority of your citizens.
At the council meeting on Aug. 12 in deciding to move forward on this ordinance, the council gave equal value to letters from 8-year-olds as to 40-year R-1, tax-paying senior citizens.
Going forward, I would hope that the council would just give absolute total consideration to science and facts as deciding factors in denying modification, not the feel-good love hug of a potential disease-carrying chicken where you should be washing your hands after handling, just like you might have been exposed to COVID-19, among other hygiene efforts.
In addition, modifying the existing ordinance is also potentially decreasing the property values of offset R-1 parcels should they decide to sell their property.
In an R-1 situation, where potentially up to possibly five properties can have a common boundary, what will be the decreasing value of those other four homes when up to 12 chickens exist in just one parcel?
What will be the health risk to neighboring homes that will constantly be surrounded by chicken manure?
Further proceeding with modifying the current ordinance to allow the existence of chickens in 85,000 R-1 parcels within city limits is just wrong on every science, fact and community health level.
Will “The Sound of Something Better” now become the “The Sound of Clucking That I Hear”?
What an ambiance call to move to Bakersfield and buy an R-1 home.