Roaming hens near you
The second reading of the highly controversial hen ordinance will take place at the Oct. 21 City Council meeting and 30 days after that it will be city law. That’s right, after Nov. 20 nearly any property owner in an R-1 zone can have four hens in a coop 10 feet away from any off site residential building. In other words, the coop can be just 10 feet away from a neighbor’s house.
Likewise, six hens can be 15 feet away, eight hens can be 20 feet away and 12 hens can be 30 feet away. This ordinance also allows hens to roam the entire backyard right up to the property line during daylight hours and only be cooped at night. It is likely the least restrictive hen ordinance of any California city.
The ordinance significantly changes R-1 zoning by adding keeping of a hen as a permitted use. This appears to be a text amendment (Bakersfield Municipal Code 17.64.080) which requires a public hearing to be noticed and conducted by the Planning Commission or City Council. A hearing was not noticed nor was it held.
Councilman Bob Smith desired a simple, streamlined ordinance to accommodate a small group of hen people whom he deemed would be responsible hen owners. The 85,000
R-1 zoned property owners were given no consideration. You can be the most responsible hen owner, but by its very nature there will be odor, flies, rodents and noise. The lack of details regarding the role of animal control, code enforcement and disposing of dead or unwanted hens are just a few of the issues that will be dealt with by residents and city staff.
There is nothing in the ordinance that provides substantive recourse for those who, unfortunately, live adjacent to a backyard hen owner. The ordinance says odor and noise shall not cause discomfort or annoyance beyond property boundaries. Who will decide when odor and noise is excessive? The code enforcement officer? Backyard hen advocates claim the majority of residents support the ordinance. Really? Based upon what information? The real majority — people who only recently became aware of the ordinance and who don’t want backyard hens — are being disenfranchised by the council.
A letter to the City Council from the Bakersfield Association of Realtors raises numerous issues that have not had “adequate public discussion and thorough evaluation of the impacts on residential properties” and concludes, “There is no reason to make a rushed and hasty decision on this issue that has the potential to impact so many.”
Similarly, in a letter to the City Council, the Home Builders Association of Kern County recommended the council take no action “until further study is conducted on the noise, odor, public health, enforcement, and quality of life issues raised by this proposal.” Sadly, the issues raised by the long-standing and well-respected Realtors and Builders Associations are being ignored.
A vocal hen advocate expressed pleasure with the ordinance in a recent Facebook post, mockingly stating, “We’re pissing our neighbors off. They’re the reason we had to get rid of our chickens...” Not a particularly eloquent statement, but true. Now, with the new hen ordinance in effect, neighbors will have no recourse. They’ll just have to put up with the hens next door thanks to councilmembers Smith, Jacquie Sullivan, Andrae Gonzales and Willie Rivera who voted in favor of the ordinance.
Procedurally, the hen ordinance will have second reading on the Oct. 21 agenda as a consent calendar item. To have a final vote, a councilmember will have to request the item be removed for separate consideration. It will take either Smith, Sullivan, Gonzales or Rivera to reconsider and change their vote to no to stop it from becoming city law. Even though you may not live in their ward, their vote will affect you on this citywide matter of changing R-1 zoning rules. Based on the dissatisfaction of the majority of property owners outweighing any possible benefits, I suggest contacting any of the four to request they vote no on this ordinance.