Planning panel seeks full council discussion of proposed farm-animal rules; roosters singled out as common complaint

The Planning & Zoning Committee voted to forward a proposed city ordinance on keeping farm animals to the full Findlay City Council for discussion (the committee requested the item be presented to council for debate rather than introduced immediately as formal legislation).

Staff presented a draft ordinance that creates three size-based categories: small animals (chickens, ducks, rabbits), medium animals (goats, sheep, similar animals under 500 pounds) and large animals (horses, cows, pigs). Proposed rules include required enclosed coops or pens, setback standards, and minimum lot sizes (small animals allowed based on a per-800-square-foot rule up to a 24-animal cap; roosters and turkeys prohibited on lots under 1 acre under the draft; medium animals allowed only on parcels of at least 1 acre with additional animals per 10,000 square feet; large animals require at least 3 acres). The draft also sets sanitation and manure-storage standards (minimum distances from wells, streams and property lines).

Staff explained a grandfather clause: current animal owners would have 90 days after adoption to register existing animals and be grandfathered for those numbers; grandfathering is described as running with the land and being lost after a 12-month discontinuance of the use. Enforcement was described as complaint-driven after the grandfathering registration period; staff said planning/inspections staff would verify animal counts during the 90-day registration window and afterward respond to complaints.

Committee discussion focused on nuisance complaints, particularly roosters. Multiple council members observed that rooster-related calls are frequent; one member said roosters are the majority of farm-animal complaints. The law director and the county prosecutor explained having a code in place provides the city with enforcement tools, including civil remedies and the option to pursue violations; they recommended enforcement be complaint-driven and cautioned against routine proactive patrols by city staff.

Committee members asked staff to refine the draft (several asked for changes such as clearer registration language and suggested edits staff previously noted) and recommended taking the revised draft and staff comments to a council meeting for a broader conversation rather than introducing an ordinance immediately. Councilman Grant Russell moved to advance the proposal to full council for discussion with staff edits; the motion passed by voice vote.

Why it matters: the draft would create a citywide framework for when and how residents may keep farm animals, clarify sanitary and setback expectations, and give the city tools to address chronic nuisance situations that currently rely on health department or civil remedies.

Next steps: staff to incorporate edits suggested by the committee and law department and present the proposal to full council for discussion before drafting formal ordinance language.