Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Urban Agriculture Chickens topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council approves first reading of backyard chicken ordinance; debates coop size, nuisance and enforcement

3195791 · April 14, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The council approved the first reading of a proposed ordinance that would allow backyard hens under specified conditions; the measure drew questions about enforcement, nuisance odor, and neighborhood suitability and will return for a second reading.

Port Huron City Council completed a first reading of an ordinance to permit backyard chickens in the city, approving the introductory measure and scheduling a second reading before final enactment.

The proposed ordinance would add Article 4 to Chapter 8 (Animals) of the Port Huron Code and allow a limited number of hens (the draft sets a limit at five) while prohibiting roosters. City Attorney Todd Shouty told the council he relied on guidance from Michigan State University extension and practical experience managing chicken coops when drafting size, coop and run recommendations. “I know enough about chickens to be dangerous,” Shouty said during his presentation.

Key points in the draft include hen-only flocks, an enclosed coop and run with a recommended size (roughly 1 square foot per hen inside the coop and about an 8-by-8 enclosed run as a guideline), regular cleaning to limit odor, a prohibition on keeping chickens inside homes or garages, and minimum setback distances (10 feet from a property line and 20 feet from a neighboring dwelling) to reduce neighbor impacts. The draft also contemplates enforcement by the city’s animal-control officers.

Council discussion and public comment highlighted competing concerns: supporters argued backyard chickens promote self-sufficiency and community education, while some council members and residents worried about odors, pests and the city’s capacity to enforce rules amid other blight and code-enforcement priorities. One council member said they planned to vote no on final adoption unless additional data on enforcement and neighborhood impacts are provided. The first reading carried on a roll call (Yes 6, No 1); Mayor Anita Ashford cast the lone recorded no vote on the first reading.

The measure will return for a second reading; staff and the city attorney were asked to provide further details on enforcement protocols, complaint response times and any required permits or inspections before final adoption.