Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Nuisance Bird Feeding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Chandler resident urges council to study nuisance bird-feeding ordinance after property damage, council asks staff to research
Summary
A Chandler resident told the City Council excessive backyard bird feeding has led to flocks of pigeons, roof damage and rats; council members asked staff and code enforcement to research ordinances used by other cities and report back.
Dane Martin, a Chandler resident, told the Chandler City Council that a neighbor’s repeated, large-scale bird feeding has turned into a “bird buffet” that is causing property damage and attracting rodents, and asked the council to consider a nuisance bird-feeding ordinance.
Martin said the problem began during the COVID period and that morning flocks now number “usually 100 to 200 birds,” which he said soils patios and decks and has damaged a roof. “We recently replaced our roof that began leaking it to a tune of $24,000,” Martin said, adding that when tiles were lifted workers found bird droppings had damaged the underlayment. He also told council members he has seen rats attracted to leftover seed and called the situation “a public health issue.”
The request prompted members of the Chandler City Council to direct staff to research possible responses rather than take immediate action. Council members asked the city manager to review ordinances used by other Arizona cities and any county authority on the subject, and to provide information from the city’s code-enforcement team about prior complaints and steps taken. The council did not vote on an ordinance at the meeting.
Why this matters: Martin cited disease risks and property damage as motivations for a local rule. In his remarks he referenced public-health guidance generally (citing the CDC) and asked the council for limits and consequences that would address “excessive negligent behavior” while not impeding residents who feed birds responsibly.
Council response and next steps: Members of the council said this was at least the third complaint the city has received on similar issues and asked staff to compile options. The council asked for: research on what Phoenix, Tempe, Mesa and Scottsdale have done; information on whether county public-health rules apply; a summary of code-enforcement records and past resolutions in Chandler; and possible draft language or subcommittee guidance if an ordinance approach is appropriate. The city manager and city attorney told the council they would look at prior case history and legal options and return with findings.
Discussion vs. decision: The meeting record shows discussion and direction to staff only; no ordinance was introduced or adopted. The council emphasized attempting neighborhood-level resolution and code-enforcement remedies before pursuing citywide regulation, and said staff should report back with research and possible draft language.
Background and claims in the record: Martin told the council he has lived at his address since February 2005 and traced the change to increased backyard gardening and feeding during the COVID period. He said studies show “as simple as 1 pound of food left out can feed hundreds of rodents per day”; that claim was offered by the speaker as context for rodent concerns. The council repeatedly asked staff to include code-enforcement findings and prior complaint history in the staff report.
Ending: The council did not set a timeline for a return report; council members said they expect staff to follow up with research and recommended that any proposed language balance property rights with protections for neighbors and public health.
