Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Neighborhood Nuisance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press council on persistent nuisance at neighboring property and chronic rooster noise
Summary
Two residents described ongoing problems at neighboring properties: one raised repeated criminal and occupancy complaints at a First Lane address and requested faster enforcement; another presented years of complaints about roosters and alleged animal neglect affecting a subdivision.
Two East Bethel residents used the public forum on April 28 to press city officials about separate persistent neighborhood nuisances: one described continuing criminal activity and unclear ownership at a property on First Lane, and another detailed multi‑year problems with roosters and animal neglect at a nearby development.
Sarah McLaughlin, who identified her address as 1148 230 First Lane, said she has collected sheriff incident reports for a property at 1120 230 First Lane and that she had recorded 53 reports to the sheriff since February 2023. McLaughlin told council she had seen continued activity and that deputies, the fire chief and the city administrator are coordinating a plan of action; she asked for the city to expedite enforcement and offered to meet privately with staff for an update.
City staff told McLaughlin the property owner had died, the owner’s son then died, and the parcel is behind on taxes; staff said the property must move through the county’s tax‑forfeiture process and sheriff’s sale procedures before the county can take title. Staff advised neighbors to call the sheriff about suspicious activity; officials said posting a deputy at the property was not feasible.
Separately, resident Dave Keefer presented complaint forms from neighbors documenting recurring rooster noise, animals in poor condition and other alleged health and safety concerns near Viking Boulevard and Jackson Street. Keefer said neighbors have recorded audio of roosters crowing at night and early morning and presented photos and a rescue‑sanctuary report for one hen that had been removed earlier and was described as suffering frostbite and lice.
Mr. Luke (city administration) and staff said code enforcement and planning staff had previously visited the property but found chickens not visible at the time. Staff agreed to address Keefer’s materials at the next staff meeting and asked residents to bring time‑stamped audio or other proof during business hours to make formal complaints.
Council members noted past discussion about rooster/hen ordinances and acknowledged the complication that allowing roosters can lead to rapid flock growth if not managed. Staff said they would pursue options and report back; no immediate enforcement action was approved at the meeting.
