Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Urban Livestock topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Keizer planning commission recommends no code changes to allow goats, cites enforcement and zoning concerns
Summary
After a staff briefing and resident testimony, the Keizer Planning Commission voted unanimously June 10 to recommend that city council make no changes to the municipal code to allow goats or to expand emotional-support animal rules pending further study; commissioners cited enforcement, noise, fencing and lot-size variability.
Get email alerts on the Urban Livestock topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Keizer Planning Commission on June 10 discussed a resident request to allow goats in city limits and voted to recommend that the City Council make no code changes related to emotional-support animals or allowing goats at this time.
Shane, planning staff, told the commission the issue originated at a May 18 City Council meeting and that a Keizer resident submitted a written request asking the city to consider amending its code to allow keeping goats with restrictions. Shane said the municipal code currently excludes livestock from the definition of pets and contains a separate permitted-use section allowing up to six chickens or ducks (no roosters) in residential areas. He also reported the city had issued a citation related to goats that proceeded to municipal court in May and that court action is on hold while the matter is discussed by the city and court.
Commissioners discussed whether local rules should address emotional-support animals, and staff clarified that federal law (ADA) preempts local code on service animals—primarily dogs and some miniature horses—and that emotional-support animals are not covered by ADA protections in the same way. Commissioners and staff agreed the city code contains no explicit allowance for miniature horses or similar exceptions; federal preemption limits how the city can regulate bona fide service animals.
Several commissioners raised practical concerns about approving a text amendment now. The Chair said lot-size variation and increasing housing density make it difficult to craft a one-size-fits-all policy, and noted enforcement capacity is limited; "If I were asked today to make a decision on whether or not to move forward, my answer would be no," the Chair said. Commissioners warned goats can be noisy and can escape typical residential fencing, creating odor, animal-welfare and neighbor-conflict issues, and they noted the city would need clear standards (size, number, setbacks, fencing and welfare requirements) and additional staff capacity to enforce them.
Monica, a Keizer resident who testified to the council and spoke to the commission, said she lives in Keizer and offered to temporarily rehome the goats while the city considers any long-term changes. "I do have a place for rehoming them," Monica said, adding she did not want to pressure staff or the commission for immediate action.
After discussion, Commissioner (S2) moved—seconded by Commissioner (S8)—that the planning commission formally recommend pursuing no changes in the municipal code related to emotional-support animals. The motion passed unanimously (the commission recorded absences earlier in the meeting). Shane said staff would report the commission's guidance back to the City Council and noted additional research or public outreach could be brought forward if the council later requests it.
The commission did not adopt any text amendments, conditions, or interim waivers; the action documented was the formal recommendation to the council that no code change be pursued at this time.

