ESCANABA — After revisiting the feather-ruffling issue that had been postponed from the meeting of Oct. 12, the Escanaba Planning Commission voted 4-3 on Thursday in favor of approving a zoning amendment to allow keeping of chickens and ducks within city limits by permit and license. The materials and a recommendation to approve will next go to the city council. The council will decide how to move forward.

The proposal to change the existing ordinance arose after city officials within the past year discovered “numerous persons” illegally keeping chickens. Other communities in Michigan — including Detroit, Marquette and Ishpeming — have adopted codes that allow residents to keep poultry and other animals.

A meeting Nov. 9, attracted more members of the public than a previous one, which saw only one speaker — who expressed support for allowing chickens — and many more letters, which were a mix of opinions from both sides.

All six of the individuals who spoke Thursday urged the commission to rule in favor of allowing chickens and ducks, although a few did still have questions.

Katrina Willette said that she used to keep farm animals in Idaho, and that caring for those creatures was good for her child’s well-being.

“In teaching him that responsibility on how to care for an animal, I’m also teaching him how to care for himself,” said Willette. She said it was beneficial to “get that sunshine, get that interaction with nature. But the City of Escanaba has taken that,” she continued, referring to the existing ordinance. “So I’m just kind of wondering why — why do we do this to our youth, especially in today’s society, where our youth is struggling?”

Willette also raised the question of whether she would be able to keep chickens in her attached heated garage. Because the structure is attached to a home, the current draft disallows it. Planning and Zoning Administrator Tyler Anthony said that such a ruling was based upon a recommendation from Michigan State University Extension and a draft ordinance provided by them from the U.P. Food Exchange.

“Both included provisions that said (not to) attach them to dwellings, because then you might actually run the risk of disease above and beyond just

As previous arguments against the amendment cited noise from chickens as being a potential problem, some citizens rebuked that by pointing out that dogs — which are allowed and present — are often more disruptive.

After describing a situation wherein “every day, at least once,” she hears barking dogs excite other neighboring dogs, setting off a chain of barking dogs and shouting humans, Carlynne Bergette Welch argued that “the clucking of hens would be less loud.”

Ann Fix agreed with that point, adding dogs getting loose is another persistent problem in Escanaba, but she also brought up another concern in the chicken debate.

“As far as smell, I compost,” said Fix. “Chicken poop is a wonderful compost for organic gardening, and I hope the city will go forward in supporting this amendment for chickens in our city.”

Medical Doctor Toskhan Cooper-Shelton said he wished to correct some errors he heard presented previously.

“Chickens raised outside of a factory farming system generally have better immune systems,” said Cooper-Shelton. “This results in less avian flu and other diseases.” He also stated farm fresh eggs are more nutritious than store-bought.

Two citizens — Susan Corwin and Mike Segorski — brought up the question of the cost of obtaining a permit and license. Both Corwin and Segorski were in support of allowing chickens, but were not keen on having to pay a fee.

If the city council accepts the new ordinance amendment, it will be up to them what the cost will be, upon advice from the planning commission staff, who mentioned that “the bare minimum fee” was $50.

Anthony followed this statement with an estimate of potential savings. Assuming that each hen lays four to six eggs per week and that a dozen eggs cost $3, a coop of six chickens could produce several hundred dollars worth of eggs in a year. All would be for personal home use, as commercial egg sales are prohibited. Corwin suggested that eggs could be donated to local food banks.

Anthony also read aloud three letters, all of which spoke in opposition of the amendment.

“Unwanted chickens are regularly abandoned by careless or overwhelmed owners,” wrote Daniel Blevins and Melissa Miller. “While people may be well intentioned when they decide to set up backyard chicken coop, they often find themselves unwilling or unable to care for these animals, who can live to be more than 10 years old but whose egg-laying tendency declines relatively early on in life.”

Another letter from repeat writer J. M. Anderson expressed a “major concern” that chickens would draw predators and vermin to the city. Anderson also attached a letter to the editor from Gen Doyle, which ran in the Daily Press on Oct. 19.

Commissioner Patrick Connor suggested the idea of a trial period, perhaps a sunset clause of sorts, but Commissioner Michael Harris pointed out that would be problematic for those who began investing money in erecting chicken coops.

Commissioner Roy Webber said that he believed people should be able to participate in endeavors that are not harmful to others, but animal husbandry did not fall in that category.

“While I honestly feel the majority of folks who raise poultry will do a responsible job, there will likely be a small but significant minority who abuse the privilege,” said Webber. “The impact on adjacent property values and quality of life will be at best neutral and quite possibly negative.”

Commissioner Kasja Nelson announced that her position had flipped after hearing what the public had to say.

Commissioner Christiana Reynolds, a high school civics teacher, said that she had found the matter to be an educational opportunity and presented findings of research done by her students and herself.

Reynolds spoke in favor of the amendment, citing “individual liberty, community enrichment and economic prosperity” as the three main pillars.

“We found that over five million eggs were donated by farmers across the country during COVID lockdown, and honestly, what a wonderful way to support our neighbors in tough economic times,” she said. “Creating a system of local fresh food benefits everyone.”

Chair James Hellerman said, “I’ve come to the conclusion, based on a lot of things, that I think property rights trump. Human rights trump. And some of these reasons — almost all of the objections could be raised for literally any animal or most humans. … Also, by far the majority of people who actually took time out of their day to show up to this meeting and the previous meeting and speak on behalf of it — that’s a heavy weight.”

Quickly counting the audience members, Hellerman said, “Each one of you are speaking on behalf of five, 600 people. That’s a heavy weight in my mind. Yes, the letters have weight. they speak the other way, but they don’t touch how many people are here in support.

“I don’t make decisions based on my opinion. I’m a representative of the community,” Hellerman said with finality.

When making decisions, the planning commission also has to consider whether proposals are in line with the Master Plan. The fourth goal named in the City of Escanaba’s Master Plan states, “Land use regulations will support a wide range of development that encourages a more vibrant, sustainable, and healthy community.”

With three votes to accept the draft as written and three to deny, it was up to a tie-breaking vote by the seventh commissioner, Mark Sadowski, who gave his approval.

All commissioners agreed on a resolution to pass along to the city council.

With an agenda already prepared for next week’s meeting, City Manager and City Assessor James McNeil said, “We will be looking at first introducing the chicken and duck ordinance at the Dec. 7 meeting. Amending an ordinance will take two meetings at a minimum.”