The debate which has moved from the planning committee of the council to the Hastings Planning Commission , to city council and back again was again heard Monday night . The topic of keeping chickens in residential property within the city of Hastings was one of lengthy discussion during a public hearing that added more to the conversation of residents to own up to 4 hens on their residential property. A wide range of comments were made beginning with an opponent, Brian Jones who offered 5 major points including a slippery slope of allowing other farm animals to dwell in neighborhoods that may or may not be accepting of the new residents. He also mentioned well-meaning novice chicken owners who become disenchanted with the work, cost or other downsides to poultry ownership with the animal’s welfare of concern to be considered. Supporters cited sustainability, natural food source, green living and educational advantages for families.
Four Dakota County 4H members were introduced by County Commissioner Mike Slavik who was a member of the 2009 Council when the ordinance was created to only allow chickens in agriculturally zoned areas and at the LeDuc for educational purposes. He prefaced his comments by saying he was on the opposing side in 2009, but feels the tide has turned in public sentiment and that the benefits outweigh the negative arguments. A signifcant amount of debate continued at the close of the public hearing by councilmembers who have turned to fact finding of their own to educate themselves on the issue.
Some major comments came from Councilmember Mark Vaughan who opposes the limited amount of data collected from those who want the change. He found the process lacking in determining who would enforce infractions, who would settle neighbor disputes, and a general incompleteness in forming a change to an ordinance on the basis of a very few inquiries. Over an hour later, a voice vote was taken with a majority of 4 of the 6 needed for approval of an ordinance change. The vote was Leifeld, Folch and Braucks in Favor and Lund, Balsanek and Vaughan opposed. The ordinance remains unchanged. In the final comments portion of the meeting, Councilmember Folch made a motion to take the chicken ordinance debate back to the planning committee of the council for further discussion. The motion passed on a voice vote of 4-2.