Detroit’s Planning Commission has questions and concerns about a proposed ordinance that would allow Detroiters to keep farm animals in their backyards.

During a Thursday night public hearing, commissioners requested more details on how the law would be enforced, why animal-keeping in Detroit was banned in the first place and they urged additional community engagement on the plan. The meeting drew a crowd of divided residents. 

The ordinance would permit up to two honeybee hives and eight chickens and or ducks for personal consumption, per household. For the ordinance to take effect the planning commission has to make a recommendation to the City Council, which would then vote on it. 

Related:

• Animal-keeping ordinance finally in the pipeline for Detroit
• Can Detroiters afford more dollar stores?
• Detroit’s new urban farming director targets land access issues

Planning Commissioner Frederick E. Russell said his sense from Thursday’s hearing was that residents were very concerned about the ordinance actually being enforced, if it were to pass. 

“I really thought [the ordinance] was really a good thing, but from people that didn’t like it, I thought they had some very valid concerns,” Russell said. “It’s a theme running through a lot of things we do at the city, which comes down to: It’s not so much the law, but it’s being able to enforce them,” he said. 

“There needs to be a budget for enforcement,” for the ordinance, he added. 

Nationally, major cities like Seattle, Cleveland, and Chicago have some animal-keeping laws, as well as a number of Michigan cities including Ferndale, Ann Arbor, and East Lansing. 

Approximately 50 people gave comments Thursday between virtual hearing participants and in-person at the Coleman A. Young Municipal Center. The commission also received 12 written letters, including one favoring the law with 60 signatures. All the letters but one were in support. 

At least a third of the in-person crowd were residents of Detroit’s 48217 ZIP code who were strongly opposed to the ordinance, noting that the area already deals with a number of pollution issues and that the neighborhood, which currently has issues with rogue farm animals, is too dense. Permitting farm animals would add even more unwanted smells and issues between neighbors, 48217 residents said. 

“I do not approve (of) this ordinance. My parents bought the house that I still live in… it was residential property, not farming property,” said 48217 resident Patricia Gaston, noting that her home is very close to her neighbor’s. “If the house next door to me decides that they want chickens and all kinds of farm animals I’m going to get all that smell in my yard. I don’t want that.” 

Planning Commission Vice Chair Melanie Markowicz asked for more information from planners for the commission about how the ordinance would work in different living situations, such as a duplex owned by two different people who might differ on wanting to keep animals in the backyard. 

“I’d like it if you could look at those kinds of scenarios,” she said. 

Commissioner Gwen Lewis is seeking details on the potential property value impacts of allowing animal-keeping in urban areas.

Multiple commissioners asked for an estimate of how many animals could be kept in Detroit if the ordinance were to pass. Planning commission staff said they don’t expect a huge increase, noting that people are already keeping animals, although it’s currently illegal. 

Under the proposed ordinance, the city’s Buildings, Safety Engineering, and Environmental Department as well as the Animal Control division would be involved with inspections and enforcement. To keep animals, residents would be required to pay a $50 annual  license fee toward enforcement. Those in violation of the ordinance would be subject to a misdemeanor and a fine. 

Patrice Brown, senior food access manager at the Eastern Market Partnership, said she is in support of the ordinance.  

“The city of Detroit has a lot of health issues and we work every day to try to resolve that through food in my work. This is about neighborhood transformation and the investment back into our neighborhood,” said Brown, a lifelong Detroit resident. Brown noted the high number of liquor stores and processed food at corner stores and dollar stores in Detroit and said the ordinance would counter that. 

“This will bring nutrient-dense food to our communities for the betterment of our health and our wellness,” she said. 

Multiple residents argued not enough residents and community leaders were notified about the proposal. Kimani Jeffrey, a planner for the commission, said there has been a lot of community engagement. 

“We’ve been trying to get the word out the best we can over the years through various meetings, various engagements, and various news outlets,” he said. 

He noted that in 2016 the planning commission held a hearing on an animal-keeping ordinance and voted in favor of it. Many of the concerns Thursday were the same as those discussed around 2016. He also noted that three in-person meetings were held regarding the ordinance last summer in Districts 1, 4, and 6, and an online meeting earlier this month had more than 100 attendees, in addition to other engagements over the last decade led by City Council President Pro Tem James Tate’s office. 

Last September, Jeffrey and other ​​commission staff gave a presentation on the proposed ordinance to planning commissioners. For Thursday’s public hearing, Jeffrey said 1,300 notices were sent out by mail to community groups as well as 6,000 emails.

Commissioner David Esparza said community engagement should be broader.

“I just don’t sense that that’s been the case – it just doesn’t come across that way to me based on a lot of the comments that we’ve heard thus far,” he said. “I’m more inclined to have more meetings out in the community, in all seven districts, in person and virtual options, and any other forum or venues because there’s some very strong opinions.” 

The next step is for outstanding questions and issues to be addressed by commission planning staff and for the planning commission to hold another meeting to make a recommendation before moving the ordinance to City Council committees.