Op Ed: Whitehall Poultry Ordinance: Solving a Common Problem or Vastly Overreaching?

I will hopefully be reading this aloud at the town meeting but may not be and I felt my opinion is important to share. On July 4th, 1776, members from the 13 colonies together signed a document creating our great nation. That document has a total of 1,320 words, the proposed ordinance contains 1,715 words establishing a more in-depth document than what was used to forge a nation.

Government needing to justify its existence aside I feel these proposed changes are no more than a mere petty dispute between someone with chickens, and someone on the town board that are unable to have a conversation. We have sidewalks in a state of disrepair, uranium in our water (which every few months I’m told is safe to drink), and dogs that are regularly loose and ending up in other parts of towns. I feel as though this proposed change is a great example of a solution to a nonexistent problem. We currently have codes dealing with the majority of issues that are being used to justify this ordinance, all noted in section four of the current town code.

What this ordinance seeks to do is profit off taxing its citizens on a yearly basis for keeping chickens. As the vast majority of the proposed changes talk about permits, and permit applications while not having an agreed cost written in the ordinance. “The permit annual fee will be established by resolution by the Whitehall Town Council and may be revised from time to time.” I will now also have to reapply for a permit, yearly, for animals that live for longer than one year. This is not done with any other type of animal inside of the city ordinance on a yearly basis. This also says the price to have backyard chickens will continue to rise as the town decides it needs more taxable income.

Section 2E, speaks to the nuisance of chickens. I can say while living in town on First Street, I let my chickens roam my backyard and bother no one. I can also say I regularly pick up dog feces off the sidewalk of my house, and my neighbor's house is more of a nuisance than a chicken will ever be. I also regularly have neighbors' dogs in my yard. When the fire department siren goes off, I can hear dogs howling. None of these things necessitate town ordinances to manage and are against the currently unenforced Town Ordinance (S 4-90). Further, “The Town of Whitehall Code Enforcement Officer will determine whether or not a nuisance exists on a case-by-case basis.” This determinant allows for significant bias to be introduced in the application of the law and reduces equality of the law solely on individual discretion that can change depending on the person enforcing it.

Section 3, This section speaks to the permitting process. This to me is where the issue lies, and clearly shows the town is viewing this as an extra revenue source. I will go through each portion I have an issue with separately here.

A) “A sketch identifying the property boundaries, the location of all structures on the property, and distances between said structures and between the property boundaries. The sketch must also indicate the location(s) of the poultry enclosure and poultry house” Why? The city currently says I do not need a permit for a chicken coop (S 42-1); why do I now need to sketch a backyard coop that may just be a small enclosed run?

B) “The number of poultry kept.” You have already said I can keep up to six chickens, why do I need to tell you exactly how many are being kept? Do I need to re-submit an application if I choose to get more? Do I need to resubmit the application if one dies?

C) “A description of the enclosure and poultry house, including materials used and cubic footage(s).” See point A. If we are talking about the regulation of safe and healthy space for chickens, unless it’s a small 2’x2’ box, the chickens will be fine. It’s a chicken coop, not a garage.

D) “A sworn statement that all statements contained in the application are true and that the permit holder shall keep the poultry in compliance with the terms of the permit, application, and this section.” If I'm spending money on a yearly basis for the purpose of getting a few eggs, is this really necessary? Im not buying a gun, Im not taking a bank loan. I am solely getting chickens. This is also not required or enforced on any other animal allowed in town currently.

E) “The applicant shall provide each residence adjacent, including those adjacent across a public right-of-way, notification that the applicant intends to keep poultry in the manner described in the application. The applicant shall submit the signed forms and a listing of all adjacent residents with the application. If a neighbor refuses to sign, the applicant shall so state on the application.” I thought I owned my property? I am unaware that I needed my neighbors' permission to use my property as I see fit, and will my neighbor also need to be notified if I get a new dog? Or will I be notified if my neighbor gets a new dog?

My main concern with the entirety of the proposed ordinance is it does not seek to solve a common problem in the town, but more seems to be a solution to an individual problem that now affects everyone or a way for the city to benefit from an increased fee. This vastly overreaches any reasonable or common sense application of a town ordinance regarding an insubstantial and otherwise unheard-of issue in town. If the welfare of chickens, and the safe keeping to not be a nuisance is truly the sole issue then why is there a permit scheme involved?

According to recent census data, the town has a population of 1,006. The same census data shows the median single provider income of Whitehall at $22,917. This proposed change would disproportionately affect locals who are already at risk of food instability, and economic disadvantage. These proposed changes would negatively affect people who are already facing severe adversity in our local community by further increasing the amount of money they have to spend on groceries. I can attest as both a local paramedic, and flight paramedic that many in our town do have to make a conscious decision to spend money on food, or money on medicine, or money on heat, and will not be able to afford one of these three things. These changes will hurt them even more.

In closing, in the words of our great founding fathers, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America,” I truly believe the town board by even considering this proposed change does not and is not actively promoting the general welfare of the people it is entrusted to serve.

Christian Rosa, NRP, TP-C

Whitehall, Montana