By Amanda Estes
Staff Writer
    South Portland Mayor Claude Morgan wasn’t far off last week when he estimated the ratio of support for changing the city’s zoning ordinance to allow for the keeping of pet hens to be 15-to-one in favor.
    On Monday, the city council heard from 17 residents in favor and one resident opposed before voting 5-2 in favor of amending the ordinance during a first reading. Jim Soule and Kay Loring were the two dissenting councilors.
     With the council scheduled to make their final decision at the Sept. 5 meeting, residents crowded council chambers and held up colorful placards urging the council to “Give peeps a chance” and “Say yes to pet hens.”
    Ten-year-old Olivia Collins and her parents Neil and Stacey are requesting the city’s residential zoning ordinance which prohibits the keeping of fowl, be amended to allow residents to raise a small number of hens. Stacey Collins helped draft the amendments that would allow residents to have six chickens per house lot and for personal use only.   
    “When we first came to workshop back in May, we had no idea it was going to be this big, city wide issue,” said Stacey Collins.
    She said as of Monday they had collected 358 signatures via a petition.    
    If approved, the amendments would require residents who wish to keep hens to pay $25 for an annual permit and a $25 one-time building permit fee for the construction of a henhouse or pen. The amendments also outline standards for the keeping of the chickens to ensure they are kept in a sanitary manner, away from predators and in a way that minimizes any adverse impact on neighbors.
    Any violations of the ordinance would result in a fine up to $100, with each day the violation continues considered a separate offense.  
    Bob Johnson, owner of Scratch Baking Company said he was “in complete support” of allowing hens in the city.
    “From an educational perspective, having been involved in specialty food businesses for over 20 years, I am constantly astonished at how many smart and well educated suburban children equate their food source to a frozen entree or a cardboard box with an action figure in it,” he said.
    Joseph Carpenito elicited some laughs and groans when he thanked the council for giving the issue “a chance to fly.” He said he has seen backyard chickens in Tacoma, Wash. in  neighborhoods more densely populated than those in South Portland. When Tacoma officials went through a similar process with their ordinance, Carpenito said those opposed to the fowl were misinformed or didn’t understand what was being proposed.
    A new resident from Pittsburgh, Penn., Meredith Mendelson, said she was more accustomed to city meetings in which a room full of people would speak out about what they didn’t want in their backyard or their neighbors’ backyards.
    “It’s a really rare thing to see a room full of people saying, ‘Maybe if I don’t want this in my backyard I think its okay for my neighbors to have it in theirs,’” she said.  
    Pamela Beal was the only person to speak against the amendments.
    “I guess tonight I’m the skunk at the lawn party, but its nice to be here and this is democracy in action,” she said.
    Beal questioned how many viewpoints were being represented and suggested the city hold a referendum vote.
    “I believe our city has a lot of good people who have good intentions and I do have a concern about stressing our existing resources, monitoring chicken coops, monitoring cleaning out chicken coops and monitoring complaints that might come from neighbors,” she said.
    Beal asked the council to consider the person who doesn’t want chickens in their backyard and how uncomfortable that person might be about complaining about their neighbor.   
    Loring said she also favored a referendum vote and said she expects more people to come forward to speak out in the coming month.
    Councilors expressed concern over the absence of an additional provision that would require a 20 foot setback for the construction of a henhouse from the rear or side property lines. A provision that would require residents to notify all abutters of any plans to build a henhouse less than 20 feet from the property line was also absent from the draft.
    The waiver would have required all abutters to be notified by mail within seven days during which time, the resident seeking the permit must prove the hens will not have a negative impact.
    “This 20 foot setback issue has been something that I felt was necessary for me to vote in favor of this,”said Councilor Linda Boudreau, proposing the setback be added to the ordinance. “This just provides for our community a level of security and protection at this time that (those opposed to hens) aren’t going to find someone putting a henhouse right up along the fence adjacent to them.”  
    Councilors Loring, Ralph Baxter and Jim Hughes opposed the 20 foot setback and the waiver, but for different reasons. Loring was opposed to the waiver and favored a mandatory 20 foot setback, while Baxter and Hughes favored a 10 foot setback.  
    “I would like to see a footage we all agree on-if its 20 feet, 15 feet, whatever- but when we say a waiver that is just loosening up the whole thing and I’m looking to tighten it up,” said Loring.  
    With a suggestion by the Code Enforcement Director Patricia Doucette to increase the notification period, the council approved (with Baxter opposed) the 20 foot setback and a 20 day period for notifying abutters.
    Boudreau proposed deleting a provision requiring a vegetative buffer around the area to hide it from abutting properties be removed from the ordinance as screening may be a subjective term. The provision was removed, however, Loring and Soule favored requiring screening measures.
    The council also unanimously approved a regulation that would terminate a permit in the event residents are absent from their property for 60 days.
    “I’ve had a couple of calls on this,”said Maxine Beecher, who proposed the amendment. “The concern is that people may assume that if they sell their house that the chicken permit automatically goes with the house and they can continue it. The point is a manner for the city to keep track of who’s got chickens.”
    In an effort to keep track of how many residents plan to have chickens, Soule proposed a first year limit of 15 permits, however, the amendment failed to gain support.
    Stacey Collins, responding to Soule’s inquiry about how many residents want chickens, said besides the existing chickens in South Portland, in the next two years, the city might see 10 households interested in keeping chickens.
    “We already have chickens in South Portland illegally,” he said. “We have not been able to enforce our current ordinance which prohibits that so how are we going to enforce an ordinance that we don’t know what the impact of it is yet.”
    Responding to Soule, Baxter said that the city hasn’t enforced the law as it hasn’t been a priority.
    Doucette said she was not aware of any existing chickens.