The Village of Westville will begin enforcing a village ordinance against keeping livestock within city limits after the village council voted not to change an ordinance that had been on the books since the 1990s, says Council Member Jeff Slavik.
“I had no idea anyone was keeping chickens in city limits until someone brought it to our attention by coming to the council to ask for the ordinance to be changed,” says Slavik.
As to why the suggestion to alter the ordinance was voted down, it’s all about mitigating risk, says Slavik.
“There is no area within city limits that is zoned for agriculture,” he says. “Animals like chickens attract other prey like coyotes and raccoons that you don’t want in town because of the threat they pose to domestic animals like cats and dogs,” he said. “And there’s a heightened risk of disease, like salmonella that you don’t want in town in close quarters, which is why most people raise them in the country, not in town.”
Aside from health concerns, Slavik says, some on the council were opposed to changing the ordinance because of the possibility of people neglecting their animals or neglecting to dispose of their waste properly, causing odor.
Only two council members thought it was time to alter the ordinance, says Slavik: Tony Strebin and Jeff Ellis.
“I’ve lived in Westville my entire life and chickens have been in town since I was a kid and there has never been a reported issue with them,” says Ellis. “It seemed kinda silly to not change the ordinance when we’ve had zero issues reported.”
Ellis wishes the council had hosted a more in-depth discussion before deciding not to alter the ordinance.
“I wanted to have people come in to give their opinions on it and maybe let’s change the ordinance to allow people to maybe have 10 chickens with a permit on the contingency that the neighbors have to approve,” says Ellis.
He has had several people reach out to request the ordinance be altered, and only one person has ever reached out saying they don’t want chickens near them, he says.
“I don’t want to argue with my fellow council members about chickens. It’s kind of a silly argument but it does affect people,” says Ellis. “There are 18 families who have chickens. Some treat them as pets. There have been zero complaints on file with the police department over all these years, so I don’t see why they couldn’t change it.”
One among those families are the Quicks, Nelle and Lee, who are being forced to give up their full brood of chickens in light of the village’s decision to begin enforcing the ordinance.
“I have literally cried every day for the last week. I am going to miss them so much and I feel awful because I can’t keep them,” says Nella, who says she has been raising her original chickens for years.
“I have two girls in particular, Dolly and Foggy, that are the sweetest and love to be cuddled and carried around. I got my original girls about six months after my dad passed away and taking care of them helped me get through that time.”
When Quick and her husband heard about the council’s decision, they began working on finding somewhere to re-home their chickens.
“We had some truly wonderful people step up and offer to take our chickens. They will all be going to their new homes in the next couple of weeks,” says Quick.
Had people been allowed to give their opinion on how the decision would affect them, says Quick, she would have spoken up.
“My chickens are my pets. They each have names and their own personalities. I have raised all of them since they were only days old. One of my favorite parts of the day is when they hear me coming and they all jump down and come running out of the coop to see me,” says Quick.
Aside from being beloved and cared-for pets, Quick says her chickens provided much-needed nutrition to her family.
“Our chickens not only provide our family and many others with eggs, but especially my 84 year old aunt who is on a high protein diet due to kidney failure. She is on a very fixed income and we have been able to provide her with two dozen eggs every week for the last several years for free.”
Quick says she hopes that the ordinance can be changed in the future.
“Obviously I wouldn’t have my babies that I currently have but I would love to be able to get some more if they did.”