Hancock resident Ginger Alberti speaks in support of the proposed city’s animal ordinance during a public hearing Wednesday night. The council scheduled a public hearing to vote on the ordinance for 6 p.m. Oct. 30. (Garrett Neese/Daily Mining Gazette)

HANCOCK — Hancock’s proposed animal ordinance will stay cooped up a little longer.

The council scheduled a special meeting for Oct. 30 to vote on the ordinance, which would include permitting up to four female poultry per property. Up to six rabbits per property are allowed; so are domestic pets.

Prohibited animals cattle and livestock in areas not zoned for agriculture use, as well as male poultry, wild animals barred through state or federal laws and regulations, venomous insects or snakes, exotic animals and bees.

The ordinance also sets standards on caring for animals and restraining them. Chickens would not be allowed to be free-range on owners’ property or rental properties.

A motion to schedule the special meeting passed 4-3, with Mayor Kurt Rickard and Councilors Rick Freeman, Jr., and Ron Blau voting against. 

Freeman said he did not see a pressing reason to address the matter before the election. 

“Where can you buy chicks right now? You can’t,” he said. “Even if somebody wanted to build a chicken coop and go buy some chicks, you’re not going to find them right now. You’re going to find them in the spring.”

Mayor Pro Tem Lisa McKenzie said it would be asking a lot to put a decision with that level of public interest on a new council member.

“I believe that everyone here has enough information, and the only reason we did not do it today is because there was an error, and I don’t think it’s appropriate to push it off to the next council,” she said. 

Originally, the council had planned to vote on the animal ordinance Wednesday night. Because notice of the public hearing had mistakenly only been published within six days of the meeting, rather than the required seven, it was pushed back. 

The vote had still been on the posted agenda for Wednesday’s meeting, which drew a crowd of about 20 people. 

Comments on the ordinance were split. A majority of people who spoke at the meeting favored it, while people who wrote in mostly opposed it.

Hancock resident Carolyn Dekker provided letters from managers from other cities around the state, such as Ann Arbor, that allowed chickens within the city. She said City Manager Eric Waara had not heard any complaints about chickens since the city began allowing them a decade ago, nor had Houghton’s code enforcement officer. Her daughter, who lives in Houghton, has successfully kept a quail in a backyard enclosure.

“There’s a responsible solution for animals leaving, and I trust my neighbors, and I know my family can do so without causing any nuisance,” she said. 

Freeman also spoke against the ordinance in public comment, saying unlike Houghton, Hancock lacked the buffer of other populated areas to prevent wildlife from coming in.

Judy Heinonen of Hancock worried the chickens would cause an increase in wildlife roaming the streets.

“Wildlife tends to threaten family pets as well as children and homeowners,” she said in her letter. “In my opinion, chickens are messy and they emit unpleasant odors, which will not help to improve our neighborhoods one bit.”

Concerns about chickens drove most of the opposition, though one resident also opposed the ordinance because of the restrictions it placed on beekeeping.

In other action, the council:

• Heard from City Manager Mary Babcock there are no candidates for the council’s Ward II seat, currently held by Freeman, who is not running for re-election. Residents who live within the ward can file an affidavit of identity by Oct. 25 to run as a write-in candidate. Whichever candidate receives the most votes would win, Babcock said; there is no minimum required.  

• Approved a letter of support for the Michigan Department of Transportation’s application for a National Scenic Byway grant to relocate the scenic outlook on Quincy Hill further north. While the lookout itself is in Quincy Township, residents often call the city requesting something be done to improve the view, Babcock said. The outlook’s former vista has been blocked by the growth of trees on the properties below, also owned by MDOT. 

“They don’t want to do anything with the trees, but that is why they want to move,” Babcock said. “Somebody might not like it if they do cut trees back to this, so this is a safer route to go.”

Hancock sent a similar letter when MDOT last applied in 2022.