SALEM — The Rules and Ordinances Committee Tuesday discussed updates to the city’s ordinances regarding the keeping of animals.

Councilman Jeff Stockman said that the ordinance was being reviewed in response to requests by residents, particularly to requests to have a goat within the city which had been received by Councilman Ron Zellers. Currently goats, sheep, and swine of any kind are not permitted to be kept within the city at all; however, the proposed change would see them reclassified to being permitted in instances only where they can be kept more than 150 feet away from any home other than their owners like horses, cattle, and chickens.

“They’re asking for no billys, just [does], and a wether, a neutered male, and they’re only talking about two or three for 4-H kids,” said Zellers.

Mayor Cyndi Baronzzi Dickey said that “as a person who has had goats, horses, cattle, sheet, and all kinds of farm animals,” she was against permitting goats within city limits due to the unique difficulties they presented that are not shared by chickens, horses, or cattle.

“I would be opposed to having goats in the city, not because they’re not cute, they are, and they serve a purpose and can give milk, those are all good things. The problem with goats in the city number one is the bucks, which are the males, smell horrendous and for a long way more than 150 feet, and if you get it on you, it almost has to wear off,” said Dickey. “Fixed goats are better, they’re not always free of a scent because it’s a hormone thing depending on what age they are when you fix them, they still could or could not have an odor. Second, different from horses, cows, or chickens, goats are very hard to contain within an area. If you have a horse or a cow you can put a nice split rail fence up and that horse or cow, unless it’s a jumper, will stay within that area, goats will not. There is no kind of fencing that we allow in a residential are at this time that will contain a goat, you have to have a woven fence, and it has to be a small woven fence, end sometimes they’ll even climb that fence.”

Dickey said that difficulty to contain them was exacerbated by the damage they could do to foliage, and other property once they had escaped.

“Once that goat is out it’s very destructive, they will eat not anything but most things including trees, whole trees, and they will eat the grass and things right down to the dirt like sheep so it’s not a pretty pasture…So, I would really caution you, even though they’re really cute animals it’s very hard to contain them, and we don’t have fencing allowed in residential zones that would do that,” said Dickey.

City Service Safety Director Joe Cappuzzello argued that specifying certain types of goats be permitted, such as the female and neutered goats would present an enforcement issue. Cappuzzello also noted that specifying particular animals as the ordinance currently does rather than types of animals was problematic and could create edge case enforcement issues with unspecified types of livestock. Stockman agreed with Cappuzzello, noting that he felt the ordinance needed significant language updates.

Stockman also said he’d like the ordinance to be updated to specify that while chickens are permitted with appropriate spacing, that rooster are not permitted within the city at all, which he argues most people already believed to be the case including himself.

Councilman Andrew Null questioned how enforcement would be handled if the ordinance was updated, and a person had an animal before it was specifically banned, and City Law Director Brooke Zellers said that the animal in question would have to be grandfathered.

Dickey also noted that she felt that the current limit of no more than two dogs or cats within 150 feet of any other residence was unreasonable, noting that many homes within the city are not more than 150 feet away from neighboring houses.

It was ultimately agreed that the ordinance would be given additional revision for further discussion with no official action taken at the committee level with Stockman noting the committee would work to resolve the matter in a timely fashion.

While the ordinance was initially included on the agenda for discussion by the city council in their meeting which immediately followed the committee meeting it was unanimously voted to table it pending further review.