Residents urge council not to limit backyard flocks or ban roosters; dozens testify

Dozens of Des Moines residents testified during the Aug. 5 City Council meeting urging elected officials to abandon proposed changes to the city's chicken ordinance, which would lower allowed flock sizes and prohibit roosters.

Homeowners and urban farmers described keeping chickens as a source of food, compost and income. Jacob Famaro, a homeowner in Woodland Heights, said he is "strongly opposed to the proposed changes" and argued that reducing allowed hens and banning roosters would harm families who rely on backyard eggs and flock continuity. "Roosters are necessary to produce fertilized eggs in order to hatch chicks," he said, and added that noise and sanitation issues should be handled through existing nuisance and noise ordinances.

Other speakers echoed those points: Suzanne Overton, a longtime South Side resident, cited nutritional benefits of backyard eggs and said roosters provide continuity and protection for flocks; several speakers said the city has recorded very few noise complaints tied to roosters. Speakers warned that reducing allowable birds from figures such as 25'30 to a lower limit would force residents to reconfigure coops, rehome animals or even sell property.

Ed Fallon and other longtime chicken keepers told council the current ordinance has supported urban farming in Des Moines for decades and suggested the city instead focus on targeted enforcement for specific violations. Multiple speakers asked the council to keep the existing limit and to pursue educational or remedial steps for owners who create problems rather than a blanket ban.

Council members received dozens of public comments on this topic during the meeting; no final vote was recorded on the chicken ordinance changes during the Aug. 5 session. Several speakers asked Councilmember Linda Westergaard, who introduced the proposal, to reconsider or to engage directly with affected residents before advancing changes.

What happens next: The matter remains before council for further consideration. Public commenters asked for more outreach, data on noise complaints and a delayed effective date if changes move forward to allow owners time to comply or rehome birds.