Update: (City Oppression) Milford tickets 93 year old man for hens

[dukejer]

http://www.hometownlife.com/article/20110811/NEWS11/108110435/Fowl-fight-continues-Milford-man-heads-court-challenge-village-s-ban-chickens?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|Milford|s

They have ticketed a 93 year old man for having 3 hens in the Village of Milford, Michigan. He goes to court next Tuesday on August 16th.

-Dukejer

 

[Yay Chicks!]

Thanks for the article. I wish him lots of luck!

 

[sunnyvera]

This is a big shame. I hope it goes well for him. His great-grand daughter is a cutie too. I wish my mom at 86 was healthy enough raise chickens and work outside. sigh

 

[itom37]

Poor guy. Glad he's up for the fight.

 

[Chemguy]

I hope the guys wins, but this sounds like more a test of the MI RTFA than anything else. I do have one issue with the gentleman, however:

"“I'm not trying to create a fight, I'm trying to solve a problem,” he said. “I figured I'd better get this straightened out before I do anymore.”

That should probably have taken place differently: "“I'm not trying to create a fight, I'm trying to solve a problem,” he said. “I figured I'd better get this straightened out before I do anything.”

Basically he asked, was told no, and did it anyway. Doesn't matter if he's 93, 10, 23 or 46. He could have worked with others to change the ordinance. Of course he's being singled out, he told the council he was going to do it anyway. Easy pickings.

 

[Denninmi]

This will be an interesting one to follow.

 

[calista]

As much as I would love to see this guy win, I'm afraid the court will agree with what Chemguy said.

The village will make an example out of how he didn't do his due diligence, ignored existing ordinances, and generally rubbed their noses in chicken poop.

He doesn't have a "right to farm" with the information provided in the story.

 

[Sonoran Silkies]

ChemGuy & Calista, perhaps you should read the Michigan Right to Farm Act thread. The state law specifically states that it preempts all local ordinances that are in conflict, and that providing the farmer is following GAAMPS and has a commercial intent, it is allowed, regardless of whether local ordinances against the farming were already in place. The gentleman believes he is in the legal right, and all previous court cases on the matter back up that stance.

 

[Chemguy]

Quote:
Thanks, Sonoran. I don't mean to quarrel about the MIRTFA, and I take your good word that it applies to this fellow. The point I was trying to make, though perhaps poorly, is that a little bit of up-front work would have avoided this situation. Now, it's a 'fight' when there need not have been one in the first place.

 

[dianaross77]

Quote:
Thanks, Sonoran. I don't mean to quarrel about the MIRTFA, and I take your good word that it applies to this fellow. The point I was trying to make, though perhaps poorly, is that a little bit of up-front work would have avoided this situation. Now, it's a 'fight' when there need not have been one in the first place.

He is under no obligation to ask for permission. It's likely if he had asked permission they would have tried to fight him. The townships don't want people to know about the MRTFA. When people bring it up, they get bullied and told "Well it doesn't work in your case." They are blatantly disregarding the law to suit their purposes. I really don't understand all this talk about changing ordinances in Michigan (when coming from MI residents who already know about the MRTFA not Chemguy). We shouldn't have to. We should be able to take advantage of the statewide protection the MRTFA allows us without fear of legal battles. I didn't let my township know about my plans. It would've been inviting them to try and shut me down. It's really sad.