VALLEY – Sighs of relief and a happy rumble arose in the packed chambers after Maricopa County’s Board of Adjustment voted March 8 that county zoning ordinance does allow the keeping of farm animals on land zoned Rural.

The BOA had been asked to interpret the zoning ordinance which describes uses allowed on rural land. The board could have voted either yes or no on allowing farm animals.

Because of the ruling, the keeping of farm animals is now considered to have been an accessory use of Rural zoning all along. Had the board voted no, those whose land might in the future be annexed by cities would have no argument for grandfathered rights to keep their animals.

Property owners from as far west as Waddell and Laveen, as far east as Rio Verde, and from both south and north rural areas of the Valley crowded into the chambers in downtown Phoenix, hands clutching sheaves of petitions and waving printed notices about the meeting they had received from neighbors.

Misgivings and misinformation flowed through the room. Anxiety was high. People jostled to the desk at the front of the chamber to fill out yellow cards to get on the roster to speak. Confusion abounded. Some believed that they were there to vote for something. Because of the huge response, the scheduled 10 a.m. meeting didn’t come to order until more than half an hour later.

BOA Chairman Mary Beth Rowland held up a huge stack of yellow cards and questioned whether participants had filled them out correctly, declaring that from the look of the responses she was not sure who was for keeping farm animals and who was opposed.

She then asked Darren Gerrard, deputy director of County Planning & Development, to give a brief explanation of the zoning ordinance and the purpose of the BOA meeting. She said the board thanked everyone for their input, including organizations like the New River/Desert Hills Community Association. Of all the hundreds of letters and e mails received by county planning, she said only five did not advocate a yes vote–and even those five were not against the keeping of farm animals, only that there be some restrictions on numbers and conditions.

Gerrard explained the ordinance as written and read county staff’s recommendation: To allow the keeping of farm animals as an accessory use in Rural residential zoning.

After the reading, Rowland called for questions. One inquiry, from Waddell residents Joe and Christina Murphy, asked if the ruling would be applied to substandard size lots. Gerrard answered that any lot zoned R43, no matter the size, would be included.

John LaFleur, also of Waddell, asked, “What happens if your land gets annexed and you are now under control of a city; can you still keep your animals?” Gerrard said that without a BOA clarification, there would be no grandfathered rights to keeping animals after annexation. But if the right to keep animals was upheld by the board, then a case for grandfathered rights could be addressed.

Rowland noted that Valley cities and individuals have been asking the county for clarification and stated that once the BOA voted on the issue, the decision would become a matter of record. She then asked if anyone in the room was against the right to keep animals or wanted to speak to that side of the issue. The room fell hushed.

She then called for a motion. David Fischbeck moved to approve the keeping of farm animals and the board voted yes.

Back To News