Hawai‘i County Council postpones bill that addresses hen houses in residential areas

The Hawai‘i County Council once again postponed taking action on a bill that limits the number of backyard hens housed in residential areas.

This time, the postponement during third reading was made out of respect for the author of the bill, Council Member Heather Kimball, who was not present at Wednesday’s meeting. Bill 52 now is scheduled to be heard on Nov. 19.

The measure defines household henneries as an outdoor site on a parcel or lot that houses female chickens, ducks, guinea hens and quails for the non-commercial production and consumption of eggs.

The bill limits the number of hens to two for the first 3,000 square feet of property in residential districts, as well as residential-commercial mixed use, and residential and agricultural zoning districts. An additional hen is allowed for each additional 1,000 square feet of property.

On Wednesday, several people testified in opposition of the bill, including 14 written testimonies. Many found problems with the bill’s requirement to keep hens confined to a coop cage, hutch, hen house or fully enclosed area at all times, as well as backyard flock owners not being allowed to sell excess eggs or birds.

Council Member Rebecca Villegas said currently it is illegal to have any hens in areas zoned for residential neighborhoods.

“This bill makes it legal for people to have a backyard flock,” she said.

Council Member Matthew Kaneal‘i-Kleinfelder addressed some of the misconceptions of the measure.

“I just would ask those who are seeing this as a prohibition of chickens that you need to read the bill,” Kaneali‘i-Kleinfelder said. “The bill does nothing to prohibit folks from having chickens. It actually begins to open up the ability of folks in the residential zoning types, for the most part, to have and keep pens at their properties.”

Kaneali‘i-Kleinfelder said those residents in agricultural zoning should not be concerned with the county prohibiting their ability to have chickens because that is an agricultural activity that is protected under state and county laws.

Several testifiers pushed back on the limited number of hens allowed and restricting the animals to fully enclosed coops.

In written testimony, Tisha Bredeson expressed her concern and disappointment over the county’s actions and “perceived authority over our ‘āina.”

Bredeson went on to write that she cares for several parcels where free-range chickens live and thrive in their natural habitat.

“These chickens are an important part of the ecosystem: they fertilize the soil, nourish my trees, provide eggs, and help maintain the land by clearing vegetation and consuming compostable waste,” Bredeson added. “The idea that the County can impose such control over private and ancestral lands is deeply troubling.”

Christina Caines wrote in submitted testimony that she feels the bill is unnecessary and infringing on the self-sufficiency and community-mindedness “we should all have.”

Caines noted that free-range chickens help in keeping down pests, including the invasive coqui frog, and stir healthy soil.

“Selling excess eggs that might otherwise go to waste, so those funds can further feed our families, is smart living and contributes to bettering everyone’s lives,” Caines said. “Bill 52 needs to be dropped.”

One testifier said during public statements that she supports Bill 52, but not as it’s written.

“I don’t think two chickens in a yard is enough to feed a family,” she stated, adding she had seven chickens and they didn’t bother her neighbors.