City Council to vote Monday on Garfield Street goats

LACONIA — The Laconia City Council is poised to reject a family’s request that they be able to keep their two pet goats.

The matter hits at a crux of how local government regulations impact citizens, especially when it comes to zoning. It asks officials where the line is between making an exception for one case and setting a precedent for future ones — and if such a distinction exists.

The Gleason family has two dwarf Nigerian goats that they keep as pets because their daughter is severely allergic to cats and dogs. The zoning of their new home on Garfield Street does not allow for livestock. Their request for a zoning variance, or exception, was rejected by the zoning board and passed to the council, who could amend city ordinances to create an exception allowing goats to be kept in residential areas. 

Such an amendment was rejected in committee, a move the council might vote to approve Monday. If they do so, the family will be faced with a difficult choice.

The Gleasons moved from their home on Meredith Center Road to Garfield Street because of a death in the family. They brought their two goats, who the Gleasons raised from infancy and keep only for companionship.

“This is my husband’s childhood home,” said Elizabeth Gleason. “When his dad died, the house passed to him, and we couldn’t afford two mortgages, so we moved here.” 

If the Gleasons don’t get relief from the city, they will have to choose between moving out of their family home or getting rid of their pets. 

London, Gleason’s daughter, has already had to get rid of a pet cat because her allergy sent her to the hospital, and another forced separation would devastate her, Gleason said. 

London wakes up early each morning to feed and play with her goats — Gleason feels it important that children have pets to learn responsibility. The goats are bathed and their pen cleaned regularly. Neighbors have stepped forward to the council to assert that the goats are not loud, messy or smelly. In fact, the neighborhood kids love the animals. 

Council members’ opposition does not hinge on whether the goats are well kept. Rather, they fear that making an exception now will open the door for other citizens from residential areas to ask for the same in order to keep chickens.

Gleason asserts that her request has nothing to do with chickens. “These aren’t livestock animals for us. We don’t use them for milk or meat or anything like that. It’s not the same.” She doesn’t understand why narrow language, making an exception only for up to two dwarf goats kept as pets and explicitly excluding chickens, could not be implemented. 

Mayor Andrew Hosmer echoed this sentiment, and said he believes it well within the city’s power to “draw up something narrow in scope that specifically allows this and excludes chickens.” 

However, “There is some concern among individual council members that this could lead to more animals in the confined quarters of downtown,” Hosmer said.

Councilor Robert Soucy is on the committee that declined to include a pet goat exception in an ordinance amendment. 

“There’s no easy answer to this,” Soucy said. He agreed it might be possible for a more narrow exception to be explored, but doesn’t know how it could be worded. 

The Gleasons are constituents of Councilor Mark Haynes, who believes that a distinction should be made in the city ordinance based on a definition of pets. 

Haynes grew up with chickens and agreed that chickens should not be allowed in downtown residential areas. 

“But chickens are not pets,” he said. “These are little pet goats and they are not hurting anyone.”

There will be a public hearing on the matter at the City Council meeting at 7 p.m. Monday, Sept. 12, at City Hall. Gleason said she plans to attend and make her case one more time. Hosmer said it is “unclear where the votes are” at this time.