Dickinson amends municipal code to clarify homeschools aren’t treated as 'schools' for animal-keeping rule; vote 4–1
Summary
After a public hearing, the Dickinson City Commission adopted Ordinance 18-39 to clarify that, for chapter 6, the term "school" does not include a homeschool operating out of a private residence. The ordinance passed 4–1, with Commissioner Riddle voting no and explaining his disagreement as a homeschool community member.
The Dickinson City Commission on Nov. 4 adopted Ordinance 18-39 to amend section 6-81 of the municipal code so that, for the chapter 6 animal-keeping provision, "school does not include a homeschool operating out of a private residence." The change was presented by City Attorney Wenco during a public hearing and approved by a 4–1 vote.
Wenco told the commission the clarification responds to enforcement questions that arose where chapter 6 (animal-keeping) and chapter 62 (zoning) did not define "school" in a way that addresses homeschools. Wenco said the intent is to make enforcement "unequivocally clear" that private-residence homeschools are not included in the typical sense of a school such as Dickinson High School, Trinity High School or Dickinson State University.
Wenco also emphasized the amendment does not authorize keeping chickens or domestic fowl in the city: "We are not authorizing chickens in the city of Dickinson. That's not what this does. We are just going one step farther in clarifying that chickens are not allowed in a homeschool type of situation or arrangement." The ordinance keeps existing exclusions in place (for example, certain animals or uses already excluded by other provisions).
Commissioner Riddle cast the lone no vote and stated on the record: "As being a member of the homeschool community, I vote no for segregating homeschool from school." Commissioners Bair, Murphy and Frederick voted to adopt the ordinance; the chair also voted aye.
The ordinance directs staff to update enforcement guidance and public-facing code language. Wenco and staff reiterated that any service-animal or ADA-related exemption would be handled separately under federal law and would require documentation.
Because this item was considered through a public hearing and produced a recorded dissent, staff flagged an action item to update enforcement guidance and public notices to reflect the clarified definition.
