If 13-year-old Ali Quinn wants goats in her Village of Cobleskill backyard, her best bet just might be rewriting the law.
And after another Board of Appeals meeting Thursday, her mom, Christy, said she might consider it.
Wiping away tears, Abi, who first asked the Village of Cobleskill to let her raise two Nigerian dwarf goats at her Washington Avenue home in May and has exhausted every other avenue, said she’s not sure.
Thursday’s ZBA meeting was the third or fourth attempt to find a way to help Abi, who wants to raise the goats herself as a 4-H project for the Fair.
Goats, however, aren’t allowed in her neighborhood.
ZBA Chair Sandy MacKay told the Quinns nothing has changed since the last time the ZBA met.
Because their property is near a state highway—Route 10—the County Planning Commission has to weigh in on whether their request for a variance is more than just a local concern, and the CPC doesn’t meet until August 6.
“We can disapprove this tonight, but we can’t approve it without the county—even though we pretty much know what they’re going to say,” Mr. MacKay said: that it’s not something the CPC needs to weigh in on.
And, even then, Mr. MacKay said, under the village’s Land Use Code, there’s no real way for the ZBA to grant Ali’s request.
“You guys do not meet any of the tests for a use variance,” Mr. MacKay said.
While most of the village prohibits horses, cows, and goats, a zoning amendment allows chickens—just no roosters.
“The village actually changed the law,” five years ago at the request of a handful of residents, Mr. MacKay said.
“That’s the situation here: You would have to change the law.”
Even when the chickens were added, however, the village denied a similar request to also allow goats, no matter how small.
Ms. Quinn asked if goats could be considered pets.
Nope, said Code Enforcement Officer Mike Piccolo.
Pets are defined as “customary household companions such as dogs, cats or birds.”
If Abi decides she’d like to try to amend village law so she can bring home her goats—they’re now living with a farmer in Cherry Valley—there’s a set procedure, Mr. Piccolo explained.
She’d take her request to the Village Board, which would refer it to the Planning Board for review and comment.
Then, the Planning Board would send the proposed change back to the Village Board, which would hold an environmental review and public hearings before a final vote.
“It’s fairly tough,” Mr. MacKay said. “It’s not going to happen in 30 days.”
ZBA member Bruce Bywater said it’s time to put the matter to rest—one way or the other—but the board decided not to act until it hears from the CPC and set a tentative August 9 date for its next meeting.