The controversy centers on draft zoning ordinance amendments that would reclassify horses to no longer be considered \u201clivestock,\u201d a classification that allows large animals to be considered part of agriculture and therefore permitted in exclusive ag zones.<\/p>\n
Tyler Flippo, who has boarded horses in Coyote Valley for more than 10 years, said he learned about the proposed changes only recently and immediately recognized the threat to his livelihood.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis proposal doesn\u2019t just threaten my business; it threatens hundreds of horses and the families who care for them,\u201d Flippo said. \u201cIf horses are pushed out of agriculture zoning, they could be displaced into unsafe living situations and an important part of our rural heritage will be lost.\u201d<\/p>\n
The proposed Rural Zoning Amendments, presented to the Planning Commission in August, aim to modernize the county\u2019s aging zoning ordinances and preserve the region\u2019s rural heritage by establishing new building limits and requiring mitigation when farmland is converted to non-agricultural uses, according to county staff. But it\u2019s the specific exclusion of equine operations that has horse owners mobilized.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhether they want to say that they\u2019re pets or not, they\u2019re going directly against state and U.S. codes that define horses as livestock,\u201d Flippo said. \u201cIt shines a bad light on our county that they are trying to do this. It really would set a bad precedent, I think, for the rest of the counties in California.\u201d<\/p>\n
The implications extend beyond semantics. Agricultural classification provides tax exemptions that horse operations rely on. Without agricultural status, existing stables could face costly compliance requirements or closure. Flippo estimates about 1,500 horses could be displaced if the amendments proceed as drafted.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhere do they go?\u201d Flippo asked. \u201cDown to Hollister, where it is allowed? Or are they going into peoples\u2019 back yards, which is totally not good for the neighborhood, with the flies and manure problems?\u201d<\/p>\n
A critical uncertainty remains around how existing equine operations would be handled under the new rules, especially those currently struggling with the county\u2019s existing permitting processes.<\/p>\n
Permit problems<\/p>\n
At a public outreach meeting conducted remotely on Oct. 7, county officials emphasized that existing operations that are in compliance with current zoning would be grandfathered in. However, Flippo said that the majority of horse facilities lack the use permits required under existing regulations due to the county\u2019s difficult permitting process.<\/p>\n
\u201cFrom what we can find out, nobody has been able to get a use permit for stables in the last 25 years,\u201d Flippo said. \u201cTo get a use permit, they estimate it costs $100,000-$200,000 by the time you\u2019re done. It\u2019s unreasonable. We don\u2019t make very much money.\u201d<\/p>\n
County officials have discussed an amnesty program for agricultural uses not in compliance, though details remain unclear. County Planning Director Jacqueline Onciano said the county wants to work with businesses to bring them into compliance rather than shut them down, noting many operators may not fully understand current code requirements.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019re not looking to shut down any businesses, but we have to take note on a case-by-case basis,\u201d Onciano said. \u201cIt\u2019s not an easy answer, but we do want to work with businesses so that we can bring them into compliance if they\u2019re out. We\u2019re going to continue to have that conversation. There is not an easy answer, because each business is operating differently.\u201d<\/p>\n