Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutA004 - Excerpt of City Council minutes from October 9, 2007 10-09-2007: 'DANGEROUS ANIMALS ORDINANCE: Chief Cychosz gave the background of the proposed Ordinance. This issues has twice come before the City Council: on July 24 and September 25, 2007. Since that time, staff has held an additional meeting with the Cyclone Kennel Club, interested parties representing dog owners, and parties who have witnessed dog attacks. As a result of that meeting, additional changes to the Ordinance were proposed, as follows: 1. Provocation, as it relates to animal behavior, was further clarified. 2. A significant penalty for failure to comply with an order to secure an animal during an investigation was added. 3. A provision clarifying the responsibility to maintain registration of a Dangerous Domestic Animal during changes of ownership or possession was added. 4. A requirement for prompt reporting of Dangerous Domestic Animals that are missing was added. 5. A ten-fold increase was made in the level of financial responsibility. 6. Confinement standards were enhanced. 7. Timely compliance with Animal Control Officer handling requirements will be required. 8. Appeal requirements were clarified and a provision for victim notification and written reporting of the hearing outcomes was added. 9. The law enforcement exemption to reflect"on-duty" behavior was clarified. Chief Cychosz summarized that the revised ordinance requires additional physical security and liability insurance and creates an appeal process for determinations made under the Ordinance. Council Member Larson, referencing that police service dogs were exempt, asked if"active use" meant "on duty." Chief Cychosz said that it did. The Ames Police Department does not have a police dog; however, there might be circumstances where a police dog may be used in a dangerous environment and the dog could exhibit menacing behavior. Police dogs are trained to do that and would be operating under the control of a trained certified handler in that type of situation. However, if a handler keeps the police dog at home, and it attacks another animal or person, it would not be exempt. Mr. Larson prefers that the words "on duty"be used instead of "active use." Joan Doran, 818 Murray Drive, Ames, advised that she is a former Board Member of the Boone Humane Society and is a current member of the Cyclone Country Kennel Club, Friends of Ames Dog Park, and Therapy Dogs International. She said that she is also a professional groomer, assistant dog trainer, and has personally trained 13 dogs. Ms. Doran stated her belief that animals that harm another animal are not automatically dangerous to people and often are not even dangerous to other animals. She issued a reminder not to humanize animal behavior. Ms. Doran noted that she likes most of the proposed Ordinance; however, asked the City Council to consider allowing an animal to have a second chance if it has proven itself to be safe and reliable, i.e., the lifting of the registration. According to Ms. Doran, one of her dogs has recently been registered as a dangerous dog for one incident that occurred over a year ago. That incident was satisfactorily handled between her and the owner of the other dog. The incident, though long ago settled, was only recently reported by a neighbor with a questionable motive. The Animal Control Officer felt obliged to label Ms. Doran's dog "dangerous" under the current Ordinance, but, according to Ms. Doran, the dog is not dangerous. Since the incident, the dog has matured and has been trained vigorously, passing the Canine Good Citizen Test and Therapy Dog International tests with flying colors. According to Ms. Doran, documentation has also been presented by numerous supporters of the dog attesting to its kind and gentle nature and good manners with people and other animals. Ms. Doran believes her dog deserves a second chance. She asked that the Ordinance include the provision that, if a dog has had no incidents for a reasonable period of time and passes the current Canine Good Citizen Test or equivalent thereof, the dog would no longer need to be registered as a Dangerous Animal and the restrictions would be lifted. Ms. Doran urged the Council to direct that this change be made to the proposed Ordinance. Nancy Christensen, 2267 S Avenue, Madrid, Iowa, advised that she was representing the Cyclone Country Kennel Club and stated that the Club is very much in favor of the revised Ordinance as it focuses attention on animal behavior and on noncompliant owners. She thanked the City Council for allowing extra time to work out the details of the Ordinance. It was noted by Ms. Christensen that the record of appeal hearing outcomes will allow the City to make data-driven decisions as to whether changes are needed to the Ordinance. Ms. Christensen stated that the Club would still like to see the "back door" reference to breeding removed (at 3.202.1.d.) because it has the perception that a certain breed of dog is dangerous simply because it is of that breed. She suggested, instead, to use training, disposition, or behavior, which would be more quantifiable than breeding. Ms. Christensen agreed with Ms. Doran that there should be a way for people to petition to have the Dangerous Animal Registration released. Also, she believes that the definition of animal provocation should be moved up to the same category of definitions as human provocation. Kay Johnson, 703 Grand Avenue, #3, Ames, spoke as a victim of a dog attack. She believes that 15 months is not long enough for a "parole hearing" for those animals. It's been six months since her dog's death, and they are still dealing with the emotional and financial impacts of it. She does not think that rehabilitation can be guaranteed. Ms. Johnson urged the City Council to pass the Ordinance, as proposed, as it protects other animals and the public from dogs that have been labeled vicious. With respect to the appeal period, Chief Cychosz said that they could hear an owner-initiated appeal at an earlier date; however, they still would look to the expertise of the Animal Control Director in that review process to determine whether the dog should be off probation. Regarding the reference to breeding, Chief Cychosz noted that behavior is the point of the Ordinance; however, lineage does impact judgment, even if it is not the primary factor. Ex officio Council Member Luttrell also asked that the reference to breeding be stricken. She feels that it could be viewed as discriminatory against certain breeds. Moved by Rice, seconded by Doll, to pass on first reading the proposed Dangerous Domestic Animal Ordinance. Moved by Goodman to amend the motion to strike the word "breeding" at Section 3.202.Ld. Motion died for lack of a second. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously."