Page 1 of 330 The Monthly National Legislation Report 7/5/2010 ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The Monthly National Legislation Reporthttp://mnlreport.typepad.com/Page 100 of 3307/5/2010IOWAFt. Dodge – (10/4/09) - In Fort Dodge, the new Animal Control Ordinance Review Committee may discuss the possibility of banning the breed. But there appears to be no support for a pitbull ban among the candidates for mayor and City Council in this year’s election. Here, those candidates discuss their thoughts on the possibility of a pit bull ban.MAYORCouncilman Matt Bemrich: ”I would not want to ban the breed,” he said. ”My first instinct is that a responsible dog owner who has a pet that might be considered vicious because of its breedshould not be penalized because their dog hasn’t done anything wrong.” ”My first instinct is to deal with the people that cause the problem,” he added.Bemrich said he thinks the city should adopt a ”zero tolerance policy” regarding dogs running loose.Councilwoman Cindy Litwiller: ”I think we need to look at ways to take additional precautions,” Litwiller said. ”I don’t think we need to go so far as to ban them.” The candidate said shebelieves the dogs should be muzzled while they are being walked. She added that pit bulls should be kept in fenced-in kennels in which the fence extends beneath the surface of the groundso that the dogs can’t dig their way out. Litwiller said she believes a liability insurance requirement for pit bull owners should be considered. She added that the city’s $2 fee for dog licensesneeds to be reviewed.COUNCIL AT-LARGEAndy Fritz: ”I do not believe that a breed specific ban is the answer,” Fritz said. ”I think we’ve got the right laws in place.” He said he thinks the existing animal control laws need to be morevigorously enforced. He added that residents have a role to play in that enforcement by reporting problems like dogs running loose.Eugene Newsome: Newsome owns a pit bull named Baby. ”She’s never, ever, ever attempted to show a hostile attitude toward anyone,” he said. Not surprisingly, Newsome is opposed to apit bull ban. However, he said he would support a measure requiring pit bull owners to have liability insurance. ”I think that would calm some of the fears of the public,” he said.Dennis O’Farrell: ”The way I see it, it’s not fair to ban the breed,” O’Farrell said. ”The fair way to handle it is to deal with each dog individually.” The candidate said he believes a dog’straining, handling and use is more important than its breed in determining if the animal will behave in a vicious way.Robert ”Barney” Patterson: He is opposed to a ban on pit bulls. ”I really don’t think we should be singling out any one breed of dog,” he said.COUNCIL, 2ND WARDRita Carlson: ”I believe we shouldn’t target one specific breed,” Carlson said. She said she thinks the existing animal control laws must be enforced.Councilman Don Wilson: ”I would not support a total ban on pit bulls,” Wilson said. He said he believes any dog that bites a person should be confined to a kennel with walls at least six feethigh.COUNCIL, 3RD WARDMargy Halverson-Collins: The candidate said she wants to wait until the Animal Control Ordinance Review Committee issues its recommendations before she offers an opinion on the issue.That committee will submit its report to the council by the end of December. She said that dog owners must accept responsibility for their animals.Halverson-Collins said pit bulls ”are not a family dog.”Richard Higgins: During a Sept. 21 City Council workshop on animal control laws, Higgins went to the podium and told the elected officials that he was in favor of a pit bull ban. He’s sincechanged his mind. ”I would not support banning pit bulls at this time until I have more information on this particular issue,” he said Wednesday. Higgins said if he’s elected he’ll try to raise doglicense fees in order to generate money to hire a second animal control officer.COUNCIL, 4TH WARDTom Hemann: ”I’m not in favor of a ban on pit bulls at this time,” he said. ”However, I feel that they should be contained in a manner that they would not be at risk of injuring any one personor animal. If it showed vicious traits than it should be banned on an individual basis.” Hemann said he’s not a fan of pit bulls. ”I feel they are intimidating because of their looks and bark and Iwouldn’t trust their personality,” he said.Kelly Hindman: Hindman opposes a pit bull ban. He said some of those dogs ”might be fine pets that don’t cause anybody any problems,” Hindman said he wants to see therecommendations of the Animal Control Ordinance Review Committee before he offers any suggestions.Marshalltown – (10/11/09) - Recent changes to dog ordinances within the city of Marshalltown have some questioning what will become of their animal if it is caught roaming loose orhappens to bite an unsuspecting person. Pertaining to a dog found at large - regardless of breed and wandering the neighborhood - a violation would mean its owner or keeper will face afirst-offense fine of $25. The second offense would impose a $100 fine with mandatory spaying or neutering of the dog at the owner's expense. The animal will also have to be micro-chippedand its owner would have to acquire necessary insurance. A third offense would subsequently result in forfeiture of the animal to the Animal Rescue League. Though giving the canine to theARL does not mean mandatory euthanasia. The animal would be subject to the same health and behavioral assessments in order to qualify for potential adoption, just as any other dog theorganization receives. changes have been made to all animals that bite without provocation in order to further protect citizens and not release a potentially harmful threat back into thecommunity. If a dog has a propensity to chase, snap or bite, it can be declared vicious and as a first offense will also be subject to mandatory spaying or neutering of the dog at the owner'sexpense, as well as an imposed fine of $100. The animal will have to be micro-chipped and its owner would have to acquire insurance on the animal. A second offense would result in ARLforfeiture. All ordinance revisions allow for appeals to be made toward the city in regard to violations.Sioux City – (10/23/09) – Four candidates discuss taxes and dogs. When talking about Animal Control's new shelter, each mentioned the council's decision to ban pit bulls and redefinevicious dogs, which has generated controversy. "I'm not for banning breeds," Fitch stated. "I don't believe that's right. Next it will be German shepherds and then dobermans." Rappolt said,"The vicious dog ordinance is an issue that needs to be dealt with now and not wait for a court decision." He proposed formation of an ad hoc committee to make recommendations. At leasta half dozen dog owners have taken their cases to court.Rixner countered, "I voted for it. I'll vote for it again." However, he said of the dog ordinance, "I'm willing to tweak it." Padgett added,"The larger issue is the irresponsible owners. ... We need to put more teeth in our laws dealing with owners." Candidate Keith Radig had to work and could not attend the forum.KANSASClay Center – (10/25/09) - Owning a dog or cat in Clay Center could get a whole lot more costly. Animal control officer Amy Taylor recommended to the City Council's Laws and OrdinancesCommittee to raise fees all around. Taylor recommended increasing dog tag fees from $1 for males and spayed females to $5 for dogs that have been fixed; and from $2 for unspayedfemales to $10 for dogs that aren't fixed. Taylor also wants to increase the impound fee, currently at $20 plus an additional $5 for an overnight stay. For those cases that go to court fornuisance violations, Taylor would like to see a stair stepping fine from $40 the first time, $60 for the second time, and $100 for the third time. City setting up to handle cats - Registration andnuisance violations will eventually be extended to cats. Taylor recommended the city change its ordinance to include cats in the maximum number of animals people are limited to have insidetheir home, which is currently a maximum of three dogs. The city ordinance does not allow people to keep poisonous, vicious animals, but there is currently no maximum on any other animalallowed by ordinance. A person can have as many parakeets, hamsters, cats, etc., provided they are kept them in a "sanitary" manner, Robinson said. Robinson said police can write ticketsfor cats, but don't have the ability to pick them up yet. Taylor also recommended the following changes in the animal control ordinance:-- Referencing banned dogs by a list rather than explicitly in the ordinance. This would give animal control the flexibility to add breeds that may become a problem as they become a problem.Currently pit bulls and any mix of pit bulls are banned by city ordinance.-- Requiring dogs be vaccinated for rabies "as the state recommends" rather than every two years. If the area has an unusually high number of rabies cases, the state may recommend yearlyvaccinations instead of every other year.-- Mandating that shelters for dogs kept outside in pens and on chains be big enough to house the dogs. Some people are getting around the animal cruelty ordinance by having shelter, butsits not large enough for the animal they're supposed to house, Taylor said.-- Taylor said she'd like to not allow owners chain their dogs "because it is a hazard" but she is not recommending that at this time. Many people chain their dogs temporarily while puttingthem out to relieve themselves, she said.-- Not allowing dogs/cats to be in vehicles for longer than 5 minutes if it's hotter than 80 degrees or colder than 30 degrees.Prairie Village – (10/23/09) - Barking dogs in Prairie Village may find themselves being hauled away by police. The city just adopted an ordinance that will allow Animal Control officers to
The Monthly National Legislation Reporthttp://mnlreport.typepad.com/Page 101 of 3307/5/2010remove a dog from a fenced back yard if it is barking constantly and annoying neighbors. "What the ordinance allows us to do as a last resort, if we're not getting anywhere with thehomeowners, it does allow us to go into the yard; take the dog and impound it," said Schwartzkopf.Survey: Does Barking Ordinance Go Too Far? The dogs would be taken to an animal hospital at 75th Street and Wornall Road, and the pet's owner would receive a court summons. Petowners would have to pay a $20 per day boarding fee if their dog is picked up, plus fines if they're convicted.Wichita – (10/31/09) - Graves and Ellen Querner of Spay-Neuter Kansas offered basic pet care tips, from providing adequate food, water and shelter to recommended vaccinations. Gravesalso covered some ordinances that pet owners need to know about, including one limiting tethering of dogs and another prohibiting the feeding of cats outdoors. For owners of pit bulls,Graves said the city is going to start "actively enforcing" new laws pertaining to the breed. Effective July 1, Wichitans are allowed to own no more than two pit bulls, and those dogs must bespayed or neutered, licensed, vaccinated against rabies and microchipped.KENTUCKYFrankfurt – (10/4/09) - Kentucky is no longer top dog when it comes to coon hunting. Illinois has landed the Professional Kennel Club's world coonhound championships, a 10-day event thathad been held in Kentucky for nearly two decades. While residents of Salem, Ill., prepare for the arrival of nearly 2,000 of the nation's best hounds later this month, business owners inKentucky still are chafing that they lost an event with an economic impact of up to $3.5 million. "It's going to be a terrible blow to this area," said Randy Mabry, owner of Willow Pond SouthernCatfish Restaurant in the western Kentucky community of Hardin. "When those guys are here, they spend a lot of money." Kentucky officials were caught off guard by the ProfessionalKennel Club's decision to move the event to Illinois, said Gil Lawson, spokesman for the Kentucky Tourism, Arts and Heritage Cabinet. "We did not know about this until after the decisionhad been made," Lawson said. Jo Kathmann, president of The Tourism Bureau of Southwestern Illinois, said her organization estimated the economic impact of hosting the worldchampionship and related events at between $3 million and $3.5 million.Independence – (10/6/09) - What constitutes a vicious dog in the city of Independence could change next month. Independence City Council heard the first reading of an ordinancemodifying the definition in an earlier ordinance of when a dog is vicious at the regular meeting Monday Oct. 5. In the existing ordinance, a dog must bite a person to be considered vicious.Two sentences in the new ordinance provide for officers to cite a dog’s owner if it has the “propensity” to be vicious or if the enforcement officer has to take “defensive action” against theanimal or if the officer feels “immediate apprehension of bodily harm.” City Council also amended the existing ordinance to include language restricting the ownership of exotic animals andincreased the amount of insurance required for the owner of a dog determined to be vicious from $100,000 to $100,000 per person and $300,000 per occurrence. The city decided not toenforce an outright ban of pit bulls because council did not feel like it was needed. “I think this is common ground. It’s not breed specific, but it has more enforcement and teeth to our currentordinance.” http://www.journalenterprise.com/articles/stories/public/200910/21/sebree10212009_news.html City Council will hear second reading of the ordinance at their regular meetingNov. 2.Newport – (10/20/09) - Some dog owners in Northern Kentucky may not have to pay for dog licenses soon. Newport city commissioners are considering getting rid of most city dog licenses.The city manager says the dog licenses aren't widely enforced -- except for vicious dogs. Newport does require the owner of any dog classified as vicious -- which includes pit bulls -- to get amicrochip and a $100,000 insurance policy.Sebree – (10/22/09) - With only four of its six members present, the Sebree City Council during a special meeting held Wednesday, Oct. 14, approved the city’s tax rates for the 2009-2010fiscal year and made a decision about a potential animal control ordinance the council has been contemplating for months. On the agenda was discussion of the animal control ordinance.Webster County Dog Warden John Dunn was present to discuss the county’s ordinance and how it applied to Sebree. After some discussion, the council agreed to abandon the ordinance itwas considering, but instructed city officials to review existing city laws regarding animal control to determine if the city should keep them or take some other action regarding them.Whitley County – (10/30/09) - James and Phyllis Walters live close to the Knox-Whitley Animal Shelter in rural Whitley County where hundreds of animals arrive each month. And they claimin a lawsuit that the noises the dogs are making are simply too much to bear. The Walters claim in the lawsuit that the constant barking is causing them “severe insomnia,” injuries to theirmental health, and loss of their propertyvalue. Court records show that the Walters have lived in their current home since 1976. Whitleycounty officials say the animal shelter is less than 10 years old. The lawsuit claims problems beganin January 2008. But shelter officials say if they can’t keep some animals outdoors..there’s reallyonly one solution. “We could do away with an outside kennel that we do have, that would meananother dog would have to be euthanized,” said Myers. If they win the lawsuit, the Walters want aninjunction that would stop the dogs from being housed outside and to be paid for compensatory and punitive damages.LOUISIANANew Orleans – AKC ALERT: The New Orleans City Council is scheduled to consider and vote on Councilwoman Cynthia Hedge-Morrell’s mandatory spay/neuterproposal at its regular meeting on Thursday, November 5th. The American Kennel Club (AKC) strongly opposes this ordinance. It is imperative that all concerned responsibledog breeders and owners in the New Orleans area again contact the members of the New Orleans City Council and politely yet strongly urge them to oppose this costly,ineffective, and unenforceable proposal. The AKC also encourages all interested parties to attend Thursday’s hearing to show a united front of opposition to the proposal.If enacted, the ordinance will:Require all dogs six months of age or older (with few exceptions) to be spayed or neutered or force owners to purchase costly $50 breeder permits to keep any dog intact. Limit female dogsfrom whelping more than one litter per year, or whelping a litter if the female is younger than 18-months of age. Permit the Louisiana SPCA (LA/SPCA), which will be responsible forenforcement of this ordinance, to determine whether or not an applicant for a breeder license has "space determined to be suitable...in which to breed dogs and raise puppies." Imposesignificant fines for those who are found to be in violation of the ordinance, with the income from the fines to be used to further finance the LA/SPCA’s animal control efforts.AKC’S OFFICIAL POSITION: The American Kennel Club opposes mandatory spay/neuter laws. Instead, we support reasonable and enforceable laws that protect the welfare and health ofpurebred dogs and do not restrict the rights of breeders and owners who take their responsibilities seriously. Additionally, we strongly support and actively promote a wide range of programsto educate the public about responsible breeding practices and the responsibilities of dog ownership.The American Kennel Club is joined by the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals(ASPCA), the American Veterinary Medical Association(AVMA), andthe National Animal Interest Alliance(NAIA) in opposing mandatory spay/neuter laws. To view AKC’s full legislative alert on New Orleans’ MSN proposal, including contactinformation and resources, please go to: http://www.akc.org/news/index.cfm?article_id=4001. For more information and the latest developments on the New Orleansmandatory spay/neuter proposal, please contact AKC’s Government Relations Department at (919) 816-3720, or e-mail doglaw@akc.orgTerrebonne – (10/13/09) - Action: Held for 30 days discussion on how to improve animal control regulations and leash laws because residents have complained that some dog owners allowtheir pets to intimidate neighbors. Action: Approved a grant agreement with PetSmart Charities for $10,000 to help pay for the mobile pet clinic that will perform low-cost spay and neuteringprocedures for local pets. Notes: Pet owners will still have to pay for the procedures, but the money pays for the clinic to travel from Metairie to Houma one day every two weeks.MARYLANDBaltimore County – (10/13/09) - Tougher laws regulating pet cemeteries in Baltimore County should spur improvements in operations, maintenance and safety of the facilities, officials said. Prompted bycomplaints about poor management from cemetery lot owners, the County Council expects to enact legislation at its session Monday that will require cemetery managers to maintain the grounds and keep mapsand records current or face fines of up to $1,000. Records should show the pet owner's last known address, the site and size of each pet grave and the location of unused lots.MASSACHUSETTSSB2172 – (10/21/09) - The Massachusetts Senate passed a comprehensive measure Oct. 21 updating the state’s antiquated statutes that govern animal control in the commonwealth’s 351communities. Senate Bill 2172, sponsored by Sen. Patricia Jehlen (D–Somerville), provides the first significant revision of these laws for decades and contains several sections that wouldimprove, with lasting effect, public safety while enhancing animal welfare in Massachusetts. “The effectiveness of Senate Bill 2172 is thanks to the panel of expert consultants who aided in itscreations,” said Jehlen. “From dangerous dogs and feral cat colonies, to animal hoarding and wild animals in urban settings, animal control officers face daily challenges. This bill will givethem more tools and skills to protect the public as well as animals.” Senate Bill 2172 also contains a voluntary check-off on state income tax forms to allow residents to fund spay/neuterprograms in Massachusetts and training for animal control officers throughout the commonwealth. The bill also updates definitions, including those for kennels, and removes references to thecounty system, which is no longer widely utilized for animal control. “Senate Bill 2172 was drafted by animal welfare experts facing these issues on a daily, if not hourly, basis, includinganimal control officers, dog owners, veterinarians, law enforcement and state agency representatives,” said Manny Maciel, president of the Animal Control Officers Association ofMassachusetts and New Bedford animal control officer. “We are pleased that the Massachusetts Senate is willing to provide animal control officers with the tools that they require to carry out
Page 2:
The Monthly National Legislation Re
Page 6 and 7:
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50: The Monthly National Legislation Re
Page 53 and 54: The Monthly National Legislation Re
Page 99: The Monthly National Legislation Re
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
Page 268 and 269:
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
Page 286 and 287:
Page 288 and 289:
Page 290 and 291:
Page 292 and 293:
Page 294 and 295:
Page 296 and 297:
Page 298 and 299:
Page 300 and 301:
Page 302 and 303:
Page 304 and 305:
Page 306 and 307:
Page 308 and 309:
Page 310 and 311:
Page 312 and 313:
Page 314 and 315:
Page 316 and 317:
Page 318 and 319:
Page 320 and 321:
Page 322 and 323:
Page 324 and 325:
Page 326 and 327:
Page 328 and 329:
Page 330:
show all

Page 1 of 330 The Monthly National Legislation Report 7/5/2010 ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?