<strong>The</strong> <strong>Monthly</strong> <strong>National</strong> <strong>Legislation</strong> <strong>Report</strong>http://mnlreport.typepad.com/<strong>Page</strong> 140 <strong>of</strong> <strong>330</strong>7/5/<strong>2010</strong>Blanchester – (8/19/09) – <strong>The</strong> Blanchester Village Council may soon be looking at legislation pertaining to vicious dogs inside the village. <strong>The</strong> subject was discussed at a recent meeting <strong>of</strong>Blanchester council but no decision was made. “<strong>The</strong>re’s a wide range <strong>of</strong> things you can do according to the Ohio Revised Code,” said Andrew McCoy, solicitor for the village. Measures tocontrol vicious dogs could include keeping the dogs caged with a ro<strong>of</strong> over the cage when they are on the owner’s property, leash or muzzle the dogs when they are <strong>of</strong>f the property, to outrightbans <strong>of</strong> vicious dogs in the village, McCoy said. It was pointed out that vicious dogs could be more than just pit bulls.Columbus – (8/25/09) - <strong>The</strong> Ohio Supreme Court says a Youngstown ordinance requiring owners to confine vicious dogs is constitutional. <strong>The</strong> 5-2 decision today, which reversed an earlier appeals courtruling, is welcome news for communities that have passed similar laws.Whitehall – (8/20/09) - As expected, Whitehall council members said "no" to a proposal for an advisory election Nov. 3 concerning vicious dogs, particularly pit bulls. <strong>The</strong> measure failed2-5, with only its sponsor, Councilwoman Leslie LaCorte, and Councilwoman Jackie Thompson voting in favor <strong>of</strong> it. After the second effort <strong>of</strong> Thompson to ban pit bulls in the city failed,LaCorte crafted a resolution seeking an advisory election. <strong>The</strong> nonbinding advisory election would have asked voters two questions. <strong>The</strong> proposed questions were, "Shall (Whitehall) prohibitthe harboring <strong>of</strong> a dog that has been involved in an incident in which it has been declared vicious?" and "Shall (Whitehall) prohibit the harboring <strong>of</strong>" specific breeds <strong>of</strong> dog. Those listed werethe American pit bull terrier, Staffordshire bull terrier, American Staffordshire terrier, American bulldog, and any other pure or mixed-breed dog whose appearance and physicalcharacteristics are dominantly those <strong>of</strong> the four breeds listed, even if not involved in any incident. <strong>The</strong> ballot issue would not have changed current ordinances regarding animal control, butonly would have demonstrated public opinion to council. While several members thanked LaCorte for her effort, it was clear they did not agree with its purpose. Councilman Jim Graham saidwhile LaCorte seeks to put the issue <strong>of</strong> breed-specific legislation to rest via an advisory election, it "would in fact have the opposite effect." "It would go on for months. We have dealt with theissue fairly and put the responsibility where it belongs: on the owners," Graham said. Graham said council should not start down the road, whenever there is disagreement among councilmembers, with conducting a public poll by means <strong>of</strong> an advisory election. "I base my votes on facts, common sense and reliable information ... and I know (most) people are opposed to breedspecificlegislation, " Graham said."It's time for all <strong>of</strong> us to move on," said Graham, eliciting applause from residents.Whitehall – (8/27/09) - Embattled Whitehall City Councilwoman Jackie Thompson could be booted from <strong>of</strong>fice if petitioners are successful in an endeavor to remove her in a rare recallelection in November. Whitehall resident C.J. Thompson is leading the recall and informed Councilwoman Thompson <strong>of</strong> her efforts during a meeting <strong>of</strong> City Council committees Tuesday,Aug. 25. Given the contentious relationship between the councilwoman and some residents, the announcement most likely wasn't a shock to many people. "This is not about pit bulls, butabout taking the city back out <strong>of</strong> the hands <strong>of</strong> Jackie Thompson," said C.J. Thompson, who earlier this year began filming council meetings and posting them to a blog squarely aimed at thecouncilwoman. <strong>The</strong> blog's mission is "to alert all residents <strong>of</strong> (Jackie Thompson's) ridiculous and outrageous behavior," it states. <strong>The</strong> councilwoman said she believes pit bulls are the primaryreason for the recall effort. Twice, Councilwoman Thompson has sponsored legislation to ban pit bulls in the city, and twice it has been defeated. "This is about pit bulls and dirty politics,"Councilwoman Thompson said.OREGONPrineville – (8/20/09) - <strong>The</strong> only guidelines in Crook County are state disturbance laws. <strong>The</strong> sheriff's <strong>of</strong>fice hopes to change that. Wednesday morning presenting a draft <strong>of</strong> an animalcontrol code to county commissioners. A draft <strong>of</strong> the ordinance has been in the works for a year. it was scheduled for a first reading Wednesday morning but never made it that far. "So everydog that doesn't have a license is in violation. And if you were to really follow that ordinance, all those dogs need to be picked up. Well we know that doesn't work," said Commissioner LynnLundquist. He went on to request more work on the wording <strong>of</strong> the new ordinance. Still, everyone agrees on the need, after testimony by citizens.Union County – (8/24/09) - A hearing on an appeal <strong>of</strong> a dog kennel license revocation took some interesting twists and turns last week, with the kennel owner possibly facing moreproblems than he started out with. Brandon Boltz, who breeds Presa Canario dogs, keeps four <strong>of</strong> the animals on his 9-acre property along Palmer Junction Road in rural Elgin. In general,kennel permits are required in Union County for people who have more than three dogs. Boltz had a permit for that location, and also one for property he owns in La Grande. Since he movedto Elgin, his Palmer Junction neighbors have lodged numerous complaints about his dogs barking. After several visits to the Boltz residence, Animal Enforcement Officer Becky Maddock tooksteps to revoke both his kennel licenses. Boltz appealed. At his hearing before the board Union County Board <strong>of</strong> Commissioners Wednesday, he sprang a surprise. He said he doesn’t careabout the La Grande kennel license because he only has two dogs there. As for the Elgin property, he claimed he doesn’t need a license because the county animal enforcement ordinance sayskennel licenses aren’t required in resource zones like the one he lives in. That turned out to be true. But then, some state land use and zoning issues cropped up. County Planning DirectorHanley Jenkins told the board that while the local animal ordinance does allow kennels in resource zones, Boltz likely is in violation <strong>of</strong> state land use law.PENNSYLVANIAHB39 –(8/19/09) - Presented to the Governor, Aug. 19, 2009 An Act amending Title 18 (Crimes and Offenses) <strong>of</strong> the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, further providing for cruelty to animals.Text <strong>of</strong> HB39CurrentBristol Borough – (8/13/09) - In response to the recent dog attacks in the borough, residents along Bristol Borough Council have been diligently working together to have laws put in place to contain viciousdogs. If passed, House Bill 1243 will allow municipalities in Pennsylvania to create and enforce their own dog laws and ordinances. “I think this legislation is long overdue” said Liz Fisher. “This Council andState Legislature John Galloway have brought attention to a problem that has been ignored." Some residents say they feel that these laws and ordinances will discriminate against specific breeds <strong>of</strong> dogs. “Askif we care what breed? We don’t. All we want is to be safe on our streets and in our yards. Please do something now," pleaded Fisher. Council President Ralph DiGuiseppe presented a recent article in the NewYork Post titled "City dog attacks child." "This problem is happening everywhere and we should be more aggressive. I don’t want to see anyone be attacked," said DiGuiseppe. “Under PA law, once an ownerhas been convicted <strong>of</strong> a summary <strong>of</strong>fense <strong>of</strong> harboring a dangerous dog the owner must post a sign on their property and also have proper insurance. If the owner takes the dog for a walk, the dog must wear amuzzle. If the dog gets out <strong>of</strong> the property or away from its owner then the owner could be charged with a misdemeanor felony," stated Borough Solicitor William Salerno. Council will make recommendationsto pass an ordinance that will mandate that large dogs be confined. <strong>The</strong> specific terms <strong>of</strong> the ordinance and definitions <strong>of</strong> confinement have yet to be determined. “If you want to have a dog you must takeresponsibility and if that means you need a fence then you need to get a fence," said Beth Fisher.SOUTH CAROLINAGreenville – (8/26/09) - <strong>The</strong> Greenville County Council's public safety committee is considering changes to a domestic pet noise ordinance that could make it more likely for pet owners to get cited for notcontrolling their barking dogs. Under the old rules, Animal Control <strong>of</strong>ficers could only get involved if two different people living within 200 feet <strong>of</strong> the dog owner's home complained. If the council adopts thechanges under consideration, anyone with a yard within 200 feet <strong>of</strong> the <strong>of</strong>fending dog's home could complain. Councilman Bob Taylor said the change would make the ordinance easier to enforce.Rock Hill – (8/30/09) - Cracking down on pet abuse is proving more difficult than York County <strong>of</strong>ficials thought. <strong>The</strong> county's six-person animal control staff can't enforce tougher rulesapproved in May because the <strong>of</strong>ficers have yet to go through training required by the state. Until the training happens — and county <strong>of</strong>ficials aren't sure when it will — the <strong>of</strong>ficers are unableto ticket violators and take custody <strong>of</strong> dangerous animals. Instead, they must wait for law enforcement to show up at the scene. <strong>The</strong> delay is disappointing to animal lovers who pushed for thenew rules. <strong>The</strong> new policy requires owners to keep their dogs in sanitary conditions and makes it illegal to restrain dogs on chains or tethers less than 10 feet long. State bureaucracy hasgotten in the way. Public employees must get certified before they can gain enforcement powers, such as writing tickets and making arrests.County <strong>of</strong>ficials had hoped to send the first batch<strong>of</strong> animal control <strong>of</strong>ficers to training next month and get the rest certified by the end <strong>of</strong> the year. But that goal now appears unlikely. <strong>The</strong> state academy is only accepting law enforcement<strong>of</strong>ficers, said Assistant County Manager Anna Hubbard. One possibility is to shuffle the chain <strong>of</strong> command so that animal control <strong>of</strong>ficers are commissioned by Sheriff Bruce Bryant. Thatscenario would allow the <strong>of</strong>ficers to get into the academy. Now, the <strong>of</strong>ficers are commissioned by the county and fall under the supervision <strong>of</strong> the county manager. <strong>The</strong>re's also anotherpotential option. A proposed law would allow animal control staffers to be certified in the same fashion as litter control <strong>of</strong>ficers, a process that involves shorter training. Lawmakers are set totake up the measure next year, according to what Hubbard was told.SOUTH DAKOTALeola – (8/20/09) - Heartland dog owners beware! A ban on five types <strong>of</strong> dogs has become law in a small South Dakota community, starting the state down a dangerous path <strong>of</strong> easy outs over responsible petownership. <strong>The</strong> whispers are true. Leola, South Dakota has indeed, tragically, passed Breed Specific <strong>Legislation</strong>, banning certain ‘types’ <strong>of</strong> dogs in their town. A summary <strong>of</strong> the details are as follows:• <strong>The</strong> breeds involved are pit bulls, bull mastiffs, Rottweilers, Dobermanpinchers, German shepherds, and any mixes <strong>of</strong> those breeds.• Dogs <strong>of</strong> those breeds already registered to town residents are "grandfathered" in and not subject to the ban.• According to with Mayor Dean Schock, whom I interviewed for this story, if there is a question <strong>of</strong> lineage in suspected mixed breed ‘<strong>of</strong>fenders,’ a genetic test will be conducted (one step up on a few big citiesout there).• After the town council originally passed the ban a local person adopted a Rottweiler puppy, and had the law put before voters. <strong>The</strong> town’s citizens supported the legislation by a vote <strong>of</strong> 103 – 27.
<strong>The</strong> <strong>Monthly</strong> <strong>National</strong> <strong>Legislation</strong> <strong>Report</strong>http://mnlreport.typepad.com/<strong>Page</strong> 141 <strong>of</strong> <strong>330</strong>7/5/<strong>2010</strong>• On a more progressive note, Leola does require all dogs to be spayed / neutered unless a breeding license is obtained, so puppies will not be born to the banned breeds.TENNESSEEClarksville – (8/28/09) - Montgomery County is asking just how long is too long to leave a pet on a chain. A man recently found the remains <strong>of</strong> two dogs at an abandoned home on BashamLane. <strong>The</strong> dogs had apparently been tied up and left to starve. Now the county's Animal Control committee is proposing an ordinance to limit the time a dog can be tethered. <strong>The</strong> CountyCommission will consider the idea at its meeting next month. It's unknown if the owner <strong>of</strong> the property will face any charges.Knoxville – (8/18/09) - Two changes in the animal control ordinance were considered and will be given first reading at the next council meeting. <strong>The</strong> first change proposed a four pet limit on every householdto discourage abuse. Similar to Galesburg’s ordinance, each house would be allowed four cats or dogs. Licensed breeders would be exempt, while families with more than four pets now would be “grandfathered”until they had four pet. <strong>The</strong> second amendment proposed to charge an increasing cost to every resident for every stray dog the city must catch. A first time <strong>of</strong>fender would pay $25.TEXAS(8/18/09) - From seat belts to concealed handguns - It’s about that time again — many pieces <strong>of</strong> legislation enacted by the Texas Legislature earlier this year are scheduled to go into effectSept. 1. SB 554 makes it illegal to own or possess dog-fighting equipment and establishes that such equipment and property where dogs are found to be engaged in dog fighting is contrabandand is subject to forfeiture. <strong>The</strong> law also makes dog-fighting subject to the elevated penalties authorized in the Texas Penal Code, Section 71.02(a), in an effort to deterorganized criminal activity.Comal County – (8/20/09) - State Representative Doug Miller addressed Comal County Commissioners Thursday to review highlights <strong>of</strong> the 81st state legislativesession. Though Miller said there were several victories for the county, the majority <strong>of</strong> the 33 bills he wrote were not pushed through to the committee process.Commissioners lobbied for a bill to restrict barking dogs that have become a nuisance in unincorporated areas <strong>of</strong> the county. “<strong>The</strong>re were a number <strong>of</strong> people — dogowners and people who moved to the county so they could have dogs — that were concerned we were going to take away their rights to own dogs or have guarddogs out in the county,” Miller explained. “It’s never the intent <strong>of</strong> legislatures to restrict peoples’ rights.”Oyster Creek – (8/25/09) - Elected <strong>of</strong>ficials have decided against amending the city’s animal ordinance after discussions found forcing dog and cat owners to register their pets with municipal staff would beredundant.City Council voted against the measure Thursday because Texas already requires dog and cat owners register and get identification tags for their four-legged friends, when they visit the veterinarian. <strong>The</strong>meeting marked the third consecutive meeting in which city leaders discussed the animal ordinance, which calls for anyone with more than three dogs or cats to register them with the city. After the decision,Mayor Louis Guidry said the vote not to broaden pet registration marked the end <strong>of</strong> discussion among elected <strong>of</strong>ficials about amending the ordinance. At previous meetings, council has discussed qualifications<strong>of</strong> vicious animals, requiring $500,000 insurance policies and banning certain dogs. “We won’t be talking about it again after tonight, I can assure you,” Guidry said. “This is the last <strong>of</strong> it, unless we get a dogbite or something that we have to talk about.” Councilman Wayne Cromis, who proposed registering all dogs and cats with the city, was disappointed about the decision. He said forcing residents to get theirpets identified was not punishment, but an effort to help city staff keep tabs on animals. “We’re not putting a resolution to the stray dogs in this town,” he said. “All we’re doing is having a resolution to what Iput on the table saying we need to try to register dogs. “I’ve tried to help the city when it comes to this dog thing,” Cromis said. “I don’t ever want to talk about dogs again.”UTAHFillmore – (8/17/09) - <strong>The</strong> city <strong>of</strong> Fillmore, Utah is considering breed specific legislation that would make pit bull ownership illegal. Please send your POLITE, RESPECTFUL AND INFORMATIVE letters <strong>of</strong>opposition, as well as educational materials to the city <strong>of</strong>ficials listed below.Fillmore City75 West Center StreetFillmore, Utah 84631Phone: 435.743.5233Fax: 435.743.5195Mayor - David L. Christensen - Phone: (435) 406-9470Councilmember - Kenneth E. MartinCouncilmember - Eugene R. LarsenCouncilmember - Josephine F. HuntsmanCouncilmember - Daniel R. RowleyCouncilmember - Krista M. IversonE-mail correspondence can be sent to the City Recorder or the <strong>of</strong>fice assistant with a request to distribute to the mayor and each city council member.Recorder - Marlene Cummings (recorder@fillmorecity.org)Office Assistant - Teresa Alldredge (teresa@fillmorecity.org)City Council Requests - Contact Marlene or call 743-5233City Council Agenda RequestOgden – (8/18/09) - Feeding a stray cat in Ogden could be a crime, and allowing the family Tabby to run loose outside the home could also violate a proposed city ordinance. <strong>The</strong> Ogdencity council is considering a proposal to rein in stray cats. That’s caught the attention <strong>of</strong> feline lovers. <strong>The</strong> animal shelter is filled with stray cats. Workers said stray cats are a health problemspreading diseases and quickly multiply. That's why the city council is considering a proposal to make it a Class B misdemeanor to feed stray cats and require leash laws for all cats. You canno longer keep a snake that is more than 9-feet long in Ogden. It's classified as a wild animal, according to changes to the city's animal ordinance approved by the Ogden CityCouncil on Tuesday night. Snakes more than 9-feet long should be turned over to Reptile Rescue, says Bob Geier, Ogden's manager <strong>of</strong> Animal Services. Salt Lake County-based ReptileRescue, founded by James Dix, may be contacted at 801-860-2497. Dix said long snakes can be dangerous for their owners if not taken care <strong>of</strong> properly and if precautions, such as havingextra people present, aren't taken during feeding. He would like cities to consider a modest yearly licensing fee for owners <strong>of</strong> long snakes to make sure snakes are taken care <strong>of</strong>, that they haveadequate housing and that snake owners know how to avoid accidents. But classifying long snakes as wild animals was just part <strong>of</strong> the changes designed to strengthen Ogden's animalordinance and help animal-control <strong>of</strong>ficers to do their jobs better, Geier said.VIRGINIADanville – (8/18/09) - Dog owners will be able to license their pets for up to three years if City Council approves proposed changes to the City Code at tonight’s meeting. <strong>The</strong> city’s dogs aresupposed to get their first rabies shot and municipal dog tag at the age <strong>of</strong> four months, with both the shot and the license good for one year. After that, rabies shots are required every threeyears, and owners will — if the proposal passes — have the option <strong>of</strong> licensing their pets for one, two or three years. Danville’s City Code will also change the definition, disposition andregistration <strong>of</strong> “dangerous” dogs, and strengthens some definitions in the sections that cover cruelty to animals.WASHINGTONEverett – (8/21/09) - An animal rights group is suing the state over Washington state’s ritual slaughter laws. Pasado's Safe Haven says the laws are too vague, unconstitutional and couldlead to horrible abuse. Those laws were designed to protect the rights <strong>of</strong> some religious groups, which follow certain religious criteria for slaughtering animals. But the trouble, according toPasado's, is that in other states, some slaughter houses have hidden behind similar laws and done horrible things to livestock.In court, their attorney Adam Karp argued something needs tobe done to prevent that from happening here. Karp says he's trying to prevent cattle and other animals in our state from falling victim to Washington's Humane Slaughter Act. As Karpinterprets the law, it gives a lot <strong>of</strong> room for animals to be abused and even tortured in the name <strong>of</strong> religionOak Harbor – (8/28/09) - Oak Harbor <strong>of</strong>ficials will review the city’s breed-specific restrictions earlier than planned thanks to a little noise from Bob Baker and Barbara Moran, the couplewho filed suit against Whidbey Animals’ Improvement Foundation late last year to save Smiley, a shelter dog, from euthanasia.In an email sent to City Administrator Paul Schmidt earlier thismonth, the couple questioned the city’s breed-specific ordinance and its effect on pit bull adoptions. “How many people in Oak Harbor will even try to adopt these dogs knowing they have tobuild them a cage and keep them muzzled?” they wrote. Baker and Moran’s affection for pit bulls is well known after their fight to save Smiley, though he didn’t turn out to be a pit bull. Smileymade regional headlines after he was dognapped from the animal shelter, and later found on South Whidbey. <strong>The</strong> breed-specific ordinance went into effect in 2006 and requires pit bullowners who live within city limits to house the controversial canines in a secure pen and muzzle the animals while on leash, among other restrictions. From an enforcement point <strong>of</strong> view, it's
Change language