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

The Monthly National Legislation Reporthttp://mnlreport.typepad.com/Page 246 of 3307/5/2010HB405 - AN ACT relating to the authority of an animal control officer to carry a bite prevention stick in the performance of official dutiesHB1395 - AN ACT relating to the offenses of cruelty to livestock animals and cruelty to nonlivestock animalsHB3322 - AN ACT relating to participation in an animal identification systemHB3380 - AN ACT relating to the barking of dogs in unincorporated areas of a countySB632 - AN ACT relating to the authority of the governing body of a municipality to create a municipal court equal justice and education fund and to require certain defendants to paycourt costs for deposit in the fund. The governing body of a municipality by ordinance may create a municipal court equal justice and education fund and may require a defendantconvicted of a misdemeanor offense in a municipal court or municipal court of record to pay a $1 equal justice and education fee as a cost of court for deposit in the fund.SB1840 - AN ACT relating to inclusion of pets and other companion animals in protective orders; providing a penalty.SB1851 - AN ACT relating to the posting of notice by a county sheriff regarding impounded estrays.San Angelo - City Council this afternoon (03/17/29) narrowly enacted an ordinance requiring a permit for animal breeders. Approved by a 4-3 vote, the ordinance will require all breeders topay $100 for every unaltered dog or cat they own and defines a breeder as anyone who "sells, trades or offers to sell" a litter of dog or cats from a dog or cat that has not been spayed orneutered. The council this afternoon also approved an ordinance regulating the tethering and housing of dogs by a 6-1 vote, although not before another hour of discussion. Debate on a thirdordinance, requiring a free multi-pet license for those owning at least seven dogs, is set to begin shortlyFlower Mound - (3/28/09) - Flower Mound’s animal services board is considering a move that would make leash laws for dogs more strict. During Tuesday’s meeting, board membersdiscussed changing the ordinance. The town council would have to give approval on the change, and board chair Christina Howard said the item could be brought before town council by Mayor June. The current ordinance, as it pertains to dog control, requires dogs in general public areas to either be on a leash or be in immediate effective control, which means that the dog istrained to respond to voice command immediately or is on an electronic device. The proposed ordinance would eliminate the immediate effective control option. The board is suggesting dogsbe on a 16-foot lead, which provides flexibility for owners who have a retractable leash. “We’re looking at this because of a growing population and the general population’s expectations,”Howard said. “We’ve had an increase in incidents, as well as multiple requests for this from our residents.” The town already has an ordinance in place similar to the proposed change fordogs in a public park as well as all trail system areas. However, the maximum length allowed for a leash in those areas is 6 feet. The current ordinance has been in effect since 1989, Howardsaid. The penalty for a violation is a $149 citation. Howard said the proposed ordinance applies only to dogs. The ordinance for cats, which requires them to be on a leash once they leave theowner’s property, will remain as it is. Howard said the animal services board will likely look at the issue again before moving it along to town council.UTAHOgden - (3/29/09) - The city council is considering adding teeth to the municipality's animal-control ordinance through tougher requirements for pit bull owners. Possible ordinanceamendments are slated to be discussed by the council during an April 21 meeting that will also include a public hearing. If adopted, the changes would go into effect July 1. Best FriendsAnimal Society, a Kanab organization that has gained attention for its work in rehabilitating 22 pit bulls that belonged to former Atlanta Falcon quarterback Michael Vick, doesn't favorchanges to the ordinance. Spokesman John Polis said the organizaton is against it because it targets a particular breed. "We are against breed-discriminatory legislation," he said. However,Ogden City Councilwoman Dorrene Jeske said she favors amending the municipality's animal-control ordinance. She believes the ordinance amendments would make it more difficult forpeople to own pit bulls, resulting in fewer dog complaints for police to investigate, which would free them up for other duties. Proposed changes to Ogden's animal-control ordinance call forpit bull owners to have liability insurance or a surety bond for at least $50,000. In addition, owners of dangerous dogs would be required to have liability insurance or a bond for at least$100,000. Pit bulls would also have to be registered with the city and implanted with a microchip so they can be identified. The dogs would be required to wear a collar with a speciallycolored tag to further identify them. Owners of pit bulls would have to confine their dogs indoors or in a securely enclosed, locked pen and display a sign indicating there is a dangerous orvicious dog on the premises. Other cities throughout Utah are also taking a tough stance against pit bulls. North Salt Lake has had an ordinance in place for about 18 years that targetsdangerous dogs and is similar to the one being considered by the Ogden City Council. South Jordan has an ordinance banning pit bulls, except for those that were in the city before theenactment of the statute in 1997.VERMONTManchester - (3/19/09) - The town is safe from unlicensed dogs, at least for now. Earlier this week Manchester Town Clerk Linda Spence said only one dog remained on the town'sunlicensed dogs list. Manchester Town Manager John O'Keefe said the town used multiple resources — such as the DMV list, the Statewide voter checklist, and the white pages — to locate thenames of people on their list. "Now we've really done our due diligence and rid the town of unlicensed dogs and unlicensed dogs tend to be unvaccinated," said O'Keefe. According to previousreports, residents had until Sept. 1, 2008 to license and vaccinate their dogs under the amnesty period — resulting in a fee of $44. That amnesty period was extended, but once the town putsthe new ordinance in place licensing alone would cost a dog owner $132 — the $44 fee applied to all three of the years the dog was unlicensed. In addition, payment for all the past tickets forthe dog being unlicensed and unvaccinated would be enforced. The tickets given to the owner for the dog being unlicensed increase in value — $40 for the initial ticket, $60 for the secondticket and $125 for each subsequent ticket. Therefore, if a dog owner were issued six tickets, he or she would have to pay a total of $600 just for past licensing tickets, O'Keefe said in aprevious interview. The same system exists for tickets given to owners whose dogs are unvaccinated, but the fees are more costly. The first ticket distributed would be for $60, the second for$125, and each subsequent ticket $250. If all six of these tickets were enforced on a dog owner the cost would be $1,185 — bringing the combined ticket totals for both the unlicensed andunvaccinated dog to $1,917, according to previous reports. One upside to the process, O'Keefe said, was that the number of dogs that were unlicensed and that the town had never knownabout before increased significantly. Even though the town has been successful in having owners license their dogs, O'Keefe made it clear that the town would not stop enforcing the law.VIRGINIAReported by Sharyn Hutchens - Thank you Sharyn ! Those of you in Virginia may want to check out the VFDC website. Click here to do so !The following bills in Virginia are dead.DEAD - HB 2220 - A BILL to amend and reenact § 3.2-6543 of the Code of Virginia, relating to salaries and expenses of animal control officers.DEAD - HB 2669 - 'Humane investigators' are minimally trained volunteer (unpaid, unless a locality wants to pay their expenses) ACOs but with many of the investigative powers of thereal thing.WEST VIRGINIAHB2843 - A BILL to amend the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended, by adding thereto a new section, designated §19-20-26, relating to commercial dog breeding operations;definitions; commercial dog breeder required to have a valid business license; requirements for maintaining a commercial dog breeding operation; cooperation with inspections by animalcontrol officers to ensure compliance with state and federal animal care lawsSB745 - A BILL to amend and reenact §19-14-5 of the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended, relating to providing moneys from an additional commercial feed distributor fee assessed tocommercial feed distributors to fund a statewide spay and neuter program; and creating the Spay Neuter Assistance Fund.Huntington - (3/19/09) - A new policy proposed by the Marshall University Board of Governors that will ban animals from buildings on Marshall's campus may soon pass. According toproposed Policy No. GA-15, domestic animals are not suitable to bring on campus because people may have a fear or an allergy associated with the animal, the animal may be a nuisance or a