09.07.2015 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>The</strong> <strong>Monthly</strong> <strong>National</strong> <strong>Legislation</strong> <strong>Report</strong>http://mnlreport.typepad.com/<strong>Page</strong> 275 <strong>of</strong> <strong>330</strong>7/5/<strong>2010</strong>ARKANSAS - <strong>The</strong> 87th General Assembly began Jan 12, 2009SB77 - AN ACT CONCERNING AGGRAVATED CRUELTY TO DOGS, CATS, AND HORSES AND RELATED OFFENSES AND CONCERNING ANIMAL MANAGEMENT PRACTICESSenate Committee on JudiciaryHelena-West Helena - (1/8/09) - Patrick Allen, Helena-West Helena code enforcement <strong>of</strong>ficer, addressed the city council Tuesday night about animal control ordinances for the city. Helena-West Helena is still without an animal shelter and has issues with enforcing leash laws and animal registration fees.Little Rock- (1/10/09) - Attorney General Dustin McDaniel is paring down his wish list for the legislative session that starts next week. He says he will focus on a handful <strong>of</strong> issues ratherthan several. In particular, McDaniel will focus on tougher penalities for animal cruelty and on an ethics bill. His bill that would make aggravated animal cruelty a felony on the first <strong>of</strong>fensehas already won over the Arkansas Farm Bureau -- a group that opposed similar efforts in the past. McDaniel says the proposal also has the support <strong>of</strong> a majority <strong>of</strong> both the House and Senatejudiciary committees, which would likely be first to consider the measure. He's predicting easy passage <strong>of</strong> the animal cruelty bill. Additional article re: SB77 - click here.Maumelle - (1/7/09) - Almost half <strong>of</strong> the hour-long meeting was spent debating a subject that wasn’t even on the agenda — cats and dogs. During the initial public comment period,Maumelle resident Brandon Tolbert asked the council to change the animal nuisance ordinance to require animal control <strong>of</strong>ficers to remove dogs that were a nuisance rather than keeping thecurrent law which he said gives animal control <strong>of</strong>ficers discretionary judgment. After a lengthy discussion on the wording Tolbert <strong>of</strong>fered that lasted almost 30 minutes, Ladner asked if thiswasn’t something that could be worked out at a more appropriate time, saying that public comments were supposed to be limited to three minutes. <strong>The</strong> council agreed, but not before cityattorney JaNan Davis warned them that dogs were considered a person’s property and the courts required due process before personal property can be taken.CALIFORNIA - 2009 Legislature began Jan. 5, 2009Alameda County - (1/9/09) - A new law took effect Jan. 1 which states that landlords and mortgage lenders must take charge <strong>of</strong> abandoned animals left behind on properties that have beenvacated following the termination <strong>of</strong> a rental agreement or property foreclosure. It requires them to notify an animal control <strong>of</strong>fice immediately, who will then retrieve and take possession<strong>of</strong> the animal until it is deemed to be in a suitable condition to be returned to the owner. <strong>The</strong> bill also authorizes animal control <strong>of</strong>ficials to secure a lien upon the animal for the purpose <strong>of</strong>recovering the costs <strong>of</strong> its rescue.Hollister - (1/6/09) - <strong>The</strong> city recently updated several laws to coincide with state legislation such as code sections dealing with the vaccination period for dogs. <strong>The</strong> change deals with thevaccination period allowed for dogs over four months old. <strong>The</strong> prior ordinance required vaccinations to occur "not less than one year and not more than two years" after birth. <strong>The</strong> newwording changes it from two years to three.Lancaster - (1/15/09) - <strong>The</strong> City Council voted unanimously Tuesday (1/13/09) to grant the first <strong>of</strong> two required approvals for a new ordinance that will define “potentially dangerous”and “vicious” canines and establish new rules for their owners to follow. (Note: CA state law prohibits designation <strong>of</strong> specific breeds as “dangerous.” However, it does allow breed-specificspay/neuter). If enacted, the ordinance would require spaying or neutering for pit bulls and Rottweilers, including mixed-breed animals that exhibit the predominant physical characteristics<strong>of</strong> those breeds. Exceptions could be made for dogs that are considered at risk <strong>of</strong> not surviving a spaying or neutering procedure, as well as for dogs registered with breed registries such asthe American Kennel Club. UPDATE: (1/16/09) - Next city council meeting: Jan. 27, 5 PM Lancaster City Hall Council Chambers, 44933 N. Fern Ave., Lancaster,California 93534 661-723-6000 To contact a member <strong>of</strong> the City Council:Phone: 661-723-6019Laguna Hills - since last year, the city has been looking into spay and neuter programs and is now recommending that a public education campaign and a license canvassing program becreated in the upcoming biennial budget to make it easier for pet owners in the city to license and alter their dogs. A canvassing program report recommends pet license outreachspay/neuter program not needed for now. <strong>The</strong> twelve-month canvassing program would run from January <strong>2010</strong> to December <strong>2010</strong>Manteca - (1/14/09) - Those slamming two <strong>of</strong> the current council members — Mayor Willie Weatherford and John Harris — for the lack <strong>of</strong> a dog park in Manteca are barking up the wrongtree. <strong>The</strong>y are conveniently leaving out one big detail: <strong>The</strong> entire council back then went along with the idea <strong>of</strong> the dog park and put it ahead <strong>of</strong> others only after the Manteca Dog OwnersGroup (DOGS) made the commitment to raise $60,000 toward its construction. <strong>The</strong> deal was simple. When the group raised the money, the city would build the park.Riverside County - (12/15/08) - Riverside County supervisors plan to introduce an ordinance today (12/16/08) to sterilize dogs whose owners let them run amok, roam unlicensed, bitepeople or otherwise violate state or local laws. <strong>The</strong> ordinance would also require all adult dogs and cats in the unincorporated county to be implanted with identifying microchips. Countyanimal-control <strong>of</strong>ficials say they hope the ordinance, if passed, will satisfy the opponents <strong>of</strong> a 2006 proposal to spay and neuter almost all dogs and cats in the unincorporated county. Underthe new proposal, spay and neuter requirements would apply only when pet owners show themselves to be irresponsible, <strong>of</strong>ficials said. <strong>The</strong> cities <strong>of</strong> San Bernardino and Los Angeles as well asLos Angeles County have adopted stricter rules that require sterilization <strong>of</strong> adult pets generally with the exception <strong>of</strong> guide dogs, purebred show animals and a few others. Supervisors areexpected to introduce the ordinance today. If it is approved, it would go to a public hearing and final vote probably in a month, Miller said. UPDATE -Ordinance approved 5-0, HEARING tobe held TUESDAY - 1/13/09 - 9:30 a.m. UPDATE - (1/14/09) - Dogs and cats whose owners let them run astray, go unlicensed, bite people or otherwise violate laws could facemandatory sterilization, Riverside County supervisors voted Tuesday. Also, pet owners must have their dogs and cats implanted with identifying microchips, supervisors decided. <strong>The</strong>unanimous decision just before 7 p.m. followed more than five hours <strong>of</strong> comment from a packed and boisterous audience <strong>of</strong> opponents and supporters. Supervisors s<strong>of</strong>tened the newrules, adding an exemption from spay/neuter provisions for "recognized breeders" and creating a committee to define that. <strong>The</strong> new rules apply to all <strong>of</strong> unincorporated Riverside Countyand take effect in 30 days. UPDATE: (1/15/09) - <strong>The</strong> Riverside County Board <strong>of</strong> Supervisors is asking for people to consider joining a committee that will review an ordinance adoptedTuesday night (Jan. 13). <strong>The</strong> REVERSAL Ordinance Task Force will include a group <strong>of</strong> people that favored the ordinance as it was written, plus a group <strong>of</strong> individuals that opposed themicrochipping/spay & neuter ordinance. <strong>The</strong> ordinance, dubbed REVERSAL by Supervisor Jeff Stone, drew praise and criticism during a seven-hour public hearing on Tuesday. Supervisor’sStone acronym stands for: Reducing Euthanasia Vowing Everyone’s Responsibility to Save Animal Lives. Supervisor Roy Wilson said he supported the ordinance, but requested a committeebe formed so people can help amend whatever changes might be necessary to the law. Those interested in participating on the REVERSAL Ordinance task force are asked to contact theirrespective Supervisor via e-mail. UPDATE: (1/19/09) - A new ordinance requiring identifying microchips on almost all dogs and cats in unincorporated Riverside County takes effectMarch 1, but animal control <strong>of</strong>ficers will not cite or fine anyone until June, said Robert Miller, county director <strong>of</strong> Animal Services.Riverside - (1/7/09) - Some Riverside County residents are pretty steamed about a new anti-nuisance ordinance, approved by the Board <strong>of</strong> Supervisors on Tuesday, that will fine owners<strong>of</strong> barking dogs up to $500. <strong>The</strong> new ordinance also affects the way dog-related complaints are handled by <strong>of</strong>ficials. Under current county law, when a resident in an unincorporatedcommunity complains about a barking, howling or otherwise noisy dog, an Animal Services <strong>of</strong>ficer investigates the matter, generally by visiting the location where the disturbance hasbeen reported. When the new rules take effect -- in 30 days -- noisy dogs' owners will receive a warning for a first complaint. If another complaint is made within a year <strong>of</strong> the first one,the matter goes to a hearing, during which an <strong>of</strong>ficer decides whether or not the dog is actually a nuisance. If so, an order is issued to the dog's owner and must be followed within 10days.Remedies might include obedience training, containing the animal within an enclosed space, such as a garage, restricting the amount <strong>of</strong> time the animal is allowed outside -- ordebarking the dog so it doesn't vocalize beyond a whisper.If the order is not followed within the 10 days allotted, a fine is incurred, beginning at $100 for the first violation. A second violation within a year racks up a $200 fine, and a $500 fine isimposed for each additional violation. For more information, check out the Riverside County Department <strong>of</strong> Animal Services.Ukiah - new ordinance regarding the status <strong>of</strong> the city's dogs would either lead to greater compassion for the animals or a "legal quagmire," depending on which side people get theirinformation from. By a 4-1 vote at its regular board meeting Dec. 17, the Ukiah City Council directed staff to draft an ordinance to be brought back for final approval at a later datemandating the change <strong>of</strong> the word "owner" to "guardian" in city code regarding canines. Councilmember Doug Crane said he could not stand behind the intentions <strong>of</strong> the actions because

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!