|
|
|
 |
ORDINANCE: O-2005-12
SUBJECT: Amending Title 6 of the Lakewood Municipal Code pertaining to Animals.
ADDRESS: N/A
RECOMMENDATION: Mayor and City Council approve the proposed ordinance.
FUNDING SOURCE: N/A
SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND OF SUBJECT MATTER:
The proposed ordinance amends Title 6, pertaining to animals, by making the following changes:
· Definitions. The terms "disposal" or "disposition" and "euthanasia" have been defined and added to the list of definitions, which are applicable throughout Title 6.
· Animals running at large. This proposed amendment clarifies the definition of when an animal is "habitually running at large" to include animals impounded while at large or an animal which is the subject of a charge of running at large a minimum of three times within a twelve month period. The previous definition was too restrictive and did not enable animal control officers to effectively deal with animals, which are found chronically at large.
Additionally, a new subsection is being proposed which mandates that upon conviction for the violation of animal running at large, that the court shall order the owner to pay any boarding and impoundment fees as well as any reasonable and necessary medical expenses incurred during the impoundment of the animal. This will be true regardless of whether or not the animal is redeemed by the owner from the animal shelter.
· Impoundment. The proposed amendment makes it clear that an owner of an animal that is impounded for being at large is responsible for the boarding and impoundment fees as well as the reasonable and necessary medical expenses incurred during the impoundment of the animal regardless of whether or not the animal is redeemed by the owner. This provision would be applicable in circumstances where the owner is not prosecuted for allowing the animal to run at large.
· Unlawful possession of dangerous animal. The proposed amendment makes
minor changes to this provision. The definition of "bodily injury"
now mirrors the definition found in the state version of this charge.
· Financial bonding requirements for costs of holding impounded animals.
The proposed addition mirrors the state provision that requires the owner or
custodian of an animal that has been impounded by an animal control officer,
a police agent, or an impound agency because of alleged neglect or abuse, or
because of investigation of charges of cruelty to animals or unlawful possession
of a dangerous animal to post a bond with the municipal court to prevent the
shelter from allowing the animal to be adopted or to prevent other disposition
of the animal. The bond must be in an amount sufficient to provide for the animal's
care and keeping at the shelter for at least thirty days. At the end of the
time for which expenses are covered by the bond, the owner or custodian must
post a new bond to prevent the disposition of the animal.
This bonding requirement will financially assist the Table Mountain Animal Shelter.
This facility is tasked with the feeding and caring of animals while criminal
cases are under investigation through the trial phase. At times these animals
require medical attention to alleviate long-standing neglect issues or injuries
sustained by acts of cruelty. These seized animals frequently require special
dietary needs as well as increased staff attention. Large seizures, especially
those relating to neglect and cruelty cases, usually result in the euthanasia
of adoptable animals which can no longer be held because of the lack of space.
Veterinary care is expensive and the proposed bonding requirement will place
the financial liability on the animal owner.
Additionally, the time limitation provides for a relatively rapid disposition for the animal, rather than allowing the animal to languish in a strange and confined environment while the criminal case winds through the justice system. Animals seized in criminal cases are often held for several months to over a year, while the court case is delayed by the defendants' failures to appear of by court continuances. The bonding requirement will serve to encourage owners to avoid court delays by requiring them to pay in advance the costs of keeping their animals. Their failure to pay the required bond will result in the relinquishment of the animals so that the animals' ownership reverts to the shelter. Then the shelter can make decisions, which are in the best interest of the particular animal as well as the general population of animals.
· Cruelty to animals. The proposed amendment updates the cruelty provision to eliminate conduct, which is now punishable as a felony crime under state law. Recklessly or negligently engaging in acts of torture, needless mutilation, or inhumane treatment of an animal remains a municipal offense while acting knowingly is a felony.
· Neglect of animals. The proposed amendment updates the neglect of animal provision to mirror the definition of neglect found in state law.
· Disposition of seized animals. The proposed amendment updates the procedure under which an owner of an animal impounded due to acts of cruelty or neglect may petition the municipal court for the return of the animal. An owner may petition for the return of the animal within ten days after its impoundment.
· Forfeiture of abused animals. The proposed addition mirrors the state provision that allows the prosecutor or the court, after the conviction of the defendant for a cruelty or neglect offense, to request the municipal court to order the forfeiture of the abused animal.
· Sentencing for cruelty or neglect offense. The proposed amendment allows the municipal court to order a defendant convicted of cruelty, neglect, poisoning, or abandonment of an animal to undergo an anger management treatment program or any other treatment program that the court may deem appropriate. The treatment is in addition to any other punishment.
· Penalties for the offenses of animal-at-large and failure to display dog's rabies and identification tag. The proposed amendment increases the minimum fine for an animal-at-large violation from fifty dollars to seventy-five dollars. The minimum fine for the failure to display dog's rabies and identification tag would be increased from thirty-five to fifty dollars. Said minimum fines have not been increased since 1998.
DATE OF FIRST READING: February 28, 2005
DATE OF SECOND READING: March 28, 2005
ORIGINATED BY: Police Department
STAFF PERSON RESPONSIBLE: Janet Young, Deputy City Attorney, 303-987-7108
Holly Gilbertson, Animal Control Supervisor, 303-987-7182
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED: Ordinance O-2005-12
Redline Version
SUBMITTED BY: Ronald R. Burns, Chief of Police
REVIEWED BY:
Joni Inman, Director Mayor's and City Manager's Office
Michael J. Rock, City Manager
 |
||
Americans with Disability Act (ADA) Notice |
||
