• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
STAFF REPORTTo: Mayor and City CouncilDate: April 28, 2009From: William Hogan, Chief of PolicePrepared by: Captain Daryl Fisher & Assistant City Attorney Curt Euler Via: Gary Jackson, City Manager Subject: Animal Control Ordinance Suggested AmendmentsSummary Statement: The consideration of an ordinance to amend the Animal ControlOrdinance.Review: In July 2008, based on issues raised by the community regarding amending theexisting Animal Control Ordinance, the Asheville Police Department in conjunction with the CityAttorney’s Office held a public meeting to seek public input regarding suggested changes to thecurrent Animal Control Ordinance. The four common issues brought to the meeting includedreducing restrictions for the keeping of chickens; reduce the restrictions for keeping of bees;allowing goats on a temporary basis for plant removal; and to enhance the restrictionsconcerning the tethering of dogs on private property.This background information ties into Council’s Strategic Operating Plan in that an amendedordinance “could” provide a “safer” City for our citizens. Historically and currently, weencourage our Animal Services Officers to be proactive and the goal of our Animal ServicesOrdinance is compliance of the ordinance to ensure the safety of our citizens and their pets.Regarding a complete ban on tethering dogs in the City, it is staff’s position that such anordinance could increase the number of at large dogs and have a disparate impact on personswho cannot afford proper fencing. It is staff's position that it already has sufficient laws in placeto deal with owners who mistreat their animals. Staff also has amended the ordinance torequire the installation of a T-Runner system to retrain dogs. Staff has heard compellingarguments on both positions. Ultimately, the decision to allow or ban tethering on privateproperty is a policy decision the governing body must make.Another part of Council’s Strategic Operating Plan includes “affordable.” Reducing restrictionsfor the keeping of chickens and bees would allow residents to produce eggs and honey at homethereby reducing food bills. City staff has worked with City residents to relax the restrictions onhaving fowl within the City limits. Staff recommends that it continue permitting chicken coopsand runs and such a practice could produce limited revenue. Staff also recommends thecontinuation of a permitting system to prevent persons from investing time and money inconstructing coops that are not in compliance with the City ordinance. City staff supports theproposed changes to reducing the requirement for having fowl in the City with the proper staffing to ensure permitting and inspections are up to date.Brief Synopsis of Suggested Changes includes but is not limited to the following:Section 3-4:Add definitions of Attractant, Refuse, and T-Runner Section 3-5: Allows the City to rescind a civil penalty if a dog owner registers his or her animal within 15 days after the issuance of a citation.
1
 
Section 3-9:Adds, “No person shall knowingly or willingly leave or store any refuse,food product, pet food or grain in any manner which would constitute theattractant to any wild animal that causes a threat to the public health,safety and welfare of the community.”Section 3-12:(f) Live animals known to transmit the rabies virus shall not be trapped,handled, kept, transported or destroyed except by Animal Control Officersor other authorized persons.(i) Allows the use of T-runners in lieu of a complete ban on tethering.
NOTE: Council will be asked to completely ban and eliminatetethering by at least one group.
(k) Restricts persons who conduct adoptions in public places to non-profitcorporations whose primary place of business is within Buncombe CountySection 3-16:Reduces the barrier for Beehives from neighboring household from 150feet to 100 feetSection 3-27:Authorizes the seizure and forfeiture of “dangerous” animals.Section 3-28:(f) Allows the animal control officer to review and modify protective ordersif the animal has been without incident for 24 months.(g) In cases where animals cause serious injury to persons, allows theCity to seize the animal, terminate ownership rights and euthanize theanimal. This decision shall be served on the owner and the owner has anopportunity to appeal prior to any action being taken place.Section 3-29:Requires that prior to being release from the shelter the animal ismicrochipped and the animal displays all the proper vaccination and Citytags.Section 3-36:Prohibits roosters within the city limits. Reduces the barrier for ChickenCoops/Runs from neighboring household from 100 feet to 10 feet fromthe all property lines or 50 feet from the nearest residence (which ever issmaller). This is the same standard the City has used for dog kennels for since 2005 with no problems.
NOTE: Council will be asked to reducerestrictions to 25 feet by at least one group.
Allows a person to have livestock on a temporary basis on his or her property for plant removal upon the issuance of a temporary permit by theCity. Section 3-38:Authorizes an annual fee and inspection for Fowl. Mandates area be keptclean.As part of recent budget cuts, the Asheville Police Department had to take a hard look at staffinglevels. We had/have two (2) Animal Services positions vacant and frozen. A decision was madeto eliminate one position and continue with the freezing of the other. Reduction in staff obviously reduces services that can be rendered. An amended ordinance would increase callsfor service and drastically increase the number of permits that must be issued thus requiring anincrease in staffing.
2
 
Pros:
•
Public and citizen input is utilized in ordinance amendments.
•
Suggested changes meet Council’s Strategic Operating Plan in the areas of a safer cityand a more affordable city.
•
Promotes elimination of food sources for bears.Cons:
•
Amended ordinance would increase calls for service and need for additional staffing.
•
Banning of tethering could adversely effect low income citizens and place financialburden on citizens to erect fences to confine dogs.
•
Requiring fences to be erected for confinement as opposed to teetering may come intoconflict with existing deed restrictions in some neighborhoods.
•
Complaints of feces and feces related odors due to restriction reduction for chickens.Fiscal Impact: Ordinance amendments would create the need to fully staff Animal Services asoriginally formed (4) and would create the need to increase by one (1) full time employee (FTE).Salary and Benefits:Entry Level: $25,396.98 annually + 26% for benefits = $32,000.191 Vacancy + 1 Eliminated Position + 1 New Position = $96,000.57Vehicles:Fully equipped Animal Services Truck: $38,000.001 current Vehicle has 174,000 miles and 1 has 96,900 miles.Would need 2 Vehicles, 1 for new position and onereplacement for the highest mileage vehicle.$76,000.00Radio:1 @ $3500.00 each$3500.00Laptop Computer:2 Semi-ruggedized @ $2500.00 each$5000.00Uniforms:For 3 positions @ $700.00 each$2100.00Training and Certification:For 3 Position @ $1000.00 per week per AnimalServices Officer 2 weeks needed per Animal Services Officer$6000.00
Total Fiscal Impact:$188,600.00
 Recommendation:
 
City staff recommends City Council adopt the revised Animal ControlOrdinance as amended with the necessary staffing levelsAttachment:(1) Ordinance (the changes are highlightedin bold)
3
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...