HomeMy WebLinkAbout07.26.2004ORDINANCE COMMITTEE
July 26, 2004
4:50 p.m.
Council Chambers
Members present: Mayor Hurley, Kincaid, Cole, Clark, Schmitt, Gunderson, Welper.
Members absent: Greenwood.
Moved by Clark, seconded by Gunderson that the Agenda, as proposed, be approved. Ayes:
Six. Absent: Greenwood. Motion carried.
The council reviewed proposed changes to the definition of At Large of Chapter 1, Animal
Control, of the Waterloo Code of Ordinances. The following changes were reviewed:
At Large: Any animal running or found within the city upon a street, alleywaly, sidewalk, public
or private grounds. Any dog or cat, properly licensed as required by this article, will not be
deemed at large if:
A. It is on the premises of the owner and said premises are adequately fenced to
contain said animal.
B. It is on the premises of the owner but is in an unfenced area and under control by
a leash, cord, chain or restraining device no longer than six (6) feet in length, or is
properly restrained within a motor vehicle or trailer.
C. It is off the property of the owner but the animal is restrained by a rope, leash,
cord, chain, or restraining device no longer than six (6) feet in length, or is
properly restrained within a motor vehicle or trailer.
D. It is properly housed in a veterinary hospital or licensed kennel
E. It is under the control of authorized public safety personnel.
F. It is under the control of professional handler for special events including, but not
limited to, 4-H events, school events, sanctioned pet shows, training activities.
Councilperson Clark reported that about three weeks ago he was contacted by a couple of
neighborhood associations who were concerned about the postal service moving their mailboxes
because of problems with dogs. The postal service is thinking about moving the mailboxes and
putting them on the street in clustered boxes. Councilperson Clark reviewed the "Letter to the
Editor" from a woman whose dog was killed when it ran out in the street and is now supporting
an ordinance which would eliminate voice control for an at -large animal. Councilperson Clark
stated he worked with City Attorney Jim Walsh, City Clerk Nancy Eckert and Randy Herod on
the proposed changes. Councilperson Clark stated that Councilperson Gunderson suggested that
Item G be added which would state that an animal would not be considered at large if the animal
is in the confines of a recognized dog park.
Councilperson Cole stated she would support the changes except for Item 13 as there are many
animals in owners' yards which are under voice control, and she does not agree with penalizing
all pet owners because of a few.
Randy Herod stated that his dog is trained as well as any, but he would never allow it in an
unfenced yard or on the street without a physical restraining device because it is a dog and dogs
will do things beyond the owner's control. Mr. Herod stated he also spoke to an animal trainer
who feels the same and would never walk his dog outside without a physical restraining device.
Councilperson Schmitt stated that he feels Item B is intruding on the public on what they do on
their own property, and he does not think the city should dictate what people do on their own
premises. Councilperson Schmitt supported the rest of the changes except for Item B as he
cannot support requiring a restraining device when an animal is on its own premises.
Ordinance Committee
July 26, 2004
Page 2
Councilperson Clark stated that the postal workers are saying if the animal is not in a fenced area
and is not on a restraining device, they will not deliver mail to the property. Councilperson
Clark stated that the neighbors do not want clustered mailboxes, and they have written to
Congressman Nussle. Some of the neighbors are elderly, and they will be required to walk a
block or more to get their mail.
Mr. Herod reported that from January 1 through June 1, 2004, Animal Control only received 21
calls, with 10 calls from this neighborhood and 8 of the 10 were animals at large.
Councilperson Clark stated that 99 percent of dog owners are responsible and keep their dog on
the premises. Councilperson Gunderson stated the council would be making changes due to
problems caused by 1 percent of our citizens, and he is leaning toward not supporting the
proposed changes.
Councilperson Kincaid stated that dogs running loose should be picked up by Animal Control,
and if the dogs are bothering the postal carriers, then Animal Control should do a walk about.
Councilperson Schmitt stated that his neighborhood does not allow fences, and most of the
animals are voice control trained. No one lets out a dog unless the owner is with the dog or the
dog is on a restraining device.
It was the consensus of the council to not forward the proposed changes to the Animal Control
Ordinance to the full council.
With no further business before the council, it was moved by Gunderson, seconded by Clark that
the meeting be adjourned at 5:14 p.m. Ayes: Six. Absent: Greenwood. Motion carried.
Nancy Eckert
City Clerk
•