Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />October 28, 1997 <br /> <br />Page 6 <br /> <br />Council Business. continued <br /> <br />Benke stated that Council has just become aware of the issue last week, and directed <br />staff to investigate immediately. Bittick said a letter was sent in April outlining the <br />violations. Benke did not receive this letter. Larson also did not receive the letter, and <br />said he reads all correspondence and notifies staff immediately. Benke noted much <br />concern that 39 calls were received, but Council did not receive notice. Bittick <br />corrected himself and said the letter was addressed to the New Brighton Community <br />Service Officer. Benke feels that is the reason why Council never received the letter. <br /> <br />Benke requested focuses on the elimination of the problem to prevent recurrence, and <br />asked if there are other alternatives than issuance of citations. Fulton feels the Police <br />Department should meet with the pet owner to determine why they are allowing the dogs <br />to run loose. He added that individuals need to take responsibility for their pets. <br /> <br />Bittick said the Association tried to speak to the pet owner, but nothing was resolved. <br />He was informed that the Police can only issue a citation if they have witnessed the dogs <br />running loose. He said this contradicts the Animal Control Ordinance. <br /> <br />Samuelson has real concern for resident safety. She is Council representative to the PSC <br />and would like to personally be involved in the resolution of the issue. <br /> <br />Rebelein feels the ordinance puts too much responsibility onto neighbors. She shares <br />their frustration and it appears they have tried to speak to the pet owner with no avail. <br />She asked if the dogs could be removed, after a specific number of violations. <br /> <br />Fulton said the only citation was issued October 22, and continued issuance would <br />eventually become a financial burden to the pet owner. The ordinance does allow for <br />citations to be issued if the Police do not visually see the dogs running. The ordinance <br />could be strengthened to include reference to the removal of a pet after so many <br />citations, if legally possible. <br /> <br />Rebelein feels the ordinance should state that after a specific number of citations are <br />issued, then appearance before the court is ordered. <br /> <br />Samuelson asked if the problem continues, could these dogs be picked up by the Police. <br />She requested the ordinance be directed back to the PSC for determination of a length of <br />time to allow removal of an animal. <br /> <br />Larson noted the urgency of the issue and action should begin now to prevent further <br />disruption in the neighborhood. He would like to see the Police issue a citation each <br />time they see the dogs running or when a resident reports seeing the dogs loose. Bittick <br />acknowledged that is exactly what they have asked the Police to do in the past. <br /> <br />Fulton estimated that fines for this type of offense is around $70 for each occurrence, <br />but is unsure at what time repeated violations of the ordinance become a court matter. <br /> <br />Gunderman asked if there is more than one pet owner involved. Bittick confirmed there <br />is one owner. Residents are afraid to go out and walk, and are frightened to let their <br />small dogs outside. Bittick believes if he was walking with a small dog, these dogs <br />would charge him. <br /> <br />Council Business <br /> <br />Windsor Green Dog <br />Issue <br />