Laserfiche WebLink
81888. 2 / (� <br />TO: Mayor and City Council C �a 22 <br />FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrate <br />DATE: August 18, 1988 �J <br />SUBJECT: Ordinance Amendment - Animal Control <br />Attachment: A. Proposed Ordinance <br />B. Ordinance Section 9.12 <br />ISSUE - Determination as to whether the Council desires to amend <br />the ordinance which currently requires all dogs to be on leashes. <br />To provide an alternative means of not being "at large". <br />INTRODUCTION - Prior to the recodification in 1984 the City of <br />Orono considered voice command or Jogs within fenced yards as not <br />being "at large". The recodification changed this to leashing as <br />the only acceptable means. This change became an issue as "leash <br />only" was a defense of an individual who was i,ivolved in an <br />accident where the dogs of the injured party were not on a leash <br />but voice command. <br />DISCUSSION - Enforcement of the ordinance has not been undertaken <br />where the dog has been in the appropriate fenced yard or under <br />effective voice command. The term "effective" voice command can <br />be open to some interpretation and can be effective 99% of the <br />time but the failed 1% may result in a problem. The proposed <br />language attempts to conform to the previous language and present <br />practice. <br />ALTERNATIVE <br />1. Allow a broader range of situations where a dog is "not at <br />large" including: <br />- Voice command <br />- In a vehicle <br />- In a yard under voice command <br />- In a fenced yard <br />- Selected combinations <br />2. Table <br />3. Leave as is <br />RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the ordinance be amended <br />to alla dog to "not be at large" when: <br />- On a leash as out 1 i nee; <br />- In a fenced owners yard when they cannot lease <br />without human ,assistance <br />