Laserfiche WebLink
<br />...' .' <br /> <br />Minutes of Regular Council Meeting <br />Page th ree <br /> <br />April 25, 1977 <br /> <br />Crichton said that, to date, efforts to crack down on nuisance <br />dogs have not been effective. <br /> <br />Carl Nast. 1955 Glenpaul, aslted why it is necessary to'vacclnate <br />for rabies? Quoted Dr. Schotthauer that vaccine is "false <br />security"; asked why we don't also require that all citizens <br />be Innoculated, if dogs have to have rabies shots. <br /> <br />Nancy Ross asked how proposed ordinance can be enforced, If existing <br />ordinance can not. <br /> <br />James Ross sal d he agrees that some laws can't be enforced -we <br />have too many laws now; agrees there are some who break the law, <br />but let's not make the law something that spoils our enjoyment. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Woodburn discussed the various typ~of vaccine - some are good for <br />I, 2 or 3 years; another cost Item. <br /> <br />It was suggested that "effective restraint" of dogs be required <br />rather that the wording as proposed. It was also noted that <br />cats are not included In the ordinance. <br /> <br />Sawyer suggested that checking on vaccinations, after the initial <br />licensing, wi II be a bigger Job than combatting "dogs at large"; <br />our dog cannot handle an 8' leash whIch he said Is not long <br />enough. Ordinance Is overly restrictive and not fair; wi II have <br />to get rid of our dog or fence our yard (very expensive). <br /> <br />It was suggested that there has been an unwillingness to really <br />try to enforce the present ordinance. <br /> <br />Mayor Crepeau said It could be done If someone were hired "full <br />time" to patrol the City. <br /> <br />Dr. Lerner asked.lf present ordinance Is unenforceable, how was <br />It enforced In his cllse? If thtsordlnance passes, I'll have to <br />get rid of my dog which Is also our security system. <br /> <br />Mr. ail I Newham. 1786 Glenvlew. said he ha. a hunting dog - <br />ordinance does not permit running the dog In open space areas; <br />appears you can't even have a litter of pups. <br /> <br />It was suggested that an ordinance should not restrict how a pet <br />be restrained on ones own property - an Invasion of privacy. <br /> <br />Councl I referred the ordl nance to the Prosecutl ng Attorney and <br />Public Safety Committee for their recommendations to Council. <br /> <br />Mr. Ross stated that an expression of residents' feelings has <br />been made tonight. How wi II this be conveyed to the Public <br />Safety Committee? <br /> <br />It was explained that the Public Safety Committee meeting Is open <br />to the public; all Interested persons are Invited to attand; <br />comments from tonight's meeting wi II be forwarded to the <br />Committee Chairman, and Councilman Crichton wll I convey the comments' <br />. made tonight to the Committee. <br /> <br />Ordinance EstabllshlnQ Industrial User StrenQth CharQes. etc. - <br />Final ReadlnCl <br />Lynden referred Counc! I to ordinance draft which he said contains <br />no substantial changes; suggested that rules be waived and <br />dispense with the last readlng~ <br /> <br />Woodbu rn moved, seconde d by Hanson, th at Councl I <br />and dispense with the reading of the ordinance. <br />unanimously. <br /> <br />waive the rules <br />Motion carried <br /> <br />Hanson moved, seconded by Woodbllrn, that Council pass the <br />ordinance as amended, AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING AN INDUSTRIAL <br />USER STRENGTH CHARGE, A FORMULA FOR THE COMPUTATION THEREOF, AND <br />^ TAX L!EN AGAINST AN INDUSTRIAL USER'S PROPERTY IN THE EVENT OF <br />NON-PAYMENT OF SUCH CHARGE. Motion carried. (Hanson, Woodburn, <br /> <br />-3- <br />