Laserfiche WebLink
I2egutar Cifly Coarnci6l~eeting <br />l~®naay, aa~uary 1a, aoas <br />Page 6 <br />Councilmember Ihlan opined that more work needs to be done as a policy matter, <br />differentiating land use criteria from animal welfare considerations, and potential <br />gaps in city law for future guidance. <br />Mr. Paschke detailed staff s interpretation of the sufficiency of existing controls <br />related to impacts created from this particular use. <br />Councilmember Roe noted that the definition of dog kemiei didn't define it as in- <br />door pet bov-der. <br />City Attorney Anderson suggested that the word "indoor" be inserted into the <br />definition to provide more clarity. <br />Councilmember Roe noted inconsistencies in the ordinance, and resolution, re- <br />lated to pet boarding and/or pet day care. <br />Councilmember Pust concurred, noting that referenced in Sections 1002.02 and <br />1005.015 were inconsistent with °`dog" or "doggie" day care. <br />Mayor Klausing expressed preference for defining "dog" rather than "doggie" day <br />care. <br />Mayor Klausing opened the meeting for public comment, with no one appearing <br />to speak. <br />The applicant was present, but had no corrunent. <br />Initially, Councihnembers Pust and Roe moved an amendment to draft language. <br />After further discussion, the motion was moved, as amended, without secondary <br />action. <br />Pust moved, Roe seconded, enactment of Ordinance No. 1356 entitled, "An Ordi- <br />nance Amending Title 10, Chapter 1002 and 1005 Pertaining to Pet Boarding and <br />Pet Day Care;" amended as follows: <br />Line 19: include "Indoor"following the word "excluding" in the added <br />definition language; <br />^ Line 20: add language at the end of the proposed definition language to <br />include, "/except t/zat suc/a pet boarding or doh day care shall remain <br />subiect to the licensing requireme~:ts oj501.19 of this Code.l" <br />^ Line 23: change all references from "doggy" to "dog" day care <br />throughout the document. <br />Councilmember Ihlan spoke in opposition to the motion; opining that there were <br />too many open policy issues that needed revisiting before this policy went for- <br />ward. <br />