Laserfiche WebLink
City Council Regular Meeting— 04/10/06 <br />DRAFT Minutes - Page 26 <br />that would provide the protection sought by Councilmember <br />Kough. <br />Councilmember Ihlan noted that whether the animal was <br />chasing or approaching a person in an attitude of attack <br />would be the perception of that person; noting her original <br />request to include the "repeatedly" language in the <br />ordinance, Section A entitled, "Definitions," Section A. (2) <br />���� <br />Maschka moved, Klausing seconded, enactment of <br />Ordinance No. 1334 entitled, "An Ordinance Amending Title <br />Five, Section 501.16, Vicious Animals, as amended." <br />Kough moved, Ihlan seconded, tabling action on the motion <br />pending additional input. <br />Roll Call <br />Ayes: Ihlan and Kough. <br />Nays: Maschka; Pust and Klausing. <br />Motion failed. <br />Ihlan moved, Pust seconded, an amendment to Paragraph 2-b <br />(page 1 of 6), to add "[on re�eated occasions,] when <br />unprovoked, chases or approaches a person,. .. <br />Councilmember Ihlan spoke in support of the amendment to <br />ensure that an animal was not labeled as dangerous due to <br />one instance. <br />Chief Sletner addressed the rationale for removing that <br />specific language, given the difficulty to enforce the <br />ordinance and in tracking previous complaints; noting that it <br />was the owner's responsibility to keep the dog inside their <br />yard for public safety purposes. <br />City Attorney Anderson asked what "on repeated occasions," <br />meant and noted that legally, "on more than one occasion," <br />would clarify the intent and potential enforcement from a <br />legal standpoint. <br />