My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2005_0425_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2005
>
2005_0425_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2014 12:06:48 PM
Creation date
9/14/2009 10:01:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
228
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
City Council Study Session — 04/18/OS <br />DRAFT Minutes - Page 5 <br />determination; expressed concern regarding the common nature <br />of dogs reacting to unusual or loud noises; the size stipulations <br />for enclosures depending on type and size of the animal; and his <br />lack of support for the proposed ordinance with its current <br />language. <br />Chief Sletner spoke to Councilmember Kough's concerns <br />regarding people on wheeled conveyance, and the need for <br />animals to be under the control of the owner or family member, <br />and the circumstances of each individual incident taken into <br />consideration for basing decision-malting. <br />Mayor Klausing thanked Chief Sletner and staff for taking the <br />initiative to be proactive in pursuing this ordinance; and <br />applauded those efforts. Mayor Klausing expressed his <br />confidence that the ordinance would work, and could be <br />amended as circumstances and experience dictated. Mayor <br />Klausing noted one item of concern, that of the kennel <br />specifications. <br />City Attorney Anderson concurred that further language <br />consideration may be needed to clarify the requirements for <br />enclosing potentially dangerous animals, based on type and size. <br />City Attorney Anderson also addressed the definition of <br />"potentially dangerous animals," noting that state law already <br />contained that definition and would be applicable to dogs in this <br />jurisdiction. <br />Councilmember Ihlan expressed her preference for the ordinance <br />that incorporated the language of state statutes. Councilmember <br />Ihlan further opined her concern regarding enclosure definitions <br />and stipulations; application to dangerous animals, not just dogs; <br />and the appeal process and appropriate party for appeal to avoid <br />the City Council malting political decisions. <br />Chief Sletner advised that no one was available on a County <br />level for the appeal process, but that the County contracted out. <br />City Attorney Anderson advised that, the language in the <br />proposed ordinance was an effort to insulate the City from any <br />further administrative procedural costs; and that whenever a <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.