12/10/1980 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

,.~ Mr~ Henry stated that he was made aware of one barking dog that caused a neighbor to move away because of repeated offenses. A $10 fine does not really motivate . some owners to do anything about problem animals. Mr. Haws arrived at the meeting. Mayor Keller agreed that the proposed maximum fine seems substantial. He indicated that he does not understand the system. If these are maximum fines, he asked whether an adjustment might be appropriate. Mr. Delay stated that "and/or days in jaiP relates back to allowing a judge the ability to deal with extreme situations. Also, suspended sentences rather than jail time can be meted out. Mr. Whitlow stated that Mr. Spickerman could be asked for additional information but some penalties are stiff because of circumstances. Some problems have been quite serious. Mayor Keller stated that it may be inappro- priate to have 100 days in jail for a violation caused by a dog. Ms. Mi 11er stated that a lot can be done with a suspended sentence. This could be a motivating force that would prevent a situation from happening again within a given time period. It may take something this harsh to motivate some people. There is a trend to take animal control more seriously and it seems to help in other communities. She feels the maximum penalties are appropriate. There are some cases where some animals terrorize neighborhoods and can be very hard to control. It is a serious responsibility to have a pet and it is a great deal of responsibility, especially in higher-density neighborhoods. Mr. Obie noted that he would encourage the council to pass this ordinance. Of all complaints received as a councilor, dog problems are the most frequent. Maybe this will put the responsibility on the owner rather on the one complaining. . Mr. Delay stated that perhaps Ms. Miller and Ms. Schue, as members of the Animal Control Task Force, could look further at this issue in the future. The most serious offenses have the highest penalties. The court is generally lenient with first offenders but this will give the court a way to deal with recalci- tr ant cases. Mr. Haws stated that the discussion is not about friendly dogs but about life and death. There is no need for vicious dogs in this community. The penalties can be made even harsher if this does not work. CB 2222--An ordinance regarding dog and animal regulations; amending Sections 4.355, 4.425, 4.430, 4.435, and 4.990 of the Eugene Code, 1971; and declaring an emergency. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Council Bill 2222 was read the second time by council bill number only. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. lieua11en, that the bi 11 be given final passage. Roll call vote; all councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18730. . MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 10, 1980 Page 5