Memorandum

City of Lawrence

TO:	Mike Wildgen, City Manager
FROM:	David Corliss, Assistant City Manager
Date:	June 24, 2004
RE:	Animal Control Code  Concerns

The Humane Society has requested an opportunity to discuss an anti-tethering ordinance before the City Commission.  Ann Wilson and Midge Grinstead have provided separate materials on this subject and plan on making a presentation at the June 29, 2004 City Commission meeting.

In anticipation of this issue, staff has drafted an ordinance reflecting the tethering issue and two other animal control issues.  A briefing on the draft language follows:

The anti-tethering language (Section 1 of Ordinance No. 7796) follows the City of Wichita code provisions.  The animal control supervisor and the City prosecutor’s office have reviewed the language.  Proving a violation from an evidentiary standpoint will necessitate proving that a dog has been picketed continuously for at least a certain length of time without a break.  This is viewed as a staffing challenge given current resources.   Staff will also need to investigate means to weigh dogs and chains if the Wichita requirements are followed in a new ordinance.

The proposed amendment  (Section 2) to the dangerous dog Code provisions responds to a municipal court decision earlier this year interpreting this law.  The amendment makes it clear that actions of a dog on private property, which fall short of actual physical contact but includes actions viewed as an apparent attack , would be grounds for a dangerous dog finding.

The proposed amendment  (Section 3) concerning which animals are allowed to be kept by property owners responds to a need to clarify that property owners may only keep birds if they are kept indoors as domestic pets.   Staff believes this was the original intent of this provision.   There is a “grandfather” provision in Section 3-301 (B) that allows those who had domestic fowl outdoors to continue keeping these types of animals if such use existed when the original prohibition was enacted, and the City Commission may allow such uses to continue upon future individual annexations.