MINUTES Administrative Board of Appeals December 18, 2017

Similar documents
93.02 DANGEROUS ANIMALS.

Police Department. Administration (209) FY Adopted Fee Schedule /1/2018 Livescan fingerprinting $22.

Title 6. Animals* Chapters: 6.05 Dangerous Dogs 6-1. * For nuisance provisions regarding animals, see LMC , , and

DOG CONTROL ORDINANCE

RESOLUTION: BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDAINED That the City of Shelton adopt the Vicious Dogs "Gracie's Law" Ordinance as follows following Ordinance:

Notice to Muzzle Dog Pursuant to City of London By-Law PH 4. Address: 203 Grenfell Place London, Ont., Postal Code: NSX 3B7

Case 3:16-cv JEG-SBJ Document 102 Filed 09/12/18 Page 1 of 9

CITY OF STERLING HEIGHTS MACOMB COUNTY, MICHIGAN ORDINANCE NO. 411

St. Paul City Ordinance

CITY OF STERLING HEIGHTS MACOMB COUNTY, MICHIGAN ORDINANCE NO.

Article VIII. Potentially Dangerous Dogs and Vicious Dogs

(2) "Vicious animal" means any animal which represents a danger to any person(s), or to any other domestic animal, for any of the following reasons:

CITY OF HAYDEN LAKE MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MARCH 19, 2013

POLICY. Number: Animals on Campus Responsible Office: Administrative Services I. PURPOSE & INTENT

Chapter 506. Dangerous and Vicious Animals Adopted July 21, 2008

Case 2:07-cr MMB Document 39 Filed 06/23/08 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Washoe County Animal Control Board

ANNUAL PERMIT TO KEEP CHICKENS

GALLATIN COUNTY ORDINANCE NO GALLATIN COUNTY DOG CONTROL ORDINANCE

Chapter 8.02 DOGS AND CATS

General Offense Information. Offenses (Completed/Attempted) Related Event(s) Related Person(s) AURORA POLICE DEPARTMENT

CHAPTER XII ANIMALS. .2 ANIMAL. Animal means every living creature, other than man, which may be affected by rabies.

Vicious Dog Ordinance

Washoe County Animal Control Board

Animal Cruelty, Dangerous Dogs, Registration and Rabies Control Act of 2008

1 SB By Senators Livingston and Scofield. 4 RFD: Agriculture, Conservation, and Forestry. 5 First Read: 25-JAN-18.

CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF HUNTSVILLE BY-LAW NUMBER Being a By-law for the Control and Licensing of Dogs

The Corporation of the Town of New Tecumseth

ORDINANCE NO AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCATA PERTAINING TO VICIOUS, POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS AND PUBLIC NUISANCE DOGS


Town of Niagara Niagara, Wisconsin 54151

ANIMAL CONTROL CITY ANIMAL ORDINANCE

San Francisco City and County Pit Bull Ordinance

CITY OF MEADOW LAKE BYLAW #18/2012 DOG BYLAW

Animal Control Law Village of Bergen Local Law Number 2 of 2018

District Attorney s Office

The Story of Steven Avery s 1985 Conviction for Rape, Exoneration and the 2005 Arrest for the Murder of Teresa Halbach

MEMORANDUM JOHN ROGERS, RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR HEATHER WHITHAM, CITY ATTORNEY DAVID HIRSCH, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY

ORDINANCE NO RESOLUTION NO APPROVING A DANGEROUS DOG ORDINANCE Chisago County, Minnesota

WOODSTOCK DOG CONTROL ORDINANCE Approved 3/30/1992 Amended 3/26/2007. Definitions, as used in this ordinance, unless the context otherwise indicates.

Animal Control Working Group Public Hearing City Council Chambers 55 West Tompkins Street, Galesburg, Illinois May 8, :00 p.m.

SUMMARY: An ordinance amending the Washoe County Code by revising provisions relating to dangerous dogs. BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO.

SUMMARY: An ordinance amending the Washoe County Code by revising provisions relating to dangerous dogs. BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO.

September 25, Glynn County Board of Commissioners. Matt Doering, Chief of Police

BY-LAW 560/ DOG TAG means a numbered metal tag issued by the Village when the Owner of a Dog licenses such Dog with the Town/Village.

BYLAW NO. 3429/2009. Being a Bylaw to regulate and control Dogs within The City of Red Deer. COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RED DEER ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:

ORDINANCE NO AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ALBANY MUNICIPAL CODE (AMC) 6.18, "DANGEROUS DOGS," AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.

A review of the sequence of events and findings for the May 2 animal attack on Antoinette Brown is attached for your review.

Durham Kennel Club. Disruptive Dog Policy

ORDINANCE NO. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIPON AS FOLLOWS:

Office of Disability Support Services dss.catholic.edu Guidelines for Support Animals

EMOTIONAL SUPPORT & SERVICE ASSISTANCE ANIMALS (ESSA)

Dangerous Dogs and Texas Law

Running at large prohibited. No cat shall be permitted to run at large within the limits of this City.

Service Animals, Emotional Support Animals, and Pets

CITY OF MUSKEGO CHAPTER 13 - LICENSING AND REGULATION OF ANIMALS (Ord. # )

USCIENCES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY

Library. Order San Francisco Codes. Comprehensive Ordinance List. San Francisco, California

CHAPTER 14 RABIES PREVENTION AND CONTROL

Animals on Campus. Major Topics. I. Introduction. II. Entities Affected. III. Policy. Administrative Regulation 6:11 Page 1 of 6

TOWN OF POMFRET DOG ORDINANCE Originally Adopted May 22, 1984 Amended December 19, 2012 Amendment adopted October 1, 2014 Effective November 30, 2014

THE CITY OF KENT, OHIO HEALTH & SAFETY COMMITTEE WED., FEB. 5, 2014

Clementina Arroyo Glenn Barnett Frank Bodeman Daniel Hutchinson Veronica Martinez Bruce Richetts Margaret Whelan

(3) BODILY INJURY means physical pain, illness, or any impairment of physical condition.

DANGEROUS DOGS AND WILD ANIMALS

TMCEC Bench Book CHAPTER 17 ANIMALS. Dangerous Dogs. 1. Dogs that Are a Danger to Persons. Definitions:

SUNSHINE COAST REGIONAL DISTRICT BYLAW NO A Bylaw to regulate the keeping of dogs within the Keats Island Dog Control Service Area

Olney Municipal Code. Title 6 ANIMALS

Page 47-1 rev

CITY OF SOUTHGATE CAMPBELL COUNTY, KENTUCKY ORDINANCE 18-15

EXHIBIT A. Chapter 6 POLICE REGULATIONS. Article 1. Dogs and Cats / Dangerous Dogs

CHAPTER 505 City of Willoughby Hills: Animals and Fowl

318.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE

POLICY. Number: Animals on Campus Responsible Office: Administrative Services I. PURPOSE & INTENT

DOG CONTROL POLICY 2016

Nancy Snyder asked what type of permits did her obtain? Answer: Captive White Tail Deer form from Division of Wildlife.

Town of Whitby By-law #

County Board of County Commissioners to provide and maintain for the residents

CITY OF ESCONDIDO MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ESCONDIDO PLANNING COMMISSION. April 8, 2014

City of Grand Island

REGIONAL DISTRICT OF OKANAGAN-SIMILKAMEEN BYLAW NO. 2671, 2017

Service and Assistance Animal Policy

The Corporation of the Town of Essex. Appeal Hearing with Resped to a Notice to Muzzle

Also present are the following resource personnel:

MINUTES OF THE APPEALS COMMITTEE Sitting as the Vicious Dog Appeal Committee

WASHINGTON & JEFFERSON COLLEGE PET HOUSE MANUAL and PET REGISTRATION FORM. Introduction. Purpose

Chapter 6 POLICE REGULATIONS. Article 1. Dogs and Cats / Dangerous Dogs (Updated Ordinance 2229, September 25, 2012)

LOCAL LAW NO. 1 DOG CONTROL LAW OF THE TOWN OF STRATFORD

CHAPTER 6.10 DANGEROUS DOG AND POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS DOG

ATHABASCA COUNTY BYLAW NO

TOWN OF LUMSDEN BYLAW NO A BYLAW TO PROVIDE FOR THE LICENSING, CONTROLLING, REGULATING AND IMPOUNDING OF DOGS.

Blacks Harbour BY-LAW NO. R.2. A By-law of the Village of Blacks Harbour Respecting Animal Control

TOWN OF ECKVILLE BYLAW NO Dog Control Bylaw

Dog Bites in Colorado July June 2012: Data, Conclusions, and. Colorado Dog Bite Data. Tips for Keeping Communities Safer

TITLE 6 ANIMALS AND FOWL

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

DOG BYLAWS. 3. There will be a late charge per dog for licensing after March 31 st. There will be no exceptions to this requirement.

ABRIDGED SUMMARY OF CATEGORICAL USE OF FORCE INCIDENT AND FINDINGS BY THE LOS ANGELES BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS

A LOCAL LAW SETTING FORTH DOG CONTROL REGULATIONS OF THE TOWN OF DRESDEN, N.Y., COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, STATE OF NEW YORK

Dog Licensing Regulation

Transcription:

MINUTES Administrative Board of Appeals MEMBERS PRESENT: David C. Levy, Chairman Ann O Connor, Vice Chair Brian W. Kruse Mark Santo Jeffrey Beals MEMBERS NOT PRESENT: Ryne Bessmer, Alternate STAFF PRESENT: Timothy Himes, Law Department Bernard in den Bosch, Law Department Jay Davis, Planning Department Clinette Ingram, Board Secretary ROLL CALL: Mr. Levy called the meeting to order at 1:00 pm. The Board received as Exhibit 1 the contents of the City's file on each case. Cases: 1. 16-05-32 (heldover from 5/26/16, 8/22/16, 11/28/16, 3/1/17 & 9/25/17) Robert S. Keith REQUEST: Appeal City Fire Department Invoice Engles, Ketcham, Olson & Keith, P.C. (RE: M s Pub Fire, January 9, 2016) 1350 Woodmen Tower Omaha, NE 68102 At the Administrative Board of Appeals meeting held on Bernard in den Bosch (City Law Department) and Robert Keith appeared before the board. Mr. in den Bosch stated that the case had become more complicated over time. He entered a stipulation where all parties involved had agreed that the matter should be continued indefinitely while other cases were pending. It also reserved the right of either party to bring the case before the board with 30 days notice (Exhibit 2). Mr. Keith added that many of the issues would most likely be settled during litigation. Mr. Levy believed that a time should be set for the continuance. Motion to LAYOVER until the December 2018 meeting of the board by Mr. Kruse. Mr. Beals seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0 Appeal granted.

Administrative Board of Appeals Page 2 2. 17-12-109 Matthew J. Hubel, P.E. Schemmer 1044 North 115 th Street, Suite 300 Omaha, Ne 68154 REQUEST: Appeal Public Works Department denial of driveway permit (RE: OPS Columbian Elementary 330 South 127 th Street) At the Administrative Board of Appeals meeting held on Ryan Haas (Public Works) and Matthew Hubel appeared before the board. Mr. Haas stated that a new elementary school was being proposed for the site. He explained that bus pickup/drop-off would be located on 127 th Street. An access was proposed for the north end of the site for preschool drop-off/pick-up and visitor parking. Another access was proposed for the southern end where the main pick-up/drop-off would be located for parents. He stated that the applicant had worked with Public Works and had made changes based on the Department s suggestions. He believed that the plan was acceptable, especially when taking into consideration the constraints and traffic patterns of the site. Mr. Hubel stated that the two driveways would contribute to the safety of the students and would help to eliminate congestion in and around the site. In response to Mr. Santo, Mr. Hubel stated that community meetings had been held throughout the design process and that adjustments had been made based on those discussions. Motion to APPROVE by Mr. Beals. Mr. Santo seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0. Appeal granted. 3. 17-12-110 Kyle Haase E & Consulting Group, Inc. 10909 Mill Valley Road Omaha, NE 68154 REQUEST: Appeal Public Works Department denial of driveway permit (RE: Loveland Flats 88 th Street and West Center Road) At the Administrative Board of Appeals meeting held on Ryan Haas (Public Works) and Kyle Haase appeared before the board. Mr. Haas stated that the proposed driveway would provide access for an 18-unit, multi-family project. The site plan showed a through driveway that connected 87 th Avenue to 88 th Street. He noted that both streets are low-speed/low-volume residential streets. He noted that the only other non-conformity with the plan was that the end of returns exceeded the limits of the property line on the north side of the site. Mr. Haase that the site would consist of 2 buildings with 9 apartments in each for individuals aged 55 and over. He indicated that there meeting were held with the neighbors and that the project had been approved by City Council at its July 25, 2017 meeting. He explained that the two accesses would allow emergency vehicles to safely enter and access the site and would provide a secondary egress if needed. It would also help with trash collection since trucks would not need to back up to exit the site. Motion to APPROVE by Mr. Kruse. Mr. Beals seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0. Appeal granted.

Administrative Board of Appeals Page 3 4. 17-12-111 Eddie J. Walker, V 1608 Lake Street Omaha, NE 68110 REQUEST: Appeal Police Department denial of firearm registration At the Administrative Board of Appeals meeting held on Lt. Dave Sedlacek (Omaha Police Department) and Eddie J. Walker V appeared before the board. Lt. Sedlacek stated that on November 15, 2017, the applicant applied to register a firearm and was denied due to two marijuana less than one ounce convictions. The first was a marijuana more than one ounce conviction from September 9, 2008 for which he was fined $300. The second was from February 24, 2012 for marijuana less than one ounce for which he was fined $300. The first conviction resulted from a traffic stop and the second was the result of a probation visit to the home. He had other marijuana less than one ounce convictions that were more than 10 years old. Mr. Walker stated that while was on probation in 2012, he received counseling for marijuana addiction and that he had been drug free since that time. He added that he was married with children and that he had been employed as a chef at a hotel for almost three years. He indicated that he also had taken steps to educate himself about the responsibilities that come with gun ownership. Motion to APPROVE by Mr. Kruse. Ms. O Connor seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0. Appeal granted. 5. 17-12-112 Davell D. Hardy 4432 Decatur Street Omaha, NE 68114 REQUEST: Appeal Police Department denial of firearm registration At the Administrative Board of Appeals meeting held on Lt. Dave Sedlacek (Omaha Police Department) and Davell Hardy appeared before the board. Lt. Sedlacek stated that on November 16, 2017 the applicant applied to register a firearm and was denied due to a marijuana less than one ounce conviction from February 18, 2014 for which he was fined $300. The conviction was the result of a traffic stop. Mr. Hardy explained that since the incident he had graduated from Job Corp and enrolled in Metro Community College so that he could obtain his CDL license. He added that he and his brother liked to shoot at the range for recreation. In response to Mr. Beals, Mr. Hardy stated that he was currently employed driving a truck locally. He stated that drug testing was a condition of his employment. Mr. Levy explained that the board had an issue with how recent the conviction was.

Administrative Board of Appeals Page 4 Motion to DENY by Mr. Santo. Mr. Kruse seconded the motion. AYES: Santo, Kruse NAYES: Beals, O Connor, Levy MOTION FAILED: 3-2 Motion to APPROVE by Mr. Beals. Ms. O Connor seconded the motion. AYES: Beals, O Connor, Levy NAYES: Santo, Kruse MOTION CARRIED: 3-2. Appeal granted. 6. 17-12-113 James K. Moore 2117 Benson Garden Boulevard #5L Omaha, NE 68134 REQUEST: Appeal Police Department denial of Taxicab Driver s Permit At the Administrative Board of Appeals meeting held on Lt. Dave Sedlacek (Omaha Police Department) and James Moore appeared before the board. Lt. Sedlacek stated that on November 22, 2017 the applicant applied for a Taxicab Driver s Permit but was denied due to two Driving under Suspension convictions from May 2013 and July 2014. He was denied since both offenses were within five years of the date his application. He also had a marijuana less than one ounce conviction from 2012 and a domestic violence conviction from October 2017. The actual arrest for the domestic violence conviction was May 2015. Mr. Moore stated that he wanted to create more opportunities for his children. He explained that he violated probation in 2016 and turned himself in in October 2017. In response to Mr. Kruse, Mr. Moore stated that his driver s license was suspended because he was driving without insurance. Motion to DENY by Mr. Kruse. Mr. Beals seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0. Appeal denied.

Administrative Board of Appeals Page 5 7. 17-12-114 Alan Backman 614 North 159 th Street Omaha, NE 68118 REQUEST: Appeal Nebraska Humane Society Potentially Dangerous Dog Declaration At the Administrative Board of Appeals meeting held on Mark Langan (Nebraska Humane Society), Alan Backman and Ana Cruz appeared before the board. Mr. Langan stated that on October 17, 2017 when NHS was called to Papillion South High School. A young man stated that he was walking on school grounds when he approached the applicant and his dog, Titan. He indicated that when both parties passed each other, the dog bit him on his arm and left a wound and a tear in his jacket. When NHS officers found the applicant they issued a citation for no pet license and a Dangerous Dog Declaration for an incident from September 5, 2017. Mr. Langan stated that on that day, Titan bit a man that was jogging on a neighborhood trail behind its home. During that incident, Titan was on a leash that was being held by a young girl. The jogger indicated that the dog ran up behind him and bit him on the leg and knocked him over. He stated that he only wanted the bite documented in NHS records. Ms. Cruz stated that they were appealing because they felt that the dog did not meet the definition of a Potentially Dangerous Dog. She stated that during the October 17 th incident, the young man ran towards the dog and made it feel threatened. She believed that the dog was provoked into biting. She added that the dog is a shepherd mix and that it is in his nature to try and stop the young man but not necessarily to hurt him. She stated that after the September 5 th incident, they met with a trainer. In response to Ms. O Connor, Mr. Langan explained that a Dangerous Dog Declaration was not issued for the first incident because the victim asked that no enforcement action be taken. He added that in the future any confirmed bites that are reported to NHS would receive appropriate action for the public s safety. In response to Mr. Kruse, Mr. Backman stated that he and his wife were not originally aware that the dog needed to be licensed. He indicated that they did so as soon as they were informed that it was a requirement. Mr. Langan stated that if the declaration were upheld the dog would need to meet the following requirements: 1) must be spayed/neutered (which the dog already was); 2) microchipped within 30 days (which had already been done); 3) a Potentially Dangerous Dog license must be purchased from NHS; 4) the owner must show that a $100,000 public liability policy had been purchased; 5) the owner must attend a responsible pet ownership class and a dog behavior class; and 6) the dog must be harnessed, muzzled and under the control of a person 19 years of age or older and on a leash no longer than 6 long for the next 2 years anytime the dog left the home. He added that if no incidents occurred during the 2 years the dog would be removed from the Potentially Dangerous list. Ms. Cruz stated that the issue was having a psychological impact on her children and was hurting their ability to train the dog. Motion to DENY by Mr. Kruse. Mr. Beals seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0. Appeal denied.

Administrative Board of Appeals Page 6 8. 17-12-115 Kelly Costello 16202 Western Avenue Omaha, NE 68118 REQUEST: Appeal Nebraska Humane Society Potentially Dangerous Dog Declaration At the Administrative Board of Appeals meeting held on Mark Langan (Nebraska Humane Society) appeared before the board. The applicant did not appear. It was determined that Ms. Costello received proper notification of the meeting. Mr. Langan stated that on November 11, 2017, NHS received 2 calls around noon about 2 dogs later identified as Kash and Bella. The first incident involved a mother and her two girls who were walking their small dog on the sidewalk. As Kash and Bella ran up to them, the mother picked up her dog. Kash and Bella attempted to jump up and bite the dog and knocked the two girls down causing minor injuries to the dog and both girls. The second incident involved Kash and Bella attacking a dog in its yard. The dog sustained some lacerations. The applicant was contact and was issued several citations including Dangerous Dog Declarations for both dogs. Mr. Langan noted that there were five additional complaints about the applicant s dogs running loose between March 2016 and October 2017. Ms. Costello appealed to the NHS board on November 30, 2017; however, her appeal was denied which made of her dogs Potentially Dangerous Dogs. In response to Mr. Kruse, Mr. Langan stated that Ms. Costello was still in possession of the dogs. He explained that the other incidents of dogs running loose involved other dogs that Ms. Costello owned. He also noted that a neighbor sent a video to NHS which showed one of the applicant s dogs circling him. Mr. Santo mentioned that it did not appear that either of the dogs had been vaccinated for rabies which caused additional safety concerns. Motion to DENY by Mr. Kruse. Mr. Beals seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED: 5-0. Appeal denied. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Motion by Mr. Beals to approve the minutes from October 23, 2017. Second by Mr. Kruse. Motion carried 5-0. Motion by Mr. Beals to approve the minutes from November 27, 2017. Second by Mr. Santo. Motion carried 5-0. ADJOURN: It was the consensus of the board the ADJOURN the meeting at 2:13 pm.