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

Similar documents
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES 7-1 PUBLIC HEARING. Date: June 17, Subject: Subject Property: Citywide. 1. Declare the Hearing Open: Mayor Duhovic

CARMEN A. TRUTANICH City Attorney

the release of feral cats, authorizing their release to qualifying feral cat colonies. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAS VEGAS DOES HEREBY ORDAIN

ORDINANCE NO

Article VIII. Potentially Dangerous Dogs and Vicious Dogs

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

TOWN OF LUDLOW, VERMONT DOG ORDINANCE

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

AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING OR REGULATING THE OWNING OR KEEPING OF PIT BULL DOGS, PROVIDING FOR PERMITS, AND PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS

ORDINANCE NUMBER 2652

ORDINANCE NO. 14,951

CITY OF BULLHEAD CITY

STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL OR STUDY SESSION AGENDA. STUDY SESSION DATE: NA MEETING DATE: October 4, 2010

THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF THE COUNTY OF CLARK, SECTION 1. Title 10, Chapter 08, Section 130 of the Clark County Code is hereby

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

ORDINANCE NO. 91 AN ORDINANCE REQUIRING THE LICENSING OF DOGS & CATS WITHIN THE CITY OF BROWNTON

BISHOP PAIUTE TRIBE DOG CONTROL ORDINANCE NO BISHOP PAIUTE RESERVATION BISHOP, CALIFORNIA

CARMEN A. TRUTANICH City Attorney REPORT NO.

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

ORDINANCE NO. 14,155

ORDINANCE NO

ORDINANCE NO. hundreds of thousands of dogs and cats are housed and bred at substandard breeding

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 7 (ANIMALS) OF THE EL PASO CITY CODE

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

The Corporation of the Town of New Tecumseth

CORYELL COUNTY RABIES CONTROL ORDINANCE NO

(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:

ATTACHMENT A ORDINANCE NO.

CHAPTER 2.20 POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS AND DANGEROUS DOGS

6.04 LICENSING AND REGISTRATION OF DOGS AND CATS

c) Owners walking their dog( s) in public areas are required to pick up and properly dispose of stool waste deposited from their dog( s).

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

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

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

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

hens may be kept on residential lots in excess of

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

ORDINANCE NO WHEREAS, the City of Hamilton (hereinafter referred to. as the City ) is empowered to enact ordinances to protect

AGENDA REPORT. SUBJECT: Amending City Code Section 14A.8 to Provide for the Dog Park Area at Trainer Park

CHAPTER 4 DOG CONTROL

Ordinance Fact Sheet FROM: TO: CITY COUNCIL DATE: January 27, 2014 CITY ATTORNEY

Draft for Public Hearing. Town of East Haddam. Chapter (Number to be Assigned) CONTROL OF ANIMALS ORDINANCE

CHAPTER 5 ANIMALS. Owner: Any person, group of persons, or corporation owning, keeping or harboring animals.

ORDINANCE NO. 1534(06)

Animal Control Ordinance

CITY OF STERLING HEIGHTS MACOMB COUNTY, MICHIGAN ORDINANCE NO.

ORDINANCE NO AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE KEEPING OF ANIMALS WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF SPANISH FORT, ALABAMA

St. Paul City Ordinance

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

Memorandum CITY OF DALLAS

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

Title 6 ANIMALS. Chapter 6.04 ANIMAL CONTROL

CITY OF RIO VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT

ORDINANCE O AN ORDINANCE RESTRICTING THE KEEPING OF PIT BULL BREED DOGS WITHIN THE CITY OF ARKADELPHIA, ARKANSAS.

ORDINANCE NO. 15,735

DOG CONTROL AND LICENSE LAW OF THE TOWN OF CAMPBELL Local Law No. 2 of the Year 2010

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

APPENDIX B TOWN OF CLINTON DOG ORDINANCE

MTAS Sample Animal Licensing Regulations

ORDINANCE NO. CS-296

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF ADELAIDE METCALFE

CITY OF SARASOTA Sarasota, Florida. Pamela M. Nadalini, MBA, CMC, City Auditor & Clerk. Ordinance No (Dogs must be leashed in all City parks)

93.02 DANGEROUS ANIMALS.

Ordinance No January 26, 2016 Page 2

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 405 OF THE CITY OF RICE (REGULATING DOGS & CATS)

Chapter 8.02 DOGS AND CATS

Chapter 2 Animals Part 1 Dogs Running at Large Part 2 Animal Noise Control Part 3 Animals at Large

CHAPTER 604 TOWN OF SCARBOROUGH ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE

CITY of ALBUQUERQUE SEVENTEENTH COUNCIL

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

TOWN OF LAKE LUZERNE Local Law # 3 of the Year Control of Dogs

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

Dog Licensing Regulation

ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH, FLORIDA

CARMEN A. TRUTANICH City Attorney REPORT RE:

TOWN OF SUMNER DOG CONTROL ORDINANCE

CHAPTER 6.10 DANGEROUS DOG AND POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS DOG

ORDINANCE NO NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:

ANCHORAGE, ALASKA AO No

ORDINANCE NO DANGEROUS ANIMALS, ANIMALS RUNNING AT LARGE, PROHIBITED ANIMALS

GALLATIN COUNTY ORDINANCE NO GALLATIN COUNTY DOG CONTROL ORDINANCE

WHEREAS, tens of thousands of unwanted and abandoned dogs and cats are euthanized every year; and

LOCAL LAW. Town of Alfred. Local Law No. 2 for the year A Local Law Entitled Dog Control Law for the Town of Alfred

D. "Poundmaster" means any person or entity appointed by the Council to discharge the duties provided for under this Section.

An individual may request an emotional support animal as an accommodation in a campus residential facility if:

TOWN OF WOODSTOCK ORDINANCE REGULATING DOGS AND WOLF-HYBRIDS

SEC BREEDING AND TRANSFER OF DOGS AND CATS. (Amended by Ord. No. 173,168, Eff. 5/18/00, Oper. 11/15/00.)

Title 8 ANIMALS. Chapter: 8-1 Cruelty to Dumb Animals. 8-2 Regulate the Keeping of Dogs. 8-3 Keeping of Livestock

THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF PORT HOPE BY-LAW NO. 48/2015

WAUPACA COUNTY CODE OF ORDINANCES CHAPTER 12 ANIMAL CONTROL TABLE OF CONTENTS

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.

TITLE 10 ANIMAL CONTROL CHAPTER 1 IN GENERAL

Loretto City Code 600:00 (Rev. 2010) CHAPTER VI ANIMALS. (Repealed, Ord ) Added, Ord )

ORDINANCE BE IT ENACTED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF HERNANDO COUNTY, FLORIDA:

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

City of Grand Island

ORDINANCE NO. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE:

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

ATTACHMENT A ORDINANCE NO.

Transcription:

MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL JOHN ROGERS, RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR HEATHER WHITHAM, CITY ATTORNEY DAVID HIRSCH, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE ADDING SECTION 12.20.080 TO THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO DOG PARK RULES AND EXCLUSION POLICY DATE: SEPTEMBER 22, 2015 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council introduce an Ordinance adding Section 12.20.080 to Chapter 12.20 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code relating to Dog Park Rules and Exclusion Policy IMPACT TO FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES: No financial impact has been identified related to adding Dog Park rules and an exclusion policy to the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code. This item is not included in the Critical Needs Action Plan. BACKGROUND The City provides for the operation and maintenance of a Dog Park at the Elm Street Park. Discussions have been ongoing with a new volunteer organization, the Elm Street Dog Park Association (ESDPA), which is being organized to provide for the day-to-day operation and maintenance of the Dog Park. The ESDPA will be operating under the umbrella of San Luis Obispo Parks, Open Space & Trails (SLOPOST), which is a 501 (c)(3) nonprofit organization, which can provide insurance for the ESDPA operations and activities. A draft agreement is being developed that would include both ESDPA and SLOPOST as parties. Based upon direction from the City Council, the approach in the draft agreement with ESDPA and SLOPOST is to provide that they will operate and maintain the Dog Park with minimal involvement by City Staff. Recent concerns, however, have developed regarding enforcement of the rules that govern the Dog Park, especially as they relate to aggressive dogs. While the vast majority of Dog Park Item 11.a. - Page 1

CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE ADDING SECTION 12.20.080 TO THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO DOG PARK RULES AND EXCLUSION POLICY SEPTEMBER 22, 2015 PAGE2 users voluntarily comply with the Dog Park rules, there are on occasion instances that require enforcement of the rules. The proposed Ordinance would provide a legally enforceable mechanism for the enforcement of the Dog Park rules. Staff also believes it is important to avoid having volunteers engaging in confrontations with Dog Park users and believes that having legally enforceable rules will mitigate those concerns. A key component of the Ordinance is to create procedures to provide for excluding aggressive dogs, and users who repeatedly violate the Dog Park Rules. Accordingly, the attached Ordinance has been drafted which will add the Dog Park rules to the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code, create an exclusion policy and procedure, and provide for penalties in the event they become necessary. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: The proposed Ordinance would add the following Dog Park rules, which will be posted at the Dog Park and have been approved by the ESDPA, to the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code: 1. Dog owners and handlers are legally responsible for their dogs and any injuries or related medical costs caused by them or their dogs. 2. Users of the Dog Park assume the risk of injury or damage to themselves, their dogs and their property. 3. If a dog bites another dog or human, contact information must be exchanged. 4. Aggressive dogs are not allowed in the Dog Park. Owners/handlers must remain with their dogs at all times. Any dog exhibiting aggressive behavior must be removed from the park immediately. 5. Dogs shall not dig or engage in excessive barking. 6. No food or dog treats may be brought into the Dog Park. 7. All dogs must be collared, licensed, vaccinated and wear l.d. tags. 8. No dogs in heat or puppies under 4 months of age are permitted in the Dog Park. 9. Owners/handlers must pick up all pet waste. 10. Children under 12 years of age must be supervised by an adult at all times. Item 11.a. - Page 2

CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE ADDING SECTION 12.20.080 TO THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO DOG PARK RULES AND EXCLUSION POLICY SEPTEMBER 22, 2015 PAGE3 11. Use of the Dog Park is limited to use by handlers/owners and domesticated dogs only. The Ordinance includes a definition of aggressive dogs, which was drafted in such a manner that an actual bite is not necessary for a dog to be deemed aggressive, since recent incidents included several reports of a dog acting aggressively, but not actually biting a person or other dog. The definition states as follows: "Aggressive Dog" means any dog that engages in aggressive behavior and poses a threat to dogs or people by virtue of a single incident or history of unprovoked acts of aggression against people or animals. Aggressive behavior includes, but is not limited to, unprovoked snapping, biting, lunging or otherwise threatening other dogs or people that causes a person observing or subject to that behavior to be in a reasonable fear for his or her safety or the safety of his or her dog. As noted, staff also believes an enforceable process needs to be in place that clearly provides for the exclusion of users or dogs that violate the Dog Park rules. Therefore, the Ordinance provides for the issuance of verbal warnings and written warning notices. Receipt of a written warning notice can include requiring the recipient and his or her dog to leave the Dog Park for the remainder of the day the written warning is issued. For violations other than aggressive dogs, Dog Park users who have received a written warning notice and again violate the Dog Park rules within ninety (90) days are subject to being issued an exclusion notice for a period of at least one month, and up to a year. Aggressive dogs do not require warning notices and are subject to being issued a written exclusion notice providing for the immediate exclusion of the dog. The notice may also provide for the permanent exclusion of the dog from the Dog Park. The Director of Recreation Services is empowered by the Ordinance to designate City employees and volunteers who can issue warning and exclusion notices. The draft agreement with ESDPA and SLOPOST includes a provision that ESDPA will be involved in initial enforcement of all Dog Park rules, however, they are not to engage in confrontations with members of the public if users do not voluntarily comply. Instead, they are to contact City staff and/or the Police Department. The proposed Ordinance also provides for an appeal process for any person issued an exclusion notice. Appeals are to the Director of Recreation Services, whose written decision is final. Item 11.a. - Page 3

CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE ADDING SECTION 12.20.080 TO THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO DOG PARK RULES AND EXCLUSION POLICY SEPTEMBER 22, 2015 PAGE4 Finally, violations of Dog Park rules are punishable as infractions, with the exception that remaining in the Dog Park after having been issued an exclusion notice is punishable as a misdemeanor. The misdemeanor provision will allow the Police, in an extreme situation, to arrest and remove the person remaining in the Dog Park despite the exclusion order. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: Introduce an Ordinance adding Section 12.20.080 to the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code; Modify and introduce the Ordinance; Do not introduce the Ordinance; or Provide direction to staff. ADVANTAGES: Adding Section 12.20.080 to the Municipal Code will provide for enforceable rules at the Dog Park in those rare instances that users repeatedly violate rules, or when aggressive dogs are at the Dog Park. It includes an exclusion policy that provides for warnings related to rule violations prior to any exclusion notice being issued, and also provides a mechanism for the immediate exclusion of aggressive dogs. DISADVANTAGES: No disadvantages with the recommended action are identified. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: No environmental review is required for this item. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: The Agenda was posted in 'tront of City Hall on Thursday, September 17, 2015 and the agenda and staff report were posted on the City's website on Friday, September 18, 2015. Item 11.a. - Page 4

ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADDING SECTION 12.20.080 TO CHAPTER 12.20 OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO DOG PARK RULES AND EXCLUSION POLICY WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande provides for the maintenance and operation of a Dog Park at the Elm Street Park; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is appropriate to provide for enforceable rules and regulations for the Dog Park and a procedure for excluding aggressive d_ogs and persons who violate the rules and regulations. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande as follows: SECTION 1. Section 12.20.80 is hereby added to Chapter 12.20 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code to read as follows: "12.20.080 - Dog Park Rules. A. Definitions. For purposes of this Section the words and phrases set forth below shall mean the following: 1. "Dog Park" means the City of Arroyo Grande Dog Park located at the Elm Street Park. 2. "Handler" means the dog owner's friend, relative, agent, or employee having custody or control over the dog while at the Dog Park. 3. "Aggressive Dog" means any dog that engages in aggressive behavior and poses a threat to dogs or people by virtue of a single incident or history of unprovoked acts of aggression against people or animals. Aggressive behavior includes, but is not limited to, unprovoked snapping, biting, lunging or otherwise threatening other dogs or people that causes a person observing or subject to that behavior to be in a reasonable fear for his or her safety or the safety of his or her dog. B. Rules and Prohibited Activities at Dog Park. The following rules and prohibited activities shall apply at the Dog Park: 1. Dog owners and handlers are legally responsible for their dogs and any injuries or related medical costs caused by them or their dogs. Item 11.a. - Page 5

ORDINANCE NO. PAGE2 2. Users of the Dog Park assume the risk of injury or damage to themselves, their dogs and their property. 3. If a dog bites another dog or human, contact information must be exchanged. 4. Aggressive dogs are not allowed in the Dog Park. Owners/handlers must remain with their dogs at all times. Any dog exhibiting aggressive behavior must be removed from the park immediately. 5. Dogs shall not dig or engage in excessive barking. 6. No food or dog treats may be brought into the Dog Park. 7. All dogs must be collared, licensed, vaccinated and wear l.d. tags. 8. No dogs in heat or puppies under 4 months of age are permitted in the Dog Park. 9. Owners/handlers must pick up all pet waste. 10. Children under 12 years of age must be supervised by an adult at all times. 11. Use of the Dog Park is limited to use by handlers/owners and domesticated dogs only. C. Exclusion from Dog Park. In addition to, or as an alternative to a criminal citation for a violation of this Section, a dog owner or handler and his or her dog is subject to the following Exclusion Process. 1. General Provision. A dog owner or handler and his or her dog is subject to exclusion from the Dog Park if he or she violates any of the Dog Park Rules contained in this Section. 2. Persons Authorized to Issue Warning or Exclusion Notices. The Director of Recreation Services shall designate those City employees and Dog Park volunteers who are authorized to issue warning and exclusion notices. 3. Violations - Issuance of Warning or Exclusion Notices. a. Warning Notice. A designated employee or volunteer may give a dog owner or handler a verbal warning for a violation of the Dog Park rules set forth in this Section. A verbal warning is not required and is provided only as a courtesy. Whether or not a verbal warning is given, a written warning notice may be issued for a violation of the Dog Park rules. The written warning notice may specify that the recipient and his or her dog must leave the Dog Park for the remainder of the day, and that in the event that a second violation of the rules occurs within ninety (90) days of issuance of the warning Item 11.a. - Page 6

ORDINANCE NO. PAGE3 notice, that person may be subject to exclusion from the Dog Park for a period of time that the designated employe e or volunteer may determine to be appropriate. b. Exclusion Notice. If a dog owner or handler has received a warning notice and again violates a Dog Park rule within ninety (90) days of the date of issuance of the warning notice, he or she may be issued a written exclusion notice excluding the person an~ his or her dog from the Dog Park for a period of time that the designated employee or volunteer may determine to be appropriate. Exclusion for violations other than aggressive dogs shall be for a period of no less than one month and no more than twelve months. The exclusion notice shall include information concerning the right to appeal the exclusion notice to the Recreation Services Director as provided in Subsection 4 herein. c. Exclusion of Aggressive Dogs. A warning notice is not required for exclusion of an aggressive dog whose behavior creates a reasonable fear in any other person using the Dog Park for his or her safety, or the safety of his or her dog. In such case, the designated employee or volunteer shall issue a written exclusion notice providing for the immediate exclusion of the dog from the Dog Park. The exclusion notice may also provide for the permanent exclusion of the dog from the Dog Park. The exclusion notice shall also include information concerning the right to appeal the exclusion notice to the Recreation Services Director as provided in Subsection 4 herein. 4. Appeals. Any person issued an exclusion notice shall have the right to an appeal from the issuance of the notice. The following procedures shall apply to all appeals: a. A notice of appeal of an exclusion notice must be filed, in writing, with the Recreation Services Director within five (5) calendar days of the issuance of the exclusion notice. The notice of appeal shall state the following: i. The appellant's name; ii. The appellant's address and a telephone number where he or she can be reached; iii. A concise statement as to why the appellant believes that the issuance of the exclusion notice was invalid or unjustified; and iv. A copy of the exclusion notice shall be attached. b. A hearing on the appeal shall be held no more than fifteen (15) calendar days after the filing of the appeal, except the Recreation Services Director may postpone the hearing date at the request of the appellant or City staff for good cause. The appellant shall be provided notice of the hearing date, time, and location at least five (5) calendar days prior to the hearing date. The hearing shall afford a reasonable opportunity for the Item 11.a. - Page 7

ORDINANCE NO. PAGE4 appellant to be present and present evidence that the exclusion notice is invalid or unjustified. The appellant shall have the right to cross-examine witnesses. c. At the hearing, the City shall have the burden to show by substantial evidence that the exclusion notice was based on and justified by violations of the Dog Park rules. The decision of the Recreation Services Director shall be final and in writing. D. Penalty. Remaining in the Dog Park after having been issued an Exclusion Notice shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. All other violations of this section shall be punishable as infractions and otherwise as provided in AGMC Section 1.16.010 et. seq." SECTION 2. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, or clause of this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be unlawful, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance or any part thereof. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, or clause thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, or clause be declared unconstitutional. SECTION 3. A summary of this Ordinance shall be published in a newspaper published and circulated in the City of Arroyo Grande at least five (5) days prior to the City Council meeting at which the proposed Ordinance is to be adopted. A certified copy of the full text of the proposed Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the City Clerk. Within fifteen (15) days after adoption of the Ordinance, the summary with the names of those City Council Members voting for and against the Ordinance shall be published again, and the City Clerk shall post a certified copy of the full text of such adopted Ordinance. SECTION 4. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. On motion by Council Member, seconded by Council Member, and by the following roll call vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Ordinance was adopted this day of, 2015. Item 11.a. - Page 8

ORDINANCE NO. PAGES JIM HILL, MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: DIANNE THOMPSON, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: HEATHER WHITHAM, CITY ATTORNEY Item 11.a. - Page 9

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Item 11.a. - Page 10