0948I
RESOLUTION NO. 948
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE CITY MANAGER AND ORDERING THE
PERMANENT REMOVAL OF TWO DOGS FROM THE CITY
The City Council of the City of Rolling Hills does hereby resolve and order as follows:
Section 1. The proceedings described in this Resolution were conducted pursuant to the
authority and procedures set forth in Chapter 6.24 of Title 6 of the Rolling Hills Municipal
Code, entitled "Dogs Attacking Persons or Animals." All "section" references in this
Resolution are to sections contained in Chapter 6.24.
Section 2. The subjects of the proceedings described in this Resolution are two dogs - a
rottweiler and a pitbull mix named Cinnamon and Chili ("the dogs") - owned by Dr. NA and
Dr. Vicki Anakwenze ("Owners"), who reside at 77 Saddleback Road in the City of Rolling
Hills ("City").
Section 3. The course of events that led to this proceeding are summarized as follows,
more detailed descriptions of which can be found in the staff report dated January 12, 2004
and the attachments thereto, all of which are hereby incorporated into this Resolution by
reference as though fully set forth:
A. Upon receipt of a complaint on September 19, 2003, an investigation conducted
by the City Manager and the Los Angeles County Department of Animal Care and Control
("Department") determined that the dogs acting in concert had killed a goose and injured two
additional geese owned by and on the property of Erwin Heindl, at 80 Saddleback Road in the
City. The investigation of this incident turned up the existence of other informal complaints
about aggressive behavior exhibited by the dogs made by joggers, pedestrians and neighbors
in the area. Pursuant to Section 6.24.030, the City Manager, in his letter to the Owners dated
September 25, 2003, determined that the allegations had merit and ordered the dogs confined
to the Owners' property at all times unless under the control and restraint of a leash. The
letter cautioned that future incidents might result in additional remedial measures. This
directive was not appealed by the Owners.
B. Upon receipt of a complaint on November 10, 2003, filed by Elizabeth Jacobowitz
of 20 Portuguese Bend Road, an investigation conducted by the City Manager and the
Department determined that the dogs attacked and killed Mrs. Jacobowitz' cat in her presence
on the front porch of her home. Further, the investigation revealed that the dogs were
unlicensed at the time of the September incident referred to in paragraph A. above. Finally,
the investigation revealed, based on statements from neighbors and persons frequenting the
area, that despite the September 25 order, the Owners were routinely allowing the dogs to
roam free of restraint off their property. Pursuant to Section 6.24.070, the City Manager, in his
letter to the Owners dated November 17, 2003, determined that the allegations were fully
substantiated and, based on the severity of the attack and the consistency of the reports and
complaints, ordered the dogs permanently removed from the City.
Section 4. Pursuant to Section 6.24.040, the Owners appealed the City Manager's order
of November 17, 2003. A hearing on the appeal was scheduled for and conducted on January
12, 2004. The City Council received a written staff report containing numerous attachments,
correspondence from the Owners and correspondence from Leslie Stetson, Leah Mirsch and
Nick Cellino. Testifying at the hearing were the Owners and their daughter, Mr. And Mrs.
Jacobowitz, Dr. Ralph Black and Los Angeles County Animal Control Officer Eric Moser. The
City Council reviewed and considered all of the written and oral evidence submitted in the
matter prior to making its decision.
Section 5. Based on all of the foregoing, the City Council makes the following factual
findings:
A. The dogs are well known in the neighborhood for roaming off the Owners'
property, and for their aggressive behavior. While one person expressed in writing his
affection for the dogs, others expressed their fear of the dogs' behavior towards equestrians,
pedestrians, joggers and domestic animals.
B. The dogs attacked and killed a goose and injured two other geese on the
property at 80 Saddleback Road. At that time, the dogs were unlicensed, and had that fact
been known by the City Manager, the dogs could at that time have been ordered removed
from the City pursuant to Section 6.24.030.
Resolution No. 948 -1-
C. Despite the City Manager's order that the dogs be confined to the property
unless under leash, the Owners allowed the dogs to roam free off their property and failed to
take reasonable precautions or measures necessary to confine the dogs to their property. The
testimony supports the finding that the dogs were seen on numerous occasions off the
property. The dogs engaged in aggressive behavior and one of them bit Dr. Ralph Black as he
was jogging in the neighborhood.
D. Less than two months after the first incident, the dogs attacked and killed a pet
cat owned by Elizabeth Jacobowitz on the front porch of her home.
E. The Owners do not dispute any of the foregoing findings, and admit to being
aware of the behavior of the dogs, to complaints by people in the neighborhood (including Dr.
Ralph Black) and to the attacks on the geese and cat referenced above.
F. After the November 7, 2003 incident, the Owners erected a chain-link dog run on
their property in which they propose to confine the dogs in the future.
Section 6. In addition to the foregoing findings, the City Council draws the following
conclusions from the evidence:
A. The dogs have displayed a history of antisocial and aggressive behavior.
Residents in the neighborhood fear the dogs. The two incidents described above, particularly
the mauling and killing of the Jacobowitz cat, show the dogs to be particularly vicious.
Animal Control Officer Moser testified that in his experience and based on his knowledge,
once a dog develops a taste for killing, it is extremely difficult to control the killing behavior.
B. The Owners were given an opportunity to keep their dogs by confining them to
their property unless leashed. The evidence is overwhelming, including admissions by the
Owners, that they failed to take reasonable precautions to control their dogs and in fact
violated the City Manager's order.
C. The Owners testified that the dogs are cared for by their children. Based on the
evidence, it is clear that the children are not capable of controlling the dogs, and that if allowed
to remain in the City, they would continue to pose a grave risk of harm to people and other
animals. The precautions proposed by the Owners are, in the judgment of the Council,
insufficient to ameliorate the risk posed by the dogs. Even if confined to the dog run
constructed by the Owners, the dogs cannot be controlled by the children, and could easily
escape if the gate is opened by a person entering or leaving the penned area. Based on their
past behavior, it is reasonably foreseeable that if they escape the pen, the dogs will leave the
property and engage in aggressive behavior.
D. The continued presence of the dogs in the City poses a risk to the life and safety
of people and animals in the City. However repentant the Owners may be, the facts fully
support and justify the City Manager's order that the dogs be removed from the City.
E. Nothing herein prevents the Owners from acquiring other dogs that are more
suited to the environment of the City and more compatible with other domesticated animals.
Section 7. The City Council hereby upholds the decision of the City Manager, and
based on the evidence received de novo at its hearing of January 12, 2004, pursuant to Section
6.24.040 hereby orders the dogs permanently removed from the City by not later than
February 2, 2004.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 26`x' day of anuary, 2004.
_ /a . Lq
FRANK E. HILL
MAYOR
ATTEST:
ffZ�6� J - K `IA�
Marilyn L. Kern
Deputy City Clerk
Resolution No. 948 -2-
1
1
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
The foregoing Resolution No. 948 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE CITY MANAGER AND ORDERING THE
PERMANENT REMOVAL OF TWO DOGS FROM THE CITY
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on January 26, 2004, by
the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Black, Lay, Pernell, Mayor Pro Tem Heinsheimer and Mayor
Hill.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
Resolution No. 948
-3-
Marilyn L. Kern
Deputy City Clerk