Loading...
1001 RESOLUTION NO. 1001 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MODIFYING THE DECISION OF THE CITY MANAGER AND ORDERING THE CONFINEMENT OF A DOG TO THE OWNERS' PROPERTY T'he 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 subject of the proceedings described in this Resolution is a male German Shepard named Rex ("the dog"), owned by Mr. and Mrs. Frank Robinson ("Owners"), who reside at 1 Georgeff 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 reports dated November 28, 2005, and January 9, 2006 and the attachments thereto, all of which are hereby incorporated into this Resolution by reference as though fully set forth: A. The Owners have owned Rex and kept him at their property in the City for approximately four years. During that time, the evidence shows, and the Owners admit, that Rex was not licensed as required by the Municipal Code. B. Upon receipt of a complaint on October 18, 2005 from Mrs. Arlene Goetz, 14 Georgeff Road, an investigation conducted by the City Manager and the Los Angeles County Department of Animal Care and Control (the "Department") determined that on October 15, 2005, Rex had, while off the Robinsons' property, engaged in an aggressive act (an attack) against Mrs. Goetz specifically, biting her on the upper left thigh in an unprovoked attack. Further, the investigation revealed that Rex was unlicensed at the time of the October 15, 2005 incident. Pursuant to Section 6.24.030, the City Manager, in his letter to the Owners dated October 27, 2005, determined that the nuisance allegations had merit and based on the severity of the attack and the fact that Rex was unlicensed, ordered Rex permanently removed from the City. Section 4. Pursuant to Section 6.24.040, the Owners appealed the City Manager's order of October 27,2005. A hearing on the appeal was scheduled for and conducted on November 28, 2005 and January 9, 2006. The City Council received a written staff report containing numerous attachments and correspondence from the Owners and a report from the Los Angeles County Department of Animal Care and Control. Testifying at the hearing were the Owners, Mr. Frank Robinson, and Los Angeles County Animal Control Officer Jacqueline Green. 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. Rex by all accounts has a history of aggressive behavior. Evidence suggests that Rex has been involved in aggressive behavior prior to this event,but had not been found to be responsible for an attack prior to this event. This is the first confirmed attack by Rex. B. At the time of the attack against Mrs. Goetz, Rex was unlicensed, itself alone a ground for removal from the City pursuant to Section 6.24.030. C. Mrs. Goetz received medical attention for her bite wound, and showed the bite wound to the Los Angeles County Animal Control Investigating Officer. The evidence shows that Mrs. Goetz was bitten by Rex. Section 6. In addition to the foregoing findings, the City Council draws the following conclusions from the evidence: A. Animal Control Officer Green testified that in her experience and based on her knowledge, it is possible that Rex could again display aggressive behavior despite his recent training. Resolution No. 1001 -1- B. The City Council finds that if allowed to roam free in the City, Rex may pose a risk of harm to other persons or animals. An attack by a dog against a person is unacceptable in a community without a leash law. The evidence shows that the attack occurred, and that future aggressive behavior is possible. C. The owners failed to maintain the proper licensing of Rex in disregard for City laws. D. At the hearing of November 28, 2005, the owners were directed by the City Council have Rex undergo behavior training, and work with the Department of Animal control to evaluate the training, inspect the confining fence for adequacy and inspect the functional aspects of the electronic fence system. The City Council agreed to continue the hearing on the appeal until January 9, 2006 and receive a report from the Animal Control Officer on these efforts. At the hearing on January 9, 2006, the Animal Control Officer testified that the owners have taken these actions including improvements to the fencing, electronic perimeter fencing and have completed dog behavior training that has dramatically changed the behavior of Rex and therefore, permanent expulsion from the City is not warranted at this time. However, Rex should be confined to the Robinson's property to ensure the safety of others, subject to Section 7 below. If Rex is off of the owners' property, Rex shall be at all times under the control of a leash managed by a person capable of controlling the dog. Section 7. The City Council hereby modifies the decision of the City Manager, and based on the evidence received de novo at its hearing of November 28, 2005 and January 9, 2006, pursuant to Section 6.24.040 hereby orders Rex permanently confined to the Owners' property. The owner must maintain the perimeter fencing and electronic fencing in proper working order and continue with any dog behavior training that may be recommended by the Department of Animal Control. Violations of any of the provisions of this Resolution or failure of confining devices that cause Rex to escape the confinement of the Robinson property shall be investigated pursuant to the provisions of Section 6.24.060 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. PASSED,APPROVED AND ADOPTED t��s 3rd y J uary, 2006. , � _ - �- , Godfrey Pernell Mayor ATTES'�: ��-� Marilyn Kern Deputy City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) The foregoing Resolution No. 1001 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING ' HILLS MODIFYING THE DECISION OF THE CITY MANAGER AND ORDERING THE CONFINEMENT OF A DOG ("REX")TO THE OWNERS' PROPERTY was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on January 23, 2006, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers �Black, I3i1� "'and M•aybr P�ernell . . , _� NOES: N o n e . ABSENT: Councilmember Heinsheimer and Mayor Pro Tem Lay. ABSTAIN: No n e . -���Q, ,. Marilyn L. ern � Deputy City Clerk Resolution No. 1001 -2-