1195 RESOLUTI4N NO. 1195
A RESOLUTIOIrT OF TI� CFTY COUNCIL OF TI� CITY OF
ROLLING HlLLS MODIFYIl�G 'I'I� DECISION OF THE CITY
MANAGER IN THE APPEAL FIi,ED BY DR. JEFFREY OSTRiKER
AND ORDERING THE C�NFINEMENT �F AZUL TO THE
OSTRIKER PROPERTY
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 b.24 of Titie 6 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Cade
("RHMC"}, entitled "Aggressive Animals." A11 "section" references in this Resoludon are to sections
contained in Chapter 6.24.
Section 2. The subject of the proceedings described in this Resolution is a ma�e Spaniel mix
named Azul ("the dog"), owned by Dr. Jeffrey 4striker{"Owner"), who reside at 27 Caballeros Road in
the City af Roliing Hills {"City"}.
Section 3. The incidents giving rise to this appeal are the second set of incidents in the last
12 manths irivolving killing of chickez�s by Azul. The first incident occurted in Dec�mber 2015 when
AzuI 1d11ed a chicken belonging to Matthew Chaisson, occupant of the property at 8 Crest Road East. In
response to that incident, the City Manager ardered that Azul be confined to the 4striker residence and
when walked be restrai�ed by a leash by a person capab�e of controlling the dog. Dr. QstTiker appealed
that order to the City CounciI, in which he urged the Council to allow him to walk Azul without a leash
due to his physical disabilities. The outcome of that appeal was memarialized in City Council
Resolution No. 1183,which concluded in Section 7 as follows:
"The City Council hereby af�rtns the decision of the City Manager requiring that Dr. Ostriker
permanently confine Azul to his property and maintain the perimeter fencing on the property in
prope7r working order. The City Council hereby modifies the decision of the City Manager based
on #he evidence received de novo at its hearing o£March 14, 20i6 pursuant to Section b.24.070
relieving Dr. Ostriker of the requirement that Azul be restrained by a leash when being walked
by Dr. Ostriker l�imself, so long as he remains more than 30Q feet from the property line of the
Chaisson home and any other residence that keeps chickens. Except when being walked by Dr.
Ostrtike� himself, Azul must be restrained by a Ieas1� by a person capable of controlling Azul
when off the �striker property. Violations af any of the provisians of this Resolu#ion or �ailure
of confining devices that cause Azul #o escape the confinernent of the Ostriker property shall be
investigated pursuant to the provisions of Section 6.24A90 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Cade."
Section 4. The course af events that led to this proceeding are summarized as follaws, more
detailed descriptions of which can be faund in the City Council staff report dated Novernber 14, 2Q l 6
and the attachments thereto, all of which are hereby incorporated into this Resolution by reference as
though fully set forth:
A. The City received a complaint report on August 4, 2016 from Mr. Norm LaCaze (24
Portuguese Bend Road) alleging that Dr. Ostrilcer's dog Azul (described as "a large, broad chested,
whitish type dog) and two other dogs entered his property on two different occasions and attacked his
chickens, each incident resulted in the death of numerous chickens. Mr. LaCaze elected not to file a
camplaint after the first incident. However, the second of these incidents on August 3, 2416, resulting
in the killing of 40 ju�enile ch�ckens,prompted him to fiie the complaint.
B. On August 19, 2016, Mrs. Geraldean Belleville (l2 Crest Road East) filed a complaint
alleging that Azul ("a long body, medium length legs, blonde colared cacker spaniel type hair dag"}
entered her pro�erty on August 5, 201G where the dog broke down the chicken coop and killed aIl the
chickens within it. Ms. Belleville stated in the report that she witnessed the attack.
Section 5. Pursuant to RHMC Section 6,24.090, fol�owing an investigation conducted by the
Los Angeles County Department of Animal Care and Control, the City Manager canducted an
administrative hearing on Thursday, September 22, 201b at 1:30 p.m. in the Rolling Hills City Council
Charnber to deterrnine if the alleged attacks had occurred and if the conditions irnposed by the City
Council in Resolution No. 1183 had been violated. At the hearing, each involved party made its initial
presentation and brief rebuttals before the hearing was concluded.
Resolution No. 1195 -1-
After reviewing the incident investigation reports from the LA Caunty Department of Animal
Care and Control officers, written docurnents provided by the parties invoived, and the oral testimony
provided at the adminis�rative hearing, th� City Manager determined that the LaCaze and Belleville
complaints were meritorious and that Dr. Ostriker �iolated the conditions of Resolution No. 1183 by
allowing Azu�to roam freely and out of his irnmediate control. In view of RHMC 5ection 6.24A9Q{A),
the City Managex ordered that Azul be removed from the City immediately.
Section 6. Pursuant to Section 6.24.070, Dr. Ostriker appealed the City Manager's order. A
hearing on the appeal was scheduled for and conducted on November 14, 2016. The City Council
recei�ed a written staff report containing numerous attachments, including correspondence from Dr.
Ostriker and a report from the Las Angeles County Department o�Anirnal Care and Control. Testifying
at the hearing were Dr. Jeffrey Ostriker(tlae dog owrier), Matthew Chaisson (previous victim of an Azul
attack}, Carol LaCaze (current carnplainant), Norm LaCaze (current cornplainant), Geraldean Belleville
(c�arrent camplainant), Dianne Wyatt (Azul's groomer), Sue Doyle (Azui's trainer}, Cathleen
Cunningham (Dr. Ostriker's therapist), Melvyn Honig and Jarnes Aichele. The City Council reviewed
and cansidered all af the written and oral evidence subrniited in the matter priar to making its decision.
Section 7. Based on all of the foregoing, the City Cauncil makes the following factual
findings:
A. Azul by all accounts has a history of aggressive behavior towards chickens. The atta.cks
on the LaCaze anc�Belleville chickens are the second, third and fourth confirrned attacks this year. The
photographs presented to the Council verified the deadly attacks.
B. Carol and Norm LaCaze testified persuasively that Azu3 showed extreme belligerence to
their gardener, Armando, who witnessed the attack in progress and threw a rock at Azul in order to cirive
him away when it appeared that the dog was advancing on him. The LaCaze and Belleville witnesses
expressed concern for the safety of their giandchildren,who frequently visit their residences.
C. Dr. Ostriker does not deny that A.zul is responsible for the attacks; in fact, he expressed
remorse for Azui's attacks and offered to reimburse the victims for their losses. In mitigation, Dr.
Ostriker argued that Azul is an emodonal support animal necessary for his emotional weli-being. Dr.
Ostriker presented testimony from Azul's groomer and trainex to the effect that Azul is not aggressi�e
towards people or other dogs and from his therapist who testified as to his emotional conditian. Dr.
Ostriker expressed a willingness to leash Azu1 whene�er off his property.
Section 8. Based on the foregoing factual findings, the City Council draws the following
conclusions from the evidence:
A. Azul attacked and killed the LaCaze and Bellevile chickens.
B. Though there is no evidence that Azul has attacked humans or animals other than
chickens, Az�il showed aggressiveness and beiigerance towards the LaCaze gardener Armando when
discovered in the midst of his killing frenzy.
C. T'he City Counci� finds that if allowed to roam free Azul poses an extre�ne risk o�harm to
chickens and a serious potential harm to humans {especially children)who may be in the ir�mediate area
of an attack. An attack by a dog against another animal is unacceptable in a community without a Ieash
law. The evidence shows without doubt that the attacks occurred and that future aggressive beha�ior is
likely if Azul is free to mam off the Ostriker properry.
D. When walking Azul without a leash, Dr. Ostriker allowed Azul to leave his immediate
control and to roam freely in the neighborhoad, resulting in an attack on the LaCaze chickens. Azul
again was allowed to roam freely when far the second time he attacked the LaCaze chickens, and yet
another time when he attacked the Belleville chickens. Dr. Ostrilcer has violated the conditions imposed
on him by City Council Resalution No. 1183,resulting in the death of innumerable chickens and causing
�ear and alaxm arnong his neighbors.
E. The Council is sympathetic to Dr. Ostriker's feelings for Azul and his asserted n�ed for
an emotional support animal. That said, and hawever beneficial that may be to Dr. Ostrilcer, Azut
presents a real and serious threat to the health of animals, and patentially humans, in the community.
On balance, and given the history of attacks and killings in 2016 alone, the conseqt�ences of a potential
fixture attack outweigh the benefits that Azul provides to Dr. Ostriker. Notwithstanding Dr. Ostriker's
affection for Azul, if necessary Dr. Ostriker can replace Azul with another emotional support animal;
Resolution No. 1195 -2-
the same cannot be said for the effects of potential future attacks - which could include injuries ar
further death-�which cannof be undone.
Section 9. Consequen�ly, and based on the foregoing, the City Council hereby modifies the
decisian of the City Manager requiring that Dr. Ostriker permanently remove Azu2 from the City as
fallows:
A. Azul is ordered confined to the Ostriker properry and shall be kept indoors at a11 tiFnes,
except as provided in paragraph B below.
B. Azul may be ailowed outdoors, provided that he is confined to a fu�ly encl�sed, secure
dag run with a concrete pad.
C. Azul shall not be walked outdoors off the Ostriker property anywhere within the
tcrritorial baundaries of the City of Rolling Hills.
Section 10. The Cxty Council reserves jurisdiction over this appeal for 90 days, during which
time the City Manager is directed to rnonitor Dr. Ostriker's compliance with the conditions imposed
herein. Should Dr. Ostriker not be in comp7iance, th� City Manager shall schedule a hearing before th�
City Council.
Section 11. The remedial pro�isions of this Reso�ution supersede the remedial pro�isions set
forth in Resolution No. I 183.
PASSED,APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 28�'day of November, 2016.
,
Bea Dieringex
Mayar
ATTEST:
Heidi Luce
City Clerk
Resolution No. 1195 -3-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
The foregoing Resolution No. 1195 en�itled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL �F THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
MODIFYING THE DECISION OF THE CITY MANAGER 11V THE APPEAL FILED
BY DR. JEFFREY OSTRIKER AND ORDERING 'IT� CONFINEMENT OF AZUL
TO THE OSTRIKER PROPERTY
was approved and adopted a# a regular meeting of the City Council on November 28, 2016, by the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Black,Mirsch,Pieper and Mayor Dieringer.
NOES: Councilmember Wilsan.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
Heidi Luce
City Clerk
Resolution No. 1195 -4-