9/17/1975`0
A special
Mayor pro tempore
the Administration
California.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
MINUTES OF A
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA
September 17, 1975
meeting of the City Council
Rose at 7:30 P.M. Wednesday,
Building, 2 Portuguese Ben
ALSO PRESENT:
ASSEMBLY BILL 446
was called to order by
September 17, 1975 at
Bend Road, Rolling Hills,
Councilmembers Crocker, Le Conte, Pernell
Mayor pro tem Rose
Mayor Heinsheimer
Teena Clifton
William Kinley
June Cunningham
Mrs. P. Breitenstein
Mrs. L. Jensen
Mrs. V. Matthews
Miss G. Nixon
Dr. & Mrs. R. Oas
Mrs. C. Partridge
Mrs. G. Swanson
Mr. & Mrs. K. Watts
1210
City Manager
City Attorney
Secretary
Resident
n
Mayor pro tem Rose reported that he had received a telephone
call from the City of Gardena asking that the Council support AB 446
which is on Governor Brown's desk for action on Friday, September 18,
pertaining to completion of the Artesia Freeway into the Harbor Free-
way, and in particular regarding an off -ramp at Redondo Beach Boulevard.
Councilwoman Le Conte said the South Bay Cities have supported
Gardena in their request as an organization, but because the Rolling
Hills Council is holding a special meeting, no action can be taken by
the Council. However, Councilwoman Le Conte suggested that members of
the Council could support AB 446 individually. Mayor pro tem Rose asked
the Manager to send a telegram to Governor Brown over his name, urging
that the Governor sign the bill.
CONSIDERATIONS OF GRANDFATHER CLAUSE RE: DOG ORDINANCE 1232
Mayor pro tem Rose opened discussion of a proposed "Grandfather
Clause" under consideration as part of the Proposed Animal Control
Ordinance, prepared by Councilman Crocker, and asked that copies be
distributed to residents in. attendance..
Councilman Crocker said that at a special meeting on August 14
a straw vote of the Council indicated that three members were in favor
of placing a limit of three dogs over four months of age permitted in
Rolling Hills. One member of the Council voted against the limitation
and one member was absent. The Council then agreed that a "Grandfather
Cluase" should be developed as an equitable provision for residents- who
had more than three dogs at the time of adoption, and Mayor Heinsheimer
asked Councilman Crocker to draw up a procedure that would cover as
many different situations as possible. The Mayor asked that a copy be
sent to members of the Council, the City Manager and members of the
Citizens' Committee on Dog Control Problems and ask for their comments.
Councilman Crocker said he had received comments from Councilman Pernell
and from Mrs. Louise Zimmerman after she had discussed the proposal with
Mrs. Gordana Swanson.
423
September 17, 1975
Mayor pro tem Rose asked Councilman Crocker to chair the dis-
cussion, and a review of the proposed "Grandfather Clause" followed,
with the following comments made:
PARAGRAPH 1
Councilwoman Le Conte said the document should be limited to
one paragraph if possible; Councilman Crocker said it would not be
possible to cover all exceptions in one paragraph.
Councilman Rose said the procedure should be available to all
residents, new and future residents as well as people who live in the
City when. the ordinance is adopted. Mr. Kinley said future cases would
not come under a "Grandfather Clause", only exceptions to the Limitation
which exist at the time the ordinance is adopted could be brought into
compliance through the grandfather clause. Councilman Crocker said it
was his aim to develop a procedure for special consideration for future
use as well as a grandfather clause for existing cases. Councilwoman
X Le Conte said it was her understanding that the Council was attempting
C to develop a procedure so that residents who had more than three dogs
over four months of age when the Council voted to put a limit on the
e number permitted could apply for permission to keep their dogs.
Councilman Pernell asked the City Attorney to clarify the number
of dogs presently permitted under existing ordinances. Mr. Kinley said
that at present -there is no limit on the number of dogs permitte; the
proposed ordinance would limit the number of dogs per household, and a
provision could be included to permit those who presently own more than
the number specified in the new ordinance to continue to keep them un-
der a grandfather clause.
Councilman Rose asked whether there would be a problem of retro-
active enforcement of the August date. Councilman Crocker said he used
the date of the straw vote of the Council indicating that they wished
to limit the number of dogs per household. He asked the City Attorney
to look into the matter and advise the Council on the matter of estab-
lishing an effective date for the limitation; specifically whether the
effective date could pre -date the date of adoption of the ordinance.
PARAGRAPH 2
Councilman. Pernell said the Application for Special Consider-
ation should include a valid reason. for the request in addition to
other information specified by Councilman Crocker.
Councilman Rose said the age of the pups should be extended
from four months to six months to give breeders an opportunity to
determine which puppies would make better show dogs in deciding which
ones to keep. Councilman Crocker said the basic age, whether four or
six months, should be the same in both the ordinance and the applica=
tion for special consideration.
Mrs. Gordana Swanson asked why 90 days after adoption of the
ordinance would be granted for compliance, and Councilman Crocker
said residents -s-hould be given sufficient time and full opportunity
to comply with requirements of the ordinance.
Councilwoman Le Conte suggested that the word "unlicensed"
should be eliminated, and requirements should apply to all dogs.
PARAGRAPH 3
Councilman Crocker said he would recommend that all applications
'be reviewed by theCouncil on an annual basis, primarily for compliance,
but also for change of conditions, review of complaints, and he suggested
that a specific date be selected and notice given, so residents can appear.
-2-
42.4
September 17, 1975
Councilman Rose said he thought the Council should investigate
complaints, but should not police the matter; authority should be given
to the Manager or her designee to review the matter, with complaints
referred to the Council. Mr, Kinley recommended that the Council adopt
a set of rules for residents who wish to keep more than three dogs on
their premises which rules could be changed from time to time, rather
than try to include all exceptions in a. grandfather clause, since rules _
would be easier to enforce. Councilman Crocker said he thought the
ordinance should. be enforced by the Council so the burden would be on
the applicant to appear before the Council, and make application for an
exception, and so residents who have a complaint and don't wish to be-
come involved with the neighbors could work through the Council. Coun-
cilman. Perne.11 said an annual review would put the Community on notice
and would allow for an orderly progression for enforcing the rules the
Council wishes enforced.
Mrs. Clifton, reported that she had been advised by the Depart-
ment of Animal Control that the City could obtain a current list of
dogs licensed in Rolling Hills by providing a list of streets contain-
ing the names of the residents. The list is being prepared and will
be forwarded to the Department, Mrs. Clifton said.
Mr. Kinley said :if the number of dogs permitted is stated in
the ordinance, and if there is a statement that more than the number
of dogs permitted -could be extended according to rules and regulations
on file in the City the matter would be under control; if there are a
lot of exceptions included in the ordinance, no one would comply.
Councilwoman Le Conte said she thought the rules and exceptions should
be included in the same document.
Mrs, Catherine Partridge said a number of residents have moved
into the city within the past two years with large numbers of dogs,
and residents in. her neighborhood sell dogs, which she considers down-
grading of a residential area. She asked if the Council plans to
prohibit such commercial activity. Councilman Rose said he thought
residents with more than. the number of dogs permitted would be allowed
to sell the excess dogs.
PARAGRAPH 4
Councilman. Crocker said a new application for exception should
be required each year, and residents should be advised of the annual
date of review by the Council. mists of names of residents who have
applied for exceptions should be posted in the window of the City Hall
so residents who wish to object would know who has applied. The Mana-
ger said the names could also be included in a special Newsletter.
Councilman Rose said he thought permission should be extended, if there
are no complaints. Councilman Crocker said he would recommend annual
application; the procedure can be changed by future Councils if they
wish to do so.
PARAGRAPH 5
Councilman Rose said he thought a personal form letter should
be sent to the residents rather than a general newsletter type notice.
Councilman Pernell said the paragraph states that a general newsletter
would be sent to all, residents upon adoption of the ordinance, and a
certified letter would be sent to residents who own more than three
dogs, as indicated by records of the Department of Animal Control.
Councilman Crocker said Paragraph 6 states that application
must be made within 60 days after the effective date of the ordinance,
which is the same as 90 days after adoption (Paragraph 2), as the
ordinance would not become effective until 30 days after adoption.
-3-
September 17, 1975
PARAGRAPH 6
'.Councilman;Crocker said the list of names and addresses of
applicants for special consideration should be posted on the City Hall
as ptiblic.information., but should not appear in the Newsletter.
Mrs. Partridge asked that the' names and addresses of applicants
be included in the Newsletter to give residents an opportunity to state
an objection. Mrs.,Partridge said noise carries across canyons; and
many problems are caused by dogs other than those in the immediate
areas; so residents other than the neighbors should be informed of who
has applied for special consideration and permission to keep more than
three adult -dogs-.. Councilman Pernell said.a-notice of a meeting to
consider such applications would be sent to all residents, and Mrs.
Partridge said notice in the Newsletter, would be adequate.
Councilman Pernell said he didn't -think a person who objected
,N to granting an application should be required to appear at the.meeting;
Xif'they sign a statement of opposition the Council should consider it.
.Councilman Rose said the Council should have a right to question the
< person filing the objection to assure that neighbors won t use it as
tta weapon if they have haddifferences over other matters. The City
=Attorney said the hearings would be administrative, and witnesses
would not be. sworn.
PARAGRAPH 7 (2)
Mr. Ken Watts said he thought the discussions over the past
few months have brought the Council back to the issue of commercialism,
and he asked that the Council take care of that issue. Large numbers
of dogs in the Flying Triangle area cause noise problems that are not
taken care of as easily as barking dogs on a neighbors property, and
Mr. Watts said cages of dogs, numbering as many as eight or ten, con-
stitute a neighborhood nuisance. Further, he said that in attempting
to treat everyone fairly, certain groups of people are favored and
other groups are suffering.
Mr. Rose said it would be difficult to deal with,numbers of
dogs at present, since there is no ordinance which specifies the
number permitted. Further, he said a great deal of time has been
devoted to all aspects of the problem, and it is still the wish of
the Council to :pass the completed ordinance as soon as possible.
Councilman Crocker said the proposed Animal Control Ordinance con-
tains a definition of a dog kennel, which will be prohibited by the
ordinance.
'Councilman Pernell said he wished to discuss a hypothetical.;
case ifi-�whIch ,a resident might have more than three dogs, and received
permission -to keep all the dogs because his neighbors did -not object.
What would happen if property changed hands and the new neighbor ob-
j ected-_',to the number of dogs because of noise or other reasons?
Councilman Crocker said he considers the right of the individual
p`ropert�.owner to full enjoyment of his property superior to the
right of a property owner to maintain more than the permitted number
because -of special- permission, and he would recommend that in such
case the special consideration be revoked.
PARAGRAPH 8
Councilman Crocker said he attempted to be fair to all dog
lovers, and he had provided for two types of special consideration;
.one for the resident who wishes to keep more than three family pets,
and who would be required to identify the dogs by name and breed; the
other for the dog fancier who would be permitted to substitute the
individual dogs without exceeding the total number permitted.
-4-
2
September 17, 1975
Councilwoman Le Conte said she doesn't think the Council should
favor one hobby over another:, and to make all things equal everyone
should be brought into compliance with the ordinance as soon as possible.
Councilman Rose said he thinks dog fanciers should get some consideration.
Councilman Pernell said that in order to be practical the Council would
have to eliminate puppies under four.months of .age from any numerical
limit, and apply the limit .to adult dogs only. Councilwoman Le Cont:
said she Is concerned -about special consideration to certain people
which could make the ordinance unenforcab-l:e, and she thinks the grand-
father clause should apply to persons who had more than three dogs on
Au pst 14., and should apply to. all... Councilman Rose sa�.d.he wished to
-�V. come e-onsider-otic to d:og fangiere.,, and Councilwoman Le Conte said
ii 4og farzt-io r wWMI ,be. pex"i"&d to his mare 4b thr dam,
it eu.1d be wyritjten into the zrditf ep... The City At ag ed,
Mayor pro tem Rose said he wished to call for a straw vote on
certainissues, and he asked members of rhe.Council.whether they would
be in favor of flexibility,to consider special consideration to residents not
in compliance.All Council members agreed.
Councilman Pernell suggested that residents could be required
to register the number of dogs in a litter with the City, to put the
Council on notice that a potential violation of the ordinance could
exist in four months.. Councilwoman Le Conte agreed with the recommend-
ationbCouncilman,Crocker said the absolute limit,- whatever the numbers
should apply to puppies as well as adult dogs.
Mayor pro tem Rose asked for straw votes on the following;
a) A resident who .has three adult .dogs .,in...compliance-with -the
ordinance could have puppies under four months of age in his home as
long as he is not engaged in commercial activity: All members agreed.
b) A dog fancier would be required to advise the City of the
number of puppies born in a litter. All members agreed:
c) Puppies born to either a resident or dog fancier would have
to be disposed of within 120 days to bring the nutter into compliance
with the ordinance, and the Owner would be required to notify the
City of compliance. Gouncilwoman Le Conte did not agree, all others agreed.
d) A dog fancier would be permitted to substitute dogs, but
could not exceed the number permitted in the Special Consideration
granted by the Council, All members agreed.
Councilman Pernell said whether the resident or dog fancier
sells,"the puppies as a commercial activity is a matter to be controlled
by the basic ordifiafice, not the "Grandfather Clause" Councilman Rose
said the matter should be settled while discussing the Grandfather
Clause. Councilman Pernell'•appealed:from the decision of the Chair on
the matter, and asked that members of the Council be polled on vihether
to consider the matter as part of the basic ordinance or the Grand-
father Clause.
A vote in favor Of "sustaining the chair was opposed by Count ll.
members Crocker, Le Conte and Pernell,, and the ruling of the chair 'was
overruled.
A straw vote on substitution of adult dogs by .dog. fa.atiers,
keeping the number constant., was recorded as. follawsa _
AYIE St Councilmembers Crooker, Pernell, hese
Nog.
Couno•i:lwoma-n Le Conte
mayor, pro�t5m Raae recessed the meeting
meeting was reconvehe-':e:.t_ -10 30 `.0 :M i.
w '- X9".6- ,. k '.]:-�_ti:�;�j'•
k.
at 10-.25 P- W ; ,the
September 17, 1975
PARAGRAPH 9
Councilwoman Le Conte said all residents should -.be in compli
ance by a specified date, and it would not be fair to let residents -
who have been given permission to exceed the permitted number in.order�
to keep more than three pets change their category to dog fancier in
order to prolong the exception. Councilman Pernell said the family
pet would come under the true "Grandfather Clause" and would be governed
by a natural life.span\rather,than by a definite time limit..
Councilman Pernell asked whether a resident could apply for
special consideration under both categories. Councilman Crocker said
the resident who wished to keep more than the number of dogs permitted
by ordinance would have to declare his category, whether he had'more
than three family pets when the ordinance was adopted and wishes per-
mission to keep them, or whether he is a dog.fancier and wishes to have
more than, the number of dogs permitted, with additional permission to
,q substitute the dogs, as long as the number of dogs does not change,
00 and having stated which category he is in, a resident would not be
permitted to change.
d
Mrs. Gordana Swanson said she wished to state that permission
for dog fanciers to exceed the number permitted by ordinance, with the
additional privilege of substituting the dogs in order to constantly
improve the breed, negates the goals she and Mrs. Zimmerman worked for.
Councilman Rose asked the Council members.to state the time .
limit they thought should be specified for compliance by all residents,
and the time stated were: Councilmen Crocker and Pernell, 5 years;
Councilwoman Le Conte, 6 years and Councilman.Rose, 7 years.
ADJOURNMENT 845
Mayor pro tem Rose adjourned the Special Meeting, and announced
that there would be another Special Meeting of the Council on Tuesday,
October 7, 1975 at 7:30 P.M. to continue discussionof the Proposed
Animal Control Ordinance and the proposal for Grandfather Clause and
Special Consideration in connection with the ordinance. The meeting
was adjourned at 11:10 P.M.
APPROVED:
Mayor
-6-
City Clerk
rrrllet...aaa� �