HomeMy WebLinkAboutFCS-13-164 - Dog Designation Appeal Committee - McNeice & Guy�t
Staff Report
Finance and Corporate Services Department
REPORT TO:
DATE OF MEETING:
SUBMITTED BY:
PREPARED BY:
WARD(S) INVOLVED:
DATE OF REPORT:
REPORT NO.:
SUBJECT:
RECOMMENDATION:
Mayor C. Zehr and Members of Council
October 28, 2013
Dog Designation Appeal Committee
Daphne Livingstone, Committee Administrator
519- 741 -2200 X7275
All
September 30, 2013
FCS -13 -164
DOG DESIGNATION APPEAL COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDATION — MCNEICE & GUY
www1 tchener ra
That the decision of the Dog Designation Appeal Committee regarding an appeal filed by
Niclin McNeice and Michael Guy, wherein the Committee modifies the Dangerous Dog
Designation applied to their dog `Luger' by the Kitchener - Waterloo and North Waterloo
Humane Society and assigns conditions for the keeping of said dog, be ratified and
confirmed.
BACKGROUND:
On July 3, 2013, the Kitchener - Waterloo and North Waterloo Humane Society designated
`Luger', a dog owned by Ms. Niclin McNeice and Mr. Michael Guy, as a Dangerous Dog. This
was done after determining that on June 19, 2013, `Luger' attacked another dog without
provocation in contravention to Chapter 530(Dogs) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code. The
Office of the City Clerk subsequently received correspondence from Ms. McNeice appealing the
Dangerous Dog Designation; and accordingly, a Notice of Hearing was issued to the Appellants
(Ms. McNeice and Mr. Guy) and the Respondent (the Kitchener - Waterloo and North Waterloo
Humane Society).
REPORT:
On September 16, 2013, the Dog Designation Appeal Committee considered the evidence and
exhibits introduced regarding the June 19, 2013 incident from the respondent; and, finding that
having reviewed the evidence and exhibits introduced by the appellant, outlining the measures
Ms. McNeice and Mr. Guy have undertaken to prevent any future incidents involving their dog
"Luger "; the Committee hereby substitutes the Dangerous Dog Designation applied to "Luger"
and assigns to "Luger" a designation of Potentially Dangerous Dog; and, pursuant to Chapter
530.11.2(c) assigns the following conditions for the keeping of said Potentially Dangerous Dog:
That the owner shall:
a) have the Potentially Dangerous Dog assessed by a certified behaviourist to
determine behaviours to be modified. Once the assessment is complete, the
Owner and Dog must work with the behaviourist until such time as the
behaviourist is satisfied that the Potentially Dangerous Dog will interact with
4. -1
other dogs without aggression. Upon completion of the work, the behaviourist
must submit a written report to the Poundkeeper advising of the results;
b) submit a satisfactory report from the behaviourist to the Poundkeeper; and
upon receipt, subject to the absence of any further aggressive behaviour, the
Potentially Dangerous Dog Designation is rescinded.
c) provide the Poundkeeper with the new address and telephone number of the
owner within two (2) working days of moving the Potentially Dangerous Dog.
d) provide the Poundkeeper with the name, address and telephone number of the
new owner within two (2) working days of selling or giving away the Potentially
Dangerous Dog.
e) advise the Poundkeeper forthwith if the Potentially Dangerous Dog is running at
large or has bitten or attacked any person or animal.
Pursuant to Chapter 530.11.5 of Kitchener's Municipal Code, all decisions of the Dog
Designation Appeal Committee must be ratified by Council before taking effect; and, Council
may affirm, rescind, add to, vary, or substitute the designation and any of the restrictions
imposed upon the keeping of the subject dog as set out in the Committee's decision.
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
Enforcing the provisions of Municipal Code Chapter 530 (Dogs) aligns with the Strategic Plan by
ensuring that the City is a safe place to live for all residents, while providing a fair and equitable
process for dog owners to seek redress of designations applied to their dogs.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no financial implications associated with this report.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
All those in attendance at the September 16, 2013 Hearing, were advised that the Committee's
decision would be considered at the October 28, 2013 Council meeting. In addition, a Notice of
Decision was served on the Appellant and the Respondent via registered mail on September
27, 2013; thereby, further notifying both parties of when the Committee's decision would be
considered by Council and the process for registering as a delegation.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Dan Chapman, DCAO, Finance & Corporate Services
4. -2