Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFCS-16-116 - Dog Designation Appeal - Sorenson Smith REPORT TO: Mayor B. Vrbanovic and Members of Council DATE OF MEETING: August 8, 2016 SUBMITTED BY: Dog Designation Appeal Committee PREPARED BY: Daphne Livingstone, Committee Administrator, 519-741-2200 x7275 WARD(S) INVOLVED: All DATE OF REPORT: July 13, 2016 REPORT NO.: FCS-16-116 SUBJECT: Dangerous Dog Designation Appeal – Sorenson and Smith ______________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION: That the decision of the Dog Designation Appeal Committee regarding an appeal filed by Ms. Jodi Sorenson and Mr. Alonzo Robin Smith, wherein the Committee confirms the Dangerous Dog Designation applied to their dog ‘Titus’ and modifies the conditions for the keeping of said dog, be ratified and confirmed. BACKGROUND: On May 9, 2016, the Kitchener-Waterloo and North Waterloo Humane Society designated ‘Titus’, a dog owned by Ms. Jodi Sorenson and Mr. Alonzo Robin Smith, as a Dangerous Dog. The Designation was applied after determining that on April 30, 2016 their dog attacked a person without provocation in contravention to City of Kitchener By-law 2014-142 (Being a by-law with respect to the designation of Potentially Dangerous, Dangerous, Prohibited and Restricted Dogs). The Office of the City Clerk subsequently received correspondence from Ms. Sorenson and Mr. Smith appealing the Dangerous Dog Designation; and a Notice of Hearing was issued to the Respondent (the Kitchener-Waterloo and North Waterloo Humane Society). REPORT: The Dog Designation Appeal Committee established by the Council of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener pursuant to City of Kitchener Municipal By-law 2014-142 and the Statutory Powers Procedure Act R.S.O. 1990 Chapter S.22 held a hearing on June 27, 2016 to consider an appeal filed with the City by Ms. Jodi Sorenson and Mr. Alonzo Robin Smith regarding the Dangerous Dog Designation applied to their dog, ‘Titus’. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. 2. - 1 The Committee considered the following: testimony of Mr. Randy Arkell, Witness for the Respondent, demonstrating on December 27, 2015 a black and white American Bulldog named ‘Titus’ attacked his dog ‘Emmitt’ while they were walking, causing a puncture wound to his one ear and an abrasion to his other ear; testimony and photographic evidence from Ms. Tara McGee, Witness for the Respondent, regarding an incident on February 21, 2016 at Mount Hope Cemetery where ‘Titus’ jumped and bit her arm while she was walking with her daughter; testimony and photographic evidence from Mr. Martin Laforest, Witness for the Respondent, demonstrating on April 30, 2016, ‘Titus’ attacked his dog on the driveway of the Appellant’s home, causing serious injury to the dog’s neck, shoulder and head; testimony provided on behalf of the Respondent by Officer Courtney Horst, Kitchener-Waterloo and North Waterloo Humane Society, which demonstrates ‘Titus’ has a pattern of aggression and unprovoked attacks in contravention to City of Kitchener By-law 2014-142. testimony and evidence provided by Mr. Alonzo Robin Smith, Appellant and Owner of ‘Titus’, explaining that his granddaughter left the gate open on December 27, 2015; and the other two incidents were as a result of ‘Titus’ protecting Mr. Smith’s daughter and his property. Evidence included a witness statement provided by Mr. Smith’s daughter who was walking ‘Titus’ on February 21, 2016. testimony of Ms. Jodi Sorenson, Appellant and Dog Owner, in support of acknowledging the Designation and willingness to meet the conditions; however, requesting the Designation to be lifted after a period of good behavior. testimony of Mr. Alex Kelly, Witness for the Appellant, in support of rescinding the Dangerous Dog Designation. In addition, the Committee reviewed and considered the provisions of City of Kitchener Municipal By-law 2014-142 and recommends that having considered all of the evidence and exhibits presented regarding the incidents, the Dangerous Dog Designation applied be confirmed to ‘Titus’ with modified conditions. The modifications to the requirements for keeping of the Dangerous Dog include an additional two conditions. The first addition is regarding confinement of the dog by requiring a maintained, secure fenced area and the existing gates to be padlocked from the inside and approved by the animal services provider. The second additional condition requires the dog to be harnessed from the chest to control forward progression, with the harness to be approved and satisfactory to the animal services provider. The Committee hereby recommends that the Dangerous Dog Designation be upheld with the following modified requirements applied for keeping of the dog: 2. - 2 The owner shall: ensure that all conditions pertaining to the dog when it is off the a) property of the owner including any leashing and muzzling requirements are complied with in any City Off- Leash Park unless specified otherwise in this designation; ensure that the animal services provider is provided with the new b) address and telephone number of the owner within two working days of moving the designated dog; provide the animal services provider with the name, address and c) telephone number of the new owner within two working days of selling or giving away the designated dog; advise the animal services provider within two working days of the d) death of the designated dog; advise the animal services provider forthwith if the designated dog e) runs at large or has bitten or attacked any person or animal; provide a copy of this designation to any person who keeps or f) harbours the designated dog; provide a copy of this designation to any veterinarian treating the g) designated dog and within the veterinarian’s premises shall be exempt from the requirements of this designation to the extent necessary to secure veterinary treatment for the dog at the discretion of the veterinarian; ensure that the designated dog has a current City dog licence; h) ensure that the designated dog wears the tag or tags provided by i) the animal services provider at all times and shall pay the reasonable cost for such tag or tags; ensure that the designated dog is kept, when it is on the lands j) and premises of the owner, confined: within the dwelling; i. in an outdoor pen that is both secure and provides humane ii. shelter to the satisfaction of the animal services provider; maintained and secure fence with in an area with a iii. padlocks on the inside of the gates to the satisfaction of the animal services provider; however the animal services provider may refuse to approve any fenced area if, in the sole discretion of the animal services provider, a fenced area would provide insufficient protection to members of the public including unsupervised children who may wander into the area; or when outside of the dwelling and the approved pen or iv. fenced area contemplated by subsections (b) and (c), under the effective control of a person of at least sixteen years of age and under leash, such leash not to exceed 1.8 metres (6 feet) in length and to be approved by the animal services provider, and, where the dog is required to wear a muzzle 2. - 3 off its property by this designation shall also wear a muzzle when confined in accordance with this subsection (d); ensure that the designated dog wears a securely attached muzzle k) harnessthat controls the dog’s movement from the and chest , satisfactory to the animal services provider at all times when it is off the owner’s property and not caged or otherwise penned or confined to the satisfaction of the animal service provider. ensure that the warning sign or signs provided by the animal l) services provider are displayed at the entrance to the owner’s dwelling which a person would normally approach and at any other place on the property as directed by the animal services provider. The sign(s) shall be posted in such a manner that it/they cannot be easily removed by passersby and the sign posted at the entrance which a person would normally approach must be clearly visible to a person approaching the entrance, or, when in a multiple unit dwelling, the owner will provide the name of the property owner and property manager if any and allow the animal services provider to request that person to post a sign or signs; ensure that the designated dog is sterilized and shall provide m) proof satisfactory to the animal services provider that such procedure has been performed within 30 days of this designation becoming a confirmed designation; ensure that the designated dog is microchipped by a licensed n) veterinarian and supply the microchip information to the animal services provider. The owner shall also permit the animal services provider to verify the implantation of such microchip. ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN: The recommendation of this report supports the achievement of the city’s strategic vision through the delivery of core service. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: There are no financial implications associated with this report. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM - All those in attendance at the June 27, 2016 Hearing, were advised of the Committee’s decision and that it would be considered at the August 8, 2016 Special Council meeting. In addition, a Notice of Decision was sent to the Appellant and the Respondents via registered mail on June 29, 2016; thereby, providing notification 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 2. - 4