HomeMy WebLinkAboutCRPS-05-174 - Feasibility of Relocating the Dog Designation Appeal Committee Meetings
~
Report To:
Date of Meeting:
Submitted By:
Prepared By:
Ward(s) Involved:
Date of Report:
Report No.:
Subject:
Members of the Dog Designation Appeal Committee
January 23, 2006
Colin Goodeve, Committee Administrator
Colin Goodeve, Committee Administrator - ext. 2278
All
December 19, 2005
CRPS-05-174
FEASIBILITY OF RELOCATING THE DOG DESIGNATION
APPEAL COMMITTEE MEETINGS
RECOMMENDATION:
That no action be taken at this time to relocate the Dog Designation Appeal Committee
meetings to the Kitchener Memorial Auditorium Complex (the Aud).
BACKGROUND:
At the request of Councillor J. Smola and Ms. A. Lawrence, an investigation was undertaken to
examine the feasibility of relocating the Dog Designation Appeal Committee meetings to the
Kitchener Memorial Auditorium Complex (the Aud). Initially it was proposed that meetings be
relocated to the Kitchener-Waterloo and North Waterloo Humane Society; however, it was
determined that due to the Humane Society staffs' enforcement of the City's Animal Control By-
laws it would be inappropriate to use their facilities as the hearing location.
REPORT:
Pros of Relocation:
The Aud offers the potential for Committee members to undertake a more succinct and detailed
hands on examination of the physical characteristics and temperament of the dog in question,
which in turn could provide for a more accurate breed determination. In comparison, other
members of quasi-judicial Committees, such as Property Standards and Committee of
Adjustment, benefit from being required to perform site inspections by gaining hands on
knowledge prior to making their determinations.
Cons of Relocation:
Relocating the Dog Designation Appeal Committee meetings to the Aud would be in
contravention to Council Policy 1-330 (Animals in City Facilities). Policy 1-330 asserts that to
ensure staff and public safety within City facilities and compliance of facility use with legislative
requirements with respect to animals; no person shall bring an animal other than a service or
working animal into any facility owned or operated by the City of Kitchener.
At present staff in the Legal Services Division are on call to answer inquiries that Committee
members may have during a meeting. Relocation would require this person to attend every
meeting to provide their services, as needed. This would represent an undue burden for that
Division and could be viewed as an inefficient use of staff resources.
Meeting dates and room bookings are scheduled a year in advance due to the legislative
requirement to hold a meeting within 30 business days of receiving an appeal. It is common
practice for these meetings to be cancelled, on short notice, if no appeals are received. The
current Committee location (the Schmalz room) is typically used by staff, who are more likely to
use a room on short notice, as compared to outside groups. Further, at times extra meetings
need to be scheduled at the last minute and logistically speaking, it is easier to accommodate
this change when dealing with staff at the same location. Conversely, the Aud may not be
capable of accommodating last minute room bookings and as a result, a meeting may need to
be held at a facility that is incapable of accommodating dogs, which raises the possibility of
inequitable services being provided to appellants.
In addition, most people who come before the Committee do so during their work hours and
asking them to take additional time and effort to have their dogs attend a hearing might be seen
as an undue hardship.
A majority of designated dogs are also young and may have a tendency to be high-strung,
which would prevent the members from conducting a thorough examination. Additionally, a new
high stress environment could have a negative impact on a dog, allowing them to be spooked
more easily and making them more prone to attack a person or each other. Consequently,
questions arise regarding the City's liability if a dog does attack someone, given that the
Committee sanctioned the dog's presence in a City facility in contravention to Policy 1-330.
Moreover, it has been proposed that the dog(s) would be crated at one end of the hearing room
during a meeting; this could result in a considerable amount of noise, which would seriously
disrupt the proceedings. Alternatively, dogs could be placed in a separate room and only
brought before the Committee at the time of their examination; however, the dog's owner would
need to be in attendance for the entire hearing. As such, the City would need to provide staff to
supervise the dogs, which would represent a considerable additional cost.
Additionally, the Region of Waterloo Public Health Department may have concerns with the
proposed relocation particularly in the areas relating to: the cleaning of crates; the possibility of
people entering the Aud who are allergic to dogs; and, the meeting room being located in close
proximity to food services areas. Humane Society staff advised that to clean their crates they
have a large vat of bleach, which they dip the plastic bottoms of their crates into; City staff may
not be able to accommodate a similar practice at the Aud. Further, questions arise regarding
who will be responsible for cleaning up after the dogs and if it is to be the owners, can the City
ensure that the area is cleaned sufficiently to prevent any possible health risks.
Several other logistical difficulties arise when considering relocation to the Aud, being:
· transportation of staff and A.V. equipment;
· the number of crates that will be needed to hold the dogs;
· storage of the crates and supplies;
· the size of crates needed; and,
· the amount and type of cleaning supplies required.
Given the reasons outlined above, staff is recommending that no action be taken at this time to
relocate the Dog Designation Appeal Committee meetings to the Kitchener Memorial Auditorium
Complex. Rather, staff suggests that Humane Society Officers employ detailed evaluation
techniques and provide videos of the dogs in question to allow the Committee members to
make more succinct breed determinations.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The cost of 3 crates would be $276. after taxes. Additionally, there are several soft costs, which
need to be considered in relation to relocation; such as, the allocation of additional staff,
cleaning supplies, transportation and the use of a room at the Aud that would normally generate
revenue for the City.
Colin Goodeve
Committee Administrator