The URL can be used to link to this page

87-1191 WHITE - UT! CLERK , PINK � FI ♦NCE ��M�� - o TMENT CITY OF SAINT PAITL Council Q BLV E � .- M�ti�� File (�0. O 7—��9 1 rd . indnce Ordinance �10. � Presented By � Ref red To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date An ordinance amending Chapters 199 and 200 of the Saint Paul Leqislative Code pertaininq to doqs and other animals and to rabies control. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. That Section 199.01 of the Saint Paul Leqislative Code is amended by addinq the following definitions: (5) Health officer. Health officer shall mean the public health services manager of the city of Saint Paul or desiqnee. (6) Ar►isal control supervisor. Animal control supervisor shall mean the animal control supervisor of the city of Saint Paul or desiqnee. (7) Owner. Owner shall mean the license holder or any other person or persons, firm, association, or corporation owning, keeping, or harboring an anicaal. Any person - ; keepinq or harborinq an animal for five consecutive days shall, for the purposes of this chapter be deemed to be an owner thereof. Section 2. That Section 199.11 of the Saint Paul Leqislative Code is amended to read as follows: � — 199.11. Bitinq; quarantine. tihen any person has been bitten by a doq or cat, the owner oz custodian of the doq or cat, havinq been so notified, shall immediately quarantine the doq or cat at owner's home or other suitable place of confinement within the city or such other place as directed by the health officer ef-�he-ef�y-ef Sa#n�-Pan�. If a doq or cat which has bitten is runninq,at larqe and has been apprehended by the animal control supervisort and if, upon anorehension, the doq or cat bears no identification which reasonably reveals its ownership, the animal control supervisor aay i�qpound the doq or cat until the quarantine period is completed. If the doq or cat has not been clai�sed after five days, the health officer COUNCILMEIV Requested by Department of: Yeas Nays Drew Nicosia [n Favor — Rettman Scheibel Against BY Sonnen Tedesco Wilson i Form Approved by City Attorney Adopted by Council: Date Certified Passed by Council Secretary BY By Approved by Mayor: Date Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By BY . - - , � � � , , 9-��gl � (,��7-/1 f I -2- 1�.�� y either immediately destroy the dog or cat and submit •the carcass for rabies examination or keep the dog or cat impounded for the full quarantine period. The period of quarantine shall commence immediately after a person has been bitten and such period shall last for ten consecutive days thereafter . If on or before the tenth day the dog or cat shows clinical signs suggestive of rabies, the dog or cat may be killed for rabies examination. W��d-an�tina��-a��e-elef4aeel-as-x+ean#ng-erea�a�es;-ne� Mag►aa;-w��-bY-aa�t��e: If any of the followina N��d animals: skunk, raccoon, fox, coyote, bobcat or bat, bites a human, a dog, a cat or any livestock, that w�� animal shall be killed immediately and the carcass submitted for rabies examination. When other r+#�e1 animal species are involved in a biting incident with a human or any other animal, the health officer shall determine whether the animal, based on the prevalence of rabies in the region, is a rabies suspect. Animals deemed to be a rabies suspect shall be killed immediately and the carcass submitted for rabies examination. Animal species including livestock, rodents (squirrels, hamsters, guinea pigs, aerbils, chipmunks, rats and mice ) and lagomorphs trabbits and hares ) may be considered rabies suspects on an individual basis . If at the end of the ten-day quarantine period the dog or cat appears to be normal, the quarantine will be terminated. Durinq the quarantine period the dog or cat shall be securely confined in a building or in a yard enclosed by a fence so constructed that the dog or cat cannot get through or over and which will not permit other animals or persons to enter and will prevent the dog or cat from coming in contact with other animals oz persons other than the custodian. Upon request the animal owner or custodian shall make the dog or cat available to the animal wa�dex control sunervisor for inspection at any reasonable time during the quarantine . The dog or cat shall not be killed unless it cannot be safely secured. If the dog or cat is killed, dies, becomes sick or escapes within the quarantine period, the owner, custodian, or agent thereof must notify the l�ea��l�-eff#ee� animal control sugervisor of the city of Saint Paul immediately. When it is necessary to quarantine a dog or cat under this chapter, the cost and expense of such quarantine shall be borne by the owner or agent of the owner of the dog or cat. Section 3 . That Chapter 200 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code is amended by changing the title to read as follows : Chapter 200. Be�s �r�imals . Section 4 . That Section 200 .01 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code is amended to read as follows: 200.01. DEFINITIONS . As used in this chapter, unless the context otherwise indicates : • • . . ' ' � � ' � . -3- �;�,/�� iyyy'� "Animal" shall mean any individual member of any of the species of birds, fish,, am�hibians� re�tiles, inseGtsj arachnids �rustaceans or� mammals except homo sapiens . "Animal control supervisor" shall me�n the anim�l control su�ervisor of the city of Saint paul or desianee. "Dog" aad-�eaA�nen shall be-}a�eade�-�e mean be�b a� male ana g�, female and-eha��-tae�nde of any �reed an3�n►a� of domest icated �he dog l�fn�. "Health officer" shall me�n the Qublic �.ealth services manager of the city of Saint Paul or desiqnee . "Owner" shall be-#r��eae�e�-�e mean t�e license holder or any other person or persons, firm, association, or corporation owninq, keeping, or harboring a-deg an animal . Any person ewn�ng keepinq or harboring a-�eq �n animal for �i��ee five consecutive days shall, for the purposes of this chapter be deemed to be �ae an owner thereof. "Running at larqe" shall mean any ani�l which is not either �, gffectively contained within a fenced area on orivate proger�y, or � effectivelv restrained� by chain or leash, to private__ Q,�o_p�,rty with the consent of the property owner, or � �ffectivel,y restrained by a chain or leash not exceedina six feet in lenath. Section 5. That Section 200 .04 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code is amended to read as follows: 200.04. 11PQLICATION. Application for such license shall be made to the license inspector . Said application shall require the owner, among other information required by the inspector, to supply the name, age, breed, sex, color and markings, and rabies vaccination shots, if any, of each dog sought to be licensed. In additior�., when the owner has bee,� convicted of a violation of 2U0.12 Subd.l, relative to the dog sought to be licensed, the aaolication shall zequire proof of Qublic liability insurance in the mir�imum amount of 5300.000. Section 6 . That Section 200.06 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code is amended to read as follows: 200.06. RUNNING AT LARGE. The b#ee�se-i�e�de�; owner e�-l�eepe� of any eantne �og shall be responsible for the effective restraint of said ean#ae �g and shall not permit the eanfne �g to run at large. �inY-ean�ne-Nh�eh-#a-ne�-effeet�ve�r een�a#ned-w#�h�n-a-ferieed-a�ea;-er-anY-eer��r►e-Wh�eh-#3-er�-any nr►feneed-area-er-�et-abn��4ng-a-��ee�;-a��eY;-pnb��e-parlt; , ti� �' .�' %� � �/ //// . , �i� _ G . . ' � �y(� � -�4- pe��#e-p�aee-e�-epeR-aav-ethe�-p�#va�e-�aRd-N#�hen�-beiaa-effee�ive�r-res��a#fled-ftern mev�r►g-beYead-sxeh-r�r�feneed-a�ea-e�-�e�;-e�-aav-ea��Ae-ea-artr-9��ee�;-pdb��e-pa�l�; sehee�-g�eends-er-pnb�3e-p�aee-w��hen�-be�na-effee��ve�y-res��a}sed-by-ehain-e�-�eash ne�-exeeea�ag-s�x-fee�-�n-�ene�h;-sha��-be-dee�ned-�e-be-rann�ng-a�-�arae: Violation of this section shall be pe��shed-br-a-��ne-Ae�-�e-exeeed-5�89:--�,ay-pe�se�-whe-4s ga�}�y_ef-a-st�bseqeert�-v�e�a��er�-ef-�h#s-see��en-�3�l��n-a-pe��ad-ef-ene-yea�-ef ane�l�e�-v�e�a��et►-ef-�h�s-see��en-s�►a��-be-pr�fl�shed-by-a-fine-ef-a�-}eas�-S59-bd�-ne� me�e-�haa-S�AA a misdemeanor. Section 7. . That Section 200.12 of the Saint Paul Levislative Code is amended to read as follows:' 200.12. DANGEROUS BA6S AN�MALS. 3ubdivision 1. ATTACK BY AN ANIMAL. It shall be unlawful for an_owner__to fail to_ restrain. an_animal__from_inflictina_or_ attemptinq to inflict bodi�iniury_ to anv__person. or_other_animal_ whether_or_ not__ the owner is�Lesent. Violation of_this_section_ shall be_a misdemeanoz__punishable � a fine not to exceed S700 or, im�risonment for_not__to exeeed_9_0._da�+s, _.or_both,_._ This section shall not apply._to__an_attack by___a_doa_.under _the__contzol .of_,an_on__duty_. law enforcement officer or to an attaek__upo.n an_uninv_ited_in_tLUder_who__has_ entered the owner's home with criminal intent. ---__.—_----- - -- - -. . _ The Court unon a findin�of the defendant!s auilt_hereunderl_is_authoxized to _ order, as �art of the di_SQostion of_the_case� that the_animal_be destroYed based on a written order containin�one._or_more of the _following__findings. of__fact_ � t�i . ni _.�.s danaerou�_as_demonstrated__by_a_yicious attack,_an u�toyoked._ attack, an attack without warninql__ or multiple__�.ttacks� or �_ the owner of_ the animal__has._demonstrated. an_inability_or unwillinqness_to_ control the animal in order to preyent �ur�+ to pers ns g��her ar�ima�,.. If the Court does not order_the_destruct.ion...of_the__dog,__the Court__shall,�as_an_ alternative. order the defendant_t.o grovide, and show groof to the Court ofl_ nublic liability insurance_ in the minimum amount of 5300�000�.. Subdivision 2. DFSTRUCTION OF DANGFROU3 BA6B#-BEF�N��P�AN �,$. The health officer shall have the authority to order the destruction of dangerous deqs animals. � DEFINITION. A dangerous dee animal is a-ean3ae an animal which has: {}� b��en-�we-e�-tne�e-petsens;-er (�a) caused se=ious bodily in7ury or disfiqurement to any person, or (3b) engaged in any attack on any oerson under circumstances which would indicate danaer to personal safety,__or � exhibited nnu_sually_aggressiye_behayioi�_such as_ an_att_ack on_another_.__ animal. or � b t en_one or more�ersons on two or more_occaisons. Slib�3Vt8�8R-�.- � PROCEDURE. The health officer er-h}s-de�#enee, after '-�. , • • �� 7`��j� -5- having been advised ot the existence ot a danqerous �eer animal, may proceed in the tollowing manner : (�a ) '1'he health otticer shall cause �l�e-appa�en� one owner ot the animal to be notitied in writinct or in person that l��s-ekeg the__animal appears to be � dangerous . �l�e-ael�a�en� `l'his. owner shall be notitied as to dates,times, places, and parties bitten, and shall be given ten aays to request a hearing before the health ofticer tor determination as to the dangerous nature ot the elea animal . (ai ) If �l�e-appa�en� no owner �aes-ne�-�eqt�es� re�uests a hearinq within ten days ot said notice, the health oificer shall make such order as he deems proper . '1'he health otticer may order the animai control supervisor to take the elee� animal into custody tor destruction . lt the deet anima.l is ordered into custody tor destruction, the owner shall immediately make the �eq animal available to the animal control supervisor, and tailure to do so shall be a misdemeanor . (bii ) If �l�e an owner reguests a hearinq tor determination as to the danQerous nature ot the �ee� animal, the hearinq shall be held betore the health otticer, who shall set a aate tor � hearinq not more tnan three weexs after demand tor said hearinq. '1'he records of Che division ot public health shall be admissible for consicleration bv the health otticer without turther foundation . Atter considerinq all evidence pertaining to the temperament ot the �ea animal, the health otticer shall make such order as he deems orooer . '1'he nealth otticer may order the animal control suoervisor to take the geet animal into custodv tor de�truction . lt the �eg animal is oraerea into custody tor destruction, the owner shall immediately make the �eet animal available to trie animal control - _ ___ supervisor and tailure to do so shall be a misdemeanor . ( ib 1 �t-a-dar�e�e�et�9-eleet-3s-�t�fln�net-a�-fa�e�e;-�l�e-e�ea �ra�eler�-sl�aff-a��el�eAd-�l�e-�ea;-afld-�l�;-t�eefl a��eher�s�e�;-�i�e-dea-bea�s-ne-��e��t}e��e�-wl��ei� �easer►a�f�+-�etieaf9-3�s-e�rr�e�9t��;-�l�e-l�eat�l�-ett�ee� sl�a��-�m�e�nd-�i�e-elea--t��tf-��ie-et�a�an��Re-pe��eel-�s ee�t��e�ed .---�f-�l�e-elee-l�a�-�fe�-�eet�-efa��teel;-��-sl�a�f be-�m�+e��a�ef�+-eles��e�ree� .- Nothing_.in__.this_ seetion__ shall �reyent the health___ot_t_icer_ trom oraerinq__the_ immediate destr_u_ction _ot ,a__rabieS _�usoect. _animal___ �ursuant to Section�UU_.11 _ot__the__5aint Yaul_ Leqislatiye �ode . ( 3c ) Any person who harbors a-de� an_ animal_ atter it has been tound by the health otticer to be danQerous and ordered into custodv for destruction shall be quilty of a misdemeanor . ( 4d1 `Phe health otficer mav apply to tC►e municioal court ot Etamsey county tor subpoenas tor hearinas under subparagraph ( fa ) li�il ► above . WMITE - CITY CLERK PINK -. ;�F.114�NCE GITY OF SAINT PAUL Council CANAq.Y - DEPARTMENT 7 BLUE. �- MAVOR File �O. • -//�/ • Ordin�nce Ordinance 1��. l �� ` Presented By Referred Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date -6- Subdivision 3. 3TOPPING 1�iN ATTACK. If anv police officer or animal control officer is witness to an attack by an animal u�on a person or another animal, the officer may take whatever means the officer deems appropriate to bring the attack to an end and erevent further iniury to the victim. Section 8 . That Section 200.14 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code is amended to read as follows : 200.14. DOGS; DI3TURBING THE PEACS; I3NFORCBMBNT. It shall be unlawful for any person to own, keep, have in possession, or harbor �ny ean�r►e �q which howls, yelps, or barks to the reasonable annoyance of another person or persons . Any person violating this section, who upon first requested by a peace officer;-t�ea��a-aff�eer or any-da�y-aa�he�tzea-a��a*a�an� hea��h-effiee� the animal control supervisor, to stop or prevent the annoyance, and refuses to comply with the request will be issued a citation or arrested in accordance with Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure, and, if the officer deems it necessary to stop the annoyance, may have the ean4ne dog taken to the city animal pound. Any ean�ne �og placed in the pound may be reclaimed by the owner upon payment of the fee prescribed Section 200.08, and if not reclaimed may be disposed of in the manner provided in Section 200.13. Section 9 . This ordinance shall take effect and be in force 30 days after its passage, approval, and publication. COUNCILMEN Requested by Department of: Yeas Nays Drew � Community Services Nicosia -� In Favor — Rettman Scheibel � Against BY Sqppocti `�°d,ac�°_l��19�$. i�iM.w Adopted by Councii: Date SEP 2 � �ggl Form Approved by City Attorney Certified Pa �ouncil S t BY By " Appro by Mayor: Dat JC� Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council B BY PUBl.ISHED '� �� ' <� . 198I � y � . ��i�4i 1�T° 09211 Communit Services p��RtMENT /7t(�'3 _ Alice Bi»ani CONTACT 29?-7717 PHO�IE July 15, 1987 DAT� �er�i� ' ", e � ASSIGN NUI►BER FOR ROUTING ORflE� (Clip All Loc�tions for Sianature) : _ 1 Department Director 3 Director of Management/Mayor Finance and Management Se�^vices Director � 4 City Clerk Budget Director � City Attorney 5 City Council . WHAT_ WILL BE ACHIEVED BY TAKII�G ACTION QN TNE ATTACNED MATERIALS? (Purpose/ t�on 1 The current ublic concern over att�cks by vicious dogs, especia�y pit�u'l].s.�,.mandates a response from �he city: This requires better tools for dealin with vicious an��als of any species or b=eed. The roposed ordin nce will allow the city �o ta s owners� whose animals have bitten. The effec� hopefully wi�l be to motivate owners to be�ter control their animals. The roposed ordinance exgands chap�ez 200 to covei the problems of attacks by animals other �han doqs. � The proposed ordinance als�o contain� improved definitions and cleans up some of the inaccuracies and inconsisteqces of la�quaqe which have accumulated in an ordinance which has been frequently amended.� . COST/BENEFIT, BUDGETARY AND PERSONNEL IiMPACTS ANTICIPATED: Because of these chanqes, we ex ec� to experience an .increase in enforcement costs. There will be increased cost's to �he ,'Violation Bureau and the court sys tem: However, there will also be increased revenue from t�he fines. Hopefully these should balance out. Unless � there is an increase in funds for adc�itional personnel, the increased time for issuinq tags and appearin in :court may result in a decrease of total animal control o€ficer field titae. In liqht of �he problem with vicious animals, this seen�s like an acceptable t;ade-off. FINANCING SOURCE AND BUDGET ACTIYITY NUI�ER CHARGED OR CREDITED: (Mayor's signa- ' ture not re- Total Amount of "Transaction; qui.red- if under � �10,00Q) Funding Source: Activity Number: . , _ : ATTACHMENTS (List and Number All Atta�hments) : ' 1. Proposed ordinance 2. Su�aary and implementation plan ; . . ; . DEPARTMENT REVIEW Ordinance ; CIT�f ATTORNEY REVIEW Yes No Cnuncil R��i��onX�equired? � Resolution Required? Yes o Yes xNo Insurance Required? Insurance Sufficient? Yes No��. Yes No Insurance Att�ched: (SEE •REVERS� SIDE FOR INSTRUCTIONSj Revised 12/84 . . , , � WMITE - CITV CLERK t ` DINK - FINANCE G I TY O F SA I NT PA U L Council / � �ANARY -OEVARTMENT F11C O ��//" �i BLUE - MAVOR � Ordi �f,`CG Ordina e , Presented By � � ! � � Refer d To �,,�ommittee: Date Out of Committee By Date An ordinan amendingf � apters 199 and 200 of the int Pau�� egislative Code pertaining to do ` and other animals and o r ies control . THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAI PAUL DOES ORDAIN : Se tion l. That Section 199 . 01 of the lint ul Legislative Code is amended by addinq �he followinq defin' � ions : �` (5) Health officer . H alth offic shall mean the public health services manager �of the city Saint Paul or designee . (6) Animal control ,upervisor . Ani 1 control supervisor shall mean the anima control supervis r of the city of Saint Paul or designee . Section 2 . That Section 199 . 1 ,� of the Saint Paul Legislative Code is amended to read as follows : 199 .11. Biting; tiarantine . When any person has been itten by a dog or cat, r'he owner or custodian of the dog or ca having been � so notified ,' shall immediately quarantine the dog or at at owner 's ho or other suitable place of confinement wi hin the city or suc, other place as directed by the health offi r ef �l�e-e��y-e -Sa}a�-Pan� . If a do which has bitten is run in at lar e and as been a rehended b the anim 1 contro su er isor and if u�on a�orehensionR the dog bears no identification �rhich reasonabl� reveals its ownership., the animal control supervisor ma im o nd the d nt' u antine eriod is com leted. If the doy as not been claimed after five days, the health officer COUNCILMEN Requested by Department of: Yeas Nays Drew Nicosia ln Favor — Rettman s�ne�bei Against BY Sonnen Tedesco Wilson Form Approved by City Attorney Adopted by Council: Date Certified Passed by Council Secretary BY By Approved by Mayor: Date Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By BY a�c- .. , ; ....�r '-r "'`a-� �;`,:" 2'x."'�"'; �' .r�'lR,: `t t.' F'6p '�`-*r.�%' r'��:: ♦.�'. � '� -r 5��`5"+-,. 5 M ��41 TS�/ �iEHIC "t,-.t .ri -� "' � .�� {:. F�'a ,+..�, A�r. �.".�#' - t+-,�''' �,�., r { ��.F I N�Ff tI�E (' _ .�,� .. � � r;�'+�.�.dtt , �.NAWV .��06PART1.{�AI'1' . a �ncl,� .� "5"�',e�: �w�. ��..�oR �� F�I�: ��'`; :�� '��►►�� F..ile ;�O d F� , . �#► � ��, �� , � -��_.. �'�'1 �� Qrdina e 1'� �, �. � , �.,� sµ t E��L � + +�, � k r � 1 �*3c..' � .',. � F : � , ; - ' + • . . �,. � - B ' ,.. , r p��tea y _ .. ._ . , ,�. f � n < .. , , �" � ,� � Refer d To �� . j ' mmittee: Date � - � ' � : _ �. , �� : • , ` ' � Out df�Committee By _ - Date a- . n . ,- _ . �n �sd ,. �i�mg t�=s� -29� aa�!! �S�t .� ° ` ;._ _ . : a►:� t�s ia� �auti �ala�l�t`��r ,.. : , , � . pas�iYt3� t� a�d +�t�a anisa��l� . . a�E .s +� cr+a�#:,tt�o3. . : - � .� � . .. ... �. . . .' : _ . . . -' . . . ' . . . ,'S' 0..: �..�,:.. �..re. . . . . .. . � � . . . . . . i�.......f �'.� . _: . � . � ��". � ��: V�� ' �� . . . . .. . .. .:... i .:: �. . . . . .t . ' . ' _ .. . . . . ��a 1. � ;, � _.. , � :,,,�� . ` �hat -��i� i'�9 w:�l a� � �,�.t 1 i��#al�t�ti�a �da 3s. �tsre� ti�r'" . :� , � �3 �� d�� _t�e #�3,i�l:s�.�s�i�ri i+�aet� . `.. + . . � r t'�� lt� e�##i�. ' I�1� o�#lce� s�s-1-1yr,fi�t�r.��e pn�3 i� '�� " � .� }C-•..'Y . , ..:. �� i �_ i� �iAi/ �� 11/ Yi�N�+"..�� i� ��M �.� � .�: 4 i� ��+�� ,�ls�1 �tts@� �!'i3O�'s• 7�t�. c�8'��01 ��'3!!►�t` s�3,1 ,� - ` a�A the ats#faa�2 ��ant�.s�►2 s��rie �rf tt�r �i�t� �►f� 8sltt� �►+�3 ' ;: ` . � j . ,�. „� . . . �. �-�i�-�a��Y ' . � � . . .. .. ' �. �' t, .. . . . . . , . . . •-�r . . � � - .. .. ... . . . . .. � . � . . .., . � � �v .- � .. ' � . � � ..� . @ '� � ' .. . .. . . . . - . .. . i�3�lw�� ♦ . : . . } . . . . v'. .. .._ ,. . . �7►��#i #+T��.i� �� Liff �i�� iR1 �.�i��l� � i� ��FO�! .�:-#'M �..._�.. ..�". -i i iio� "s. ZQat� as fOl�a�ts, f _ � �. '�,.a - _ � ' : :? � =.: ,' l'+�.il� ��.t#�j s�a#�. �hem a�y gN►�sa�a� h�ss _D�es 'tt�a��b� � _ . . . , . : ° �da�g or �at, �x�e�r or �r�s�adta� of `tf�s.�o+g a�t t� b�tv��ag b+e�ss� . : _ . � a�t�fi�.;, .a1a�s1� i�3�ate3� �u�eax��i�a �b� �tt�'q ox t $t � _;: � � `° _c�r•a or� at�tsz ��.ta►b2e �►la�� of c�a��laa�s�� wt ia ��a' . . .. � ` �e�ty c�� a+�� c►ti� place �a �i r��t�d by t� �eea 1��t o��f 1 +� ; �. •,; �. . , � �� !��-e�ie�►�#u�--Fa�t�. � �. . a . i,: _ � . . , :� . .�.: COUNCILM�N _ � �, Yeas Nays <,Requested by Department of: �., , .� Drew Nicoaia �tl FBVOi � �, Rettman ScMibel e� aiFlSt BY Sonnen . g Tedeeco Wilson . . . : / : 4� �'"°� ` Forrt� Approved by City Attorney r Adopted by Council: • Date - Certified Passed by CounciT Secretary BY � �`:: $y `�� _ ; �: Approved by Mayor,: Date Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council'� . ��: By Y�� gy r- �;:� a.. _ . . , � r�. �,`=t . . � r.. _. , . ��F,�I//1/ � -2-. may either immediately destroy the dog or cat and submit the for the full quar�ntine oeriod. The period ' quarantine shall commence immediately after a person has bee � bitten and such period shall last for ten consecutive days hereafter. If on or before the tenth day the doq or cat shows linical signs suggestive of rabies, the dog or cat may e killed for rabies examination. Wild animals are defined a meaning creatures, not human, wild by nature. If any of the fo lowing wild animals: skunk, raccoon, fox, coyote, bobcat or at, bites a human, a dog, a cat or any lives ock, that wild ani shall be killed immediately and the carcass submitted or rabies examination. When other wild ani species are in olved in a biting incident with a human or any o er animal, the health officer shall determine whether the imal, based n the prevalence of zabies in the region, is a rab s auspect. Animals deemed to be a rabies suspect shall be lled imme iately and the carcass submitted for rabies exami ation. >' imal species including livestock, rodents (squirre s, ha ers, guinea pigs, gerbils, chipmunks, rats and mice ) an lag orphs (rabbits and hares) may be considered rabies suspects on individual basis. If at the end of the ten-day quarantine i d the dog or cat appears to be normal, the quarantine will be r inated. During the quarantine period the dog or cat shall be e urely confined in a building or in a yard enclosed by a fence o structed that the dog or cat cannot get through or over and wh ch will not permit other animals or persons to enter a d w 11 event the dog or cat from coming in contact with other ni ls or persons other than the custodian. Upon zequest the ani 1 owne or custodian shall make the dog or cat available to he a�nimal wa� er� control supervisor for inspection a any �easonable ime durinq the quarantine. The dog or ca shall,' not be kill d unless it cannot be safely secured. If the dog or' cat is kille� dies, becomes sick or escapes within th quarantine period, th'+s., owner, custodian, or agent there f must notify the aea��eff�ee� 1 ont ol u e v' of the city of Saint Paul��,�mmediately. When it is necessary to uarantine a dog or cat under'��,this chapter, the cost and e pense of such quarantine shall `be borne by the owner or agent o the owner of the dog or cat. � 3ection 3. That Chapter 200 of the aint Paul Legislative Code is amended by chanqing the titl� to re d as follows: C�ter 200. Begs Anima_�. Section 4 . That Section 200.01 of the 3aint Paul Legislative Code is amended to read as follows: 200.01. DEFINITIONS. As used in this chapter, unless the context otherwise indicates: P N'�E - FINA CE RK CANARV - DEPARTMENT �GITY OF SAINT PAUL Council .. BIVE - MAVOR FIIC NO. �� /�/� • Ordin�cnce Ordinance r10. Presented By Referred To Cmmmittee: Date r Out of Committee By Date -6- b 'visio 3 . STOPPING T C . If an olice officer or animal control officer is wi ness to an attack b an animal u on a erson or another an' al the officer ma take whatever means he or she deems a r riate to brin the attack to an end and revent further i ur to the victim. ction 8 . That Section 200 .14 of the Sa nt Paul Legislative Code is amended to read as follows : 200 .14 . DOGS; DISTURBING TH PEACE; ENFORCEMENT. It shall be unlawful for any perso to own, keep, have in possession, or harbor any eanir�e do�, hich howls, yelps, or barks to the reasonable annoyance f another person or persons . Any person violating this secti , who upon first requested by a peace officer;-1�ea��Y�-eff� e� or any-elt��y-at��l�e��ze�-ag9�s�an� l�ea��i�-eff�ee� the nimal control su ervisor, to stop or prevent the annoyance, and efuses to comply with the request will be issued a citation r arrested in accordance with Minnesota Rules of Criminal Proce ure, and, if the officer deems it necessary to stop the annoyanc , may have the ean�t�e do�c taken to the city animal pound . A y ear��ne d� placed in the pound may be reclaimed by the owner upon payment of the fee prescribed Section 200 . 08, and if ot reclaimed may be disposed of in the manner provided in Se ion 200 . 13 . Section 9 . This ordinance s all take effect and be in force 30 days after its passage, approv 1, and publication. COUIVC[LMEN Requested by Department of: Yeas Nays Drew Community Services Nicosia [n Favor Rettman C��7��-'V"'Z� Scheibel Against BY ' Sonnen Tedesco Wilson Form A by C'ty torn Adopted by Council: Date c Certified Passed by Council Secretary BY By � Approved by Mayor: Date Appro b Mayor for Su ssi to Council By BY ��f� �-�'°•"�'•��'�IF�+•rv:��'� i�"' �,' ..�_ .. _ ,� _ . . . ...� .,..:,,� yf:�x ', .. . .-- .q .;..r: . .: �. : — �INA'N £ r�� */�,: f�4 �^� r fC� ARY —.DF�PA �TN�NT ��i. V�'i' ,�'� 'ti�F� ��r`1�,!� �,1 �T f YOL11�1� . � I' S.- . � -.MA Y� .. r �S�-�'�` Fite �N 0. ;.�'��/`.� . � . - ' � '``` . � . . , _ , �. �. . y+a .�r� ,y� y _ .� . �/ f�LZ[`�1�� U,tdinanceNQ. > >.. a . _ _ . . _.� � �- � , �.�- _ � �, , �_Presen�d By _ � . � '. � ," R'#ecred�To ;� _ ' Committee: . Date , , �~ _ , � , � ,,. f, ,... � 0 t of Ccimmittee By a • . '�� . . . .. , —�,;� , � � �+ �� ' � � _ . -. � (� t ,, � � �, { � . . .' . . . �r+% • _ , . _ , �, � . � . r ' .w.. . _ _ , ,: _ '' . ; . ., ,.,_ . .�.. ..__.. ;' � - -._......�,....,.�----"� � �: �.�_..:-=' +� + � �. - . , . . �.. :� y � ,� , � ,,�'' �,,� :; -> i. j .� . . . . _ . . . . . a ��1M�Q� ��• . � . . . .. . " ..- ,t Y .- ` i � . . f..;.� . . � . . . . .. } � � � . � �. ' . . . � ' . . . �.. .. . . ', �tt�'�tkct,i 2�Q.�� o�,�tha_�aint F��tl tre�i��ati�±s_��d� le aa�#a�lad �t► , ' �ce�ad a�h.fd�;� . _.. �,' w 2 . ,�� .��1:; �1� ��8� ?� P=�l� �'O�C��'. �t �e�ill �t . � zi . �� . ,, '�r��° :faar aQ;'� ga�r� ��t �en, l��a�, �s �� as+e��a�� .�� . . , . �� c #�!y �s � r�� /3�►. Y'"el�r +�ac b�r�k�lt to ��hb � ' . `._ ,: �;.� �es�e�at�s�a.�o��a�caa �� sot�e�c �rso�r at pers�as. �iar�� p�saca+cc� � ' . ; � �., ' 'vita�i��i� thia �tit�at,, �++t�r v� f irst toqna3�ed b�,► a p�ac� ,��, T : ��+�s��--�a��gi�#aa�t �r �a�d�a��-as��e��--�#a!�# 't�;�-- �; , � �ta�--d��er ��,,.�SB��..�t=,r.i +�ii�t.lf.�� t� �ap �t�r ,��'� ' � 'F • . " �� .�pAt�"�31�!�r �1A!� tl1�1�"� '�i! f�+d�F�',�1� 11/��."�'! � TiIQ1�� M�.�� `iQ �# a �. �" isaaeti a► c3�t�e� oz atra�t�d i�� aeearrda�s rrf�t� �li�s��a._ �qY+�e` ` � �;., t�� t�f#t�aatl� �hr1ortse�ace, "satl, �f tb�rt ��it�ar l�ea�i�t it A+r+e:'a��y ta ' ._ , � stag 'the aan��rance, �ee� 3��t ��t+d �ca�ue $f�it t+�lta�;�t t�a �#�t�.' ,. ;.� : � �r' �a#iwe�-,��: - _'1�' ��e �, plae��3 ia �Ra ��udad �� a; . , :� f�,.r � ..... � �.•..+��r� .V� ��. � � ��Y. ��' �F� �� ./��.-.iI��M1,�i+� �. , �. . �. : . � t'. . :��.�'�� iA� ��`. �;��A;�'� i��1 �iQ ��ffi�li� Qf ��_ �C�lI'` ��' • � ,. ... p��ri�+i�i�e_ ��t• #�e��i,�n ��,3�. ., . ..: ; r' : � .� � . . ...� '"�. .� . . .. � � . � � . . . . . 'L . � � . �. , . - { .. � � . _ � � � � �@i�i.�i�� .�■ � . , . . , . .. . �� ?�i� ar+��i. s1q►�3. t,al�a� �r�f�t �d be ia �oEs��o �35,.. nai�#�.a��:3�S" . . , ;f �. � .. ' ��e ��e��t1��:a�lt p�►li+�tt��. ` � ; , . : - - �.i - : , .,. , " �' � $ ,.,* �. . , CQUNCI�.1Y(�;N • Requested by Department cff: �� Yeas Nays _ _ ' : y �y ' . Drew �:� v �lZ�'C#� ' " n►i�:�e' . ` In Favor - 4 : . �� Rettman _ d, x ' s�nea�si A ainst gy -: . ,. � Sonn.n � " - .. Tedesco �� , Wilso� ' . . Forts� Ap eved,.by�ity;At ar�ey , ' Adopted by Council� Date _ � ` . '' �� .�V " �. � , , ' Cettified Passed byr Council Secretaty BY , gy . ,= : _ � ;�: �4pproved b,g,Mayor: pate ' Approved by Mayor€or Submissio�to Council "' � • � _ _ r� � � r . ,. . . _. _ _ . . _ � �> : , . . . .; B� • �� f �.<.. . 4 1..� .. r'; _ . _. _ 1 . = '�,.� ,.__?��.�._ � .._. _�, ._ ,. . ..t{�!' '.r > - ,�' . ,. �.. . - ,._ . .a*'-�c�,i . . ��,--�� -��i -4- � @tt�}#e-p�aee-e�-d@eA-aAy-e�tter-p�#va�e-�an�-w#�l�ed�-be#ng effee�#ve�Y-re��refned-f�e�n-�nev#ng-berend-�aeh-nnfeneed-area-er �e�;-ar-aay-eaA#r�e-as-any-��ee�;-pt��#e-pa�l�;-�ehee�-greand�-e� @ab��e-p�a�e-W#��en�-be4ng-effee�#ve�y-rea��a4ned-by-eha4n-er �easl�-Ae�-exeeed#Ae�-s#x-�ee�-#A-�eAg�l�=-sba��-be-�ee�e�-�e-be LliTiR#11g-a�-�a��e: Violation of this section shall be p�n#saed b�-a-f#ne-na�-�e-exeeed-S�AB:--I+,�r-pe�sen-wl�e-�a-gt�#��}*-ef-a at�bsee�xep�-v�e�a�#en-ef-�t��s-see��ea-w��p�a-a-pe�}ed-e�-er�e-}►ea� ef-ane�her-v#e�a�#an-ef-�l+f�-aee�ien-aha��-be- an#ahed-by-a-f�rae e#-a�-�eas�-$58-bn�-ne�-n�e�e-�l�as-Q�BA nor. Section 7 . That Section 200.12 of the Saint Paul Legis tive Code is amended to read as follows: 200.12. DANGEROUS 8968 ANIMALS. 8ubdivision 1. w w a' tt t' to ' c odi 'ur r or wner i sha d e u a e 70 e e r oth. � e or o er a.�t of th,ie dis�ostion of the case, t imal st e a a wr e er ' i e llowing findings ot fact: � e ma is a rous s m nstrated b a vic' ous t an un ro oked attack,� an attack wi out c � t e owne o the n'mal has demonstrated an inabilit� or unwillin e s t �ontrol the animal in order to prevent i to Qerson� or other animals . t rt doe ot rder th destru t ' o o t e o he Cou 1 a lternat've rder the defendant to r v de and sho o t the Court o ublic iabil ' t e t e in' u m t of 00. Subdivision 2. DBS RUCTION OF DANGEROUS 8968p-BBF�N��BN ANIMAL3. The health off cet shall have the authority to order the destruction of dangerous �egs �imals. � I . A dangerous aeg �nimal is a-ean�rne �n. animal wh ch has: E�� b#� ea-�we-e�-�ete-petaex�;-et t��.) ca sed serious bodily in7ury or disfigurement to any person, or (3�) engaged in any attack on any person under circumstances which would indicate danger to personal safety�. or � exhibit�.d unus�ally agaressive behavior, su�:h as ar� attack on another animal, or � �itten one oz more persons on two or more occaisons. Sabdfv�a�en-2.- � PROCEDURE. The health officer er-h4s-deaignee, after l • . �� :J f �/ // /�( / � PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE DOG ORDINANCE The general intent of the proposed amendments is to deal with any dog or animal which is dangerous not �ust a specific breed. The major features are: -They allow the city to tag a person whose dog or other animal bites or attacks. -They allow the city to deal with any vicious animals not just dogs. -They make letting a dog run at large a misdemeanor rather than just a petty misdemeanor. -They allow animals which exhibit unusually aggressive behavior to be declared dangerous and ordered destroyed. -They require that persons who have been convicted of letting their animal attack to carry liability insurance in order to keep the animal. -When a person is in court for an animal bite, they allow the Court to order the animal destroyed, thus avoiding a duplicate hearing at the Division of Public Health. -They provide general clean-up and clarification of an ordinance made patch work by many amendments. , • �;1��'�/��i /�y�.� -a- SECTION BY SECTION EXPLANATION OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING THE DOG AND RABIES CONTROL CHAPTERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE CODE SECTION 1. To specifically designate the appropriate persons with the correct titles to be responsible for each activity and to allow flexibility by including designees. SECTION 2. This change provides for the dog pound quarantining unidentifiable dogs which have bitten. Previously there was an attempt to cover this in 200. 12 (2) (2) . However, it was poorly designed and did not accomplish what it appeared to be attempting. (For example how could it be determined that a dog running at large had been declared a dangerous dog if there is no way the dog can be identified. ) Since this is a rabies control issue it has been placed here in Chapter 199 instead of in Chapter 200. The proper title for responsible personnel have been inserted. SECTION 3 . The title of Chapter 200 is changed from dogs to animals since some of its sections address all kinds of animals not just dogs. SECTION 4. Definitions of animals and of responsible personnel have been added. The definition of "dog" has been rewritten so as not to appear to conflict with the ordinance which forbids the keeping of wild member of the dog family. The definition of "owner" has been changed to allow us to hold any person taking out a license for a dog, responsible for that dog and to allow us to continue to hold an owner responsible for a dog he/she may be keeping at another person's house. It also means an adult in a household where a minor owns and licenses a dog could also be held responsible. The number of days that a person may keep a dog before being declared an owner has been changed to five to be consistent with the state law. The definition of "running at large" has been moved from Section 200. 06 to here so that it will apply to all parts of the chapter and in order to unclutter 200. 06 and improve the organization of the chapter. It has also been streamlined in such a way as to maintain the strength of the previous definition and cover a few situations which the previous definition did not cover as clearly. C�"��-/!�� / -3- SECTION 5. When pursuant to Section 200.12 (1) , the Court requires liability insurance the effect lasts only for the year. This change would continue the effect by requiring the license section to demand proof of insurance to issue or renew a dog license on a "convicted biter" . SECTION 6. The section on running at large has been changed by moving the definition to the definition section, by changing the word "canine" to "dog" to remove any apparent conflict with the prohibition of wild dog types, and by making a violation a misdemeanor instead of petty misdemeanor. The reason the penalty limits are not listed here but listed in the section on attacks, is to emphasize the seriousness of letting your animal bite or attack. In a practical sense it has no effect on the penalties. Section 7. 220. 12 (1) would allow us to tag an owner when his/her dog bites. It would also allow a judge when hearing a dog bite case to order the dog destroyed. When a �udge is hearing such a case he would be hearing the same facts which the health officer does in a dangerous dog hearing. If the facts of the case warrant destruction of the dog, it seems a waste of time and resources to hold another hearing at the health division. 220. 12 (2) (1) The list of conditions under which a dangerous dog action could be initiated has been changed. The order has been changed for emphasis and unusually aggressive behavior has been added. Hopefully we may be able to prevent a really bad attack if aggressive behavior has been reported. This section has also been expanded to allow us to take action on other animals which are dangerous. It also establishes that notifying one owner is sufficient. 220. 12 (2) (3) The previous 220. 12 (2) has been moved to chapter 199. (See section 2 . ) and in its place has been inserted a disclaimer so that this chapter will not conflict with the rabies control chapter on the issue of wild animals kept for pets and which have bitten. 220.12 (3) This sections allows a police officer or animal control officer to intervene in a dog attack. Essentially they are given this authority elsewhere but we have included it here for education purposes and to add further protection against suit. Section 8. In 200. 14 "canine" is changed to "dog" for the same reason cited in Section 5. The proper title for responsible personnel is given. _ . ��-ii�i -4- ��/�� IMPLEMENTATION OF CHANGES CREATED BY THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTERS 199 AND 200 PERTAINING TO ANIMALS AND RABIES CONTROL The major change proposed is the ability to issue tags to owners whose animals have bitten. The animal control supervisor will issue tags from the office for reported bites on the basis of the bite reports. Discretion will be used in deciding whether or not to issue a tag when a bite report is received. For bites committed while a dog was running at large, a tag for running at large would also be issued in the same manner as is done now. When tags are issued for bites which are particularly serious or involve an unprovoked attack or are committed by a dog running at large or constitute a second offense, we will request a court appearance. Since the Court can order the destruction of the animal when a owner is found guilty of letting it attack, the animal control supervisor will assemble all pertinent facts and inform the city attorney who is prosecuting the case that the Division feels the destruction of the animal is appropriate and necessary. After a conviction on an animal attack charge, if the court does not order the destruction of the animal, the animal control supervisor will notify the license division so that proof of insurance can be demanded upon subsequent license renewal. Upon notification by the animal control supervisor, the license divison will flag their renewal cards to let them know when they need to demand proof of insurance. �_ � (,��"�-/��i/ � , � ' �•~~ . /� ( / � :�• CITY OF SAINT PAUL INTERDEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM T0: Joe Carchedi FROM: Ron J. Guilfoil � �.._ ,-r, DATE: July 24, 1987 -`' � ,,� �., RE: Ordinance Amendment Pertaining to Dogs and Other Animals �,�� ,`:-� � �"„ .._,� =�'� •--- ::y The Department of Community Services has proposed several changes to Chapt�ers`=�� 199 and 200 pertaining to dog and animal control. The changes are proposec� to provide more and better control mechanisms on animals which have been W determined to be vicious, expands certain parts of the ordinance to include all animals--not just dogs, and provides for some general "house-cleaning" in the ordinance language and definitions. Specifically, you requested I review the proposed change in Section 5. This change expands the requirement for proof of insurance on animals for an owner convicted of a violation of Chapter 200.12, Subdivision 1 (i.e. dog bite or vicious determination) . The change proposed would require continuous proof of liability insurance when licensing such an animal. In other terms, it requires an owner to show proof of insurance on an animal every time the license is renewed. My first comment on this proposed change is that it appears to be appropriate. It provides added protection to the public in case another violation occurs. My other comrnents, the ones you are interested in, are concerning the administration of this change. As dog licenses can be purchased at various locations with the paperwork being routed to the Licensing Division, it appears this change may be difficult to administer. Not only would each location need to have an updated listing of those animals requiring proof of insurance, but staff would have to be trained as to what documentation can be accepted as proof of insurance. Also, the license period may vary from the insurance policy period, which will add more confusion to the procedure. Next, the proposed changes do not specify what action can or should be taken if proper proof of insurance is not presented. Obviously, in this case the license should not be awarded, but what then should be done? Should the License Division report this to the Animal Control Officer? What if the owner never applies for a renewal license, are you to report this to the Animal Control Officer? As we have recorded over 400 bites in each of the last two years (see attached memo) the record keeping could become quite extensive. I am aware that not all of these resulted in an owner being tagged, but I assume quite a few of these have and would be covered under the proposed changes. It appears to me that the implementation of the insurance proposal would add staff and paperwork to your division, require daily or weekly up-dates from the Animal � t�y/:i�>i . �_. •+ � Joe Carchedi /,�� , Page Two July 24, 1987 Control Officer and, in my opinion, be quite difficult and cumbersome to implement under our current system. However, given my support of the proposed ordinance change, I do not recommend we drop the changes because our system does not allow easy implementation. I suggest we consider changing the system. A transfer of the responsibility for dog licensing to Community Services may ease the administration of this ordinance. Centralization of dog licensing responsibility in the Animal Control Office of the Department of Community Services would facilitate implementation: - Transfer of records to another City Division would not be required. - Originating record source has the current, up-dated information on hand to review license applications. - Ease enforcement of proof of insurance requirements as the Animal Control Office will be taking the license application. - Provides one source for record keeping, licensing, and enforcement. I do realize that this recommendation is a major change in our operations. Convenience to the public also may be impaired by requiring only one location for dog licensing. However, I believe the added protection given to the public by controlling vicious animals outweighs the inconvenience of only one location for licensing of animals. Consideration could be given to accepting applications and fees through the mail to ease the inconvenience for the majority of animal owners. In summary, I believe the proposed change is a good one, consideration should be given to adding language specifying what happens when a violator does not show proof of insurance, and transfer of all aspects of dog licensing be made from the Licensing Division to the Department of Community Services - Animal Control Office. If you have any other questions, I can be reached at 6240. RTG:lm Attachment cc: Bill Gunther Eugene Schiller ____. �'G�i��/ �'- _ � �. i 7�r3 CiTY Of SAINT PAUL INTERDEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM T0: Ron J. Guilfoile FROM: Sharon Bailly��✓ DATE: July 22, 1987 RE: Amendment to Dog Ordinance Following is the information on the Dog Ordinance that you requested. How many dog bites a year? 1985 - 471 reported dog bites. 1986 - 403 reported dog bites. The procedure that is used when a citizen is bitten by a dog follows : 1. Victim calls Police reporting the incident. a. Animal Bite Report is sent to Bill Gunther of the City Environmental Health Department. ' 2. Animal Control is sent out to check and see if the dog involved is healthy. a. Dog is quarantined for 10 days, regardless of health. b. After 10 days Animal Control rechecks the dog to see if it is still healthy, if the dog is unhealthy at this time it will be destroyed. 3. If the lst incident involving the animal is serious or if it is the animal's 2nd reported, bite Bill Gunther holds a Serious Dog Hearing. a. Both victim and owner of the animal are requested to be present. 1. If owner fails to show, dog is to be picked up and destroyed. b. If both parties are present the facts are heard. Bill Gunther then decides if the animal should be destroyed or kept alive. 4. If the animal is to be kept alive, structural changes must be met by the owner (ex. fenced yard, chain) . a. Owner signs affidavit agreement stating City is not responsible, etc. , owner also signs a Bite Agreement to meet the structural changes. ,, . �,�-��7�i�i .r� - �� ' Ron J. Guilfoile Page Two July 22, 1987 S. On a specific compliance date Animal Control checks to see if the changes agreed upon have been met. a. If these changes have not occurred at this time Gunther receives a memo stating this has not taken place. He then decides if the dog should be destroyed or he contacts the owner about the matter. ;� �, � � ;,� �' ��7//�/ �;� (,,� �_�. -4- p�b�#e-p�aee-e�-xper�-any-e�he�-p��va�e-�and-r+��hen�-be�n�-effee��ve�y-�es��a3ned-f�em �nev3ng-beYend-saeh-e�nfeneed-aten-er-�e�;-er-anr-eanine-en-a r-��ree�;-pnb�te-parl�; sehae�-g�ennds-et-pnb�*e-p�aee-W��hen�-beina-effeet3ve�r-t �rained-bY-ehain-er-�ea�h na�-exeeed�nq-six-fee�-�n-�eng�h;-�ha��-be-dee�ned-�e-be-� nn�r►a-a�-�arge: Violation of this section shall be pnn��hea-by-a-f�ne-na�-�e-exeee -8�88:--�lny-pe��en-Mhe-#s qn;��Y-ef-a-sabseqaen�-v#e�a�4eA-ef-�h#�-�ee�3en-w��h3n a-per�ed-ef-ene-year-ef ane�he�-v#e�a�#en-ef-�A#s-see�#ea-sha��-be-pxn�shed-bY a-fine-ef-a�-�ea��-958-ba�-ne� �ne�e-�haa-6�A8 a misdemeanor. Section 7. That Section 200.12 of the Saint Paul Leqislative Code s amended to read as follows: 200.12. DANGEROU5 BA66 �.. Subdivision 1. �lTTACK BY AN ANIMAL. It shall be unlawful for an owner to fa,�l to restrain an anima.�from infli�.ti� or �ttem�tinq to inflict bodily iniury to an rson or other animal w t ex r not the owner is present. Viol�tion f this_sec ion shall be a_misdemeanor punishable_ � a fine not to exceed 5700 or im risonme t fo not to exceed 90 da�s, or both. This section shall not apply to an attack .y a d�__under the contio.��n on�.duty_. law enforcement officer. The Court up�a find ng of t��_dg�d�� 's_gi�i�lt_hereunde�.��__�y�hg�.i��g�_to__ ozdezL as ,gart of the disao�tion of e.�_#�iat the�nimal�e_de ro e.��a��d on a written order containina one or .�ng �,�.�_t�e fQllowina findings__Qf_.faet_ � the animal is dangerous as dem nstrated bv a v_��i�ous_a�tack, an un�rovoked attack, an �tt�ck without war _ng1._.Qr__multiple._attacksl_or_ � the ownex of the animal has d monstLated an_inability or unwill�nqness.�o control the anima�._in order o_prevent �njuzy to_pezsons or othe_r animals. If the Court does not order the des uction of the do�.t the Court shal� as_an alternative� order the defendant to .�ov�de_� an�how_..proof_to the Cou�t of� public liability insurance i the inimum amount of 5300�000. Subdiviaion 2. DESTRUCTION OF DANGBR US B866;-BBg�N�'P�BH �IIMALS. The health officer shall have th authority to order the destruction of dangerous �aqs animals. u DEFINITION. A dangerous de animal is a-ean�ae an animal which has: f�} bt��en-tve-er-mere-pe ens;-et (�a) caused serious bodily in7ury or disfigurement to any person, or (3b) enqaqed in any attac on any person under circumstances which would indicate danger to personal safety, or � � �hibited unusuall a gressivg be�i�viQr�. such_as an attack on another animal, or � bitten one or more oersons o�two or more occa.i�sons,. St�bd#v�s4ea-�: � � PROCEDURE. The health officer et-h3�-de�3gttee� after 9-�s� �� /�9/ � . .. i 7 y t� -�- pab�}e-p}aee-er-apen-aay-e�i�e�-p��va�e-�a�a�-w��l�e��-be#ea-effee��ve�y-�es��a#ae� ' frem-mevtnq-beYend-aneh-anfeneea-area-et-�e�;-e�-anr-eanine-en-anr-s�ree��-pnb��e patk;-aehee�-gronnda-er-pnb��e-p�aee-wi�han�-being-effee�}ve�r-�es�ta�nea-bv-eha�n-er �eaah-ne�-exeeed�ng-a�x-fee�-tn-�eng�h;-sha��-be-deeMe�-�e-be-�ann}eg-a�-�arqe: Violation of this section shall be pan�ahe�-bY-a-ftrce-ne�-�e-exeeed-5�89.---�n7 peraon-wha-�a-gn��r-ef-a-snbseqeen�-tiio�a��en-ef-�h�s-aee�ien-r4�h4n-a-per�ed-ef-ene �►ear-ef-ane�her-v�e�a��en-ef-�h��-see�ten-�ha��-be-pnn4shed-by-a-f#ne,�ef-a�-�eas�-S59 bn�-na�-mere-�han-5�98 a misdemeanor. Section 7. That Section 200.12 of the Saint Paul Leqislative Code is amend to read as follows: 200.12. DANGFROUS B866 �j.�AI�. Subdivision 1. ATTACK BY AN ANIMAL. It shall be unlawf�l for an owner to fail to re�t _in_an animal from infli�ting or tin t in 1'ct di in' r t an ers or o her animal whe h� er r9. 3r�ot the owner is present. Violation of this section hall be a misdemeanor puni,�hable � a fine not to exceed 5700 or imprisonment f n t to exceed 90 da or both. This section shall not anoly to an attack_� _d49 undez the contro.l°n on_duty_ law enforcement officer or to an attack u�on an uninv_ited_intruder_who has_entered the owner's home with criminal intent._ The Court upon a finding of the defendan ' u'�lt hereunder. is authorized to order, as part of the dis,��sti4�of t.�.g c �g,_that �h�_�n�p��_ be_de$troyed__basgd__ on a written order containing one o= moz of_the fo lowina findings of fact: �. the anitaal is dangerous as_dem nstrated� a vicioas attack�an_ unprovoked attack, an attack ithout_warni_nq,�r�nultiple attacks:Qr_ ,�,� the owner of ��ap�ma.� has emonstrated an_inability._or..unwillingne,ss to_._ oc ntrol the animal in order _o prevent in?ury_to_ oersons__or._other na imals. � If the Court does not order_the de__ ruc��on�f the doa,�_the Court shall as an__ alternative. order the defendant rovide and show�roof to the Court_of,__ Qublic liability insurance in the minimum_amount of�300t000. Subdivision 2. DE3TRUCTION OF DANG ROUS 9A6B;-BBF�N��9N ��. The health officer shall have he authority to order the destruction of danqerous dags animals. >� � DEFINITION. A dangerous�eg �.nima� is a-eaa�se an animal which has: �}} b4��en-�we-er-mere-,�e�sans;-o� (�a) caused serious bod�ly iniury or disfigu=ement to any person, or ; (3b) engaged in any a�tack on any person under circumstances which would indicate danger to personal safety, or ,� g#�hibited unu��ally a_garessive #�ehav�or. such as an attack on anothe�_ anilaal, or � bitten one or more persons on..�wo�r more occaisons. Seb��v�s�er�-�: 2� PROCEDURE. The health officer er-F��s-des3gnee, aftei ; .. ' �1st �'— /�' � - . .. _ , ./ � r�:� Ad� ��>/ -f 7 �3rd _;� �� (� � � . ;- ed _�L�-i �—k7 Yeas �ays ' DREW NICOSIA �f��/-,�f%� RETTMAN ��,�� SCHEIBEL sa��:v WILSON WEIDA PR.SIDENT; � , . _ _ _�. . __ .. .: . . ..- .. , . .. - � _,_ ' ' 'Ist �-/��7 ��-- �2nd' �',r'_> - �{ � ` 3rd /�-% - �� Adopted `- � � ' , � C'-�a-�� 'Yeas Nays D� ,- ;� �� /,%l �'%'/ NICOSIA f'� ��l�� RETTi�lAN . SCHEIBEL . SOiVN�v WILSON WL`ZDA I PRSIDENT: ; i