04-07-2020 Special City Council Meeting Minutes (2)

Home Browse Search

Special City Council Minutes Apri17, 2020 Page 3 of 8 � ------------------------------ out. She said that Mr. Rose had to put him on a leash to hold him in there. Officer Fyle said she does realize that dogs do not typically like people in uniform, but most dogs that are friendly will come up and wag their tail. She said this dog was not wagging his tail and he didn't want anything to do with her. Chief Klang stated that Mr. Rose will speak as well. He also stated that the Council will have the opportunity to determine whether or not the dog was potentially dangerous dog or a dangerous dog. Chief Klang explained that a potentially dangerous dog is when an unprovoked a bite on a human or domestic animal on public or private property. He explained substantial bodily harm as it relates to the dangerous dog means bodily harm which involved temporary but substantial disfigurement or which causes temporary but substantial loss or impairment of the functional body member or causes a fracture of any bodily member. Chief Klang stated that you can see through the pictures that the boy did sustain harm and Chief Klang is not sure if those scars on his face will last and he also does not know if they will go away. Chief Klang explained that if the Council goes for potentially dangerous dog the dog needs to be microchipped and Mr. Rose has already had the dog microchipped therefore that meets that requirement. He stated that if the dog escalates up to a dangerous dog then that's going to put some other requirements on Mr. Rose. He will have to put fence around his yard, post of signage, insure the dog, and the last is to have the dog neutered. Chief Klang said that in six months from the date the Council makes its � decision Mr. Rose would be able to come back before the Council and ask to have the dog re-evaluated because the dog has had training or that the dog has changed his demeanor. Council Member Swanson asked if there is one charge here or a lesser charge. Chief Klang explained that it is not a charge but the Council would deem the dog potentially dangerous then that means Mr. Rose would have to have the dog microchipped which he has already done and then the dog would just go on being noticed as being a potentially dangerous dog. Then if the dog did bite somebody else then he would move automatically to the dangerous dog classification. Chief Klang explained that the Council has the option since there is the substantial bodily harm to the child to deem it a dangerous dog. Craig Rose stated that when this incident occurred he has never looked at a statute and is not familiar with the name of it. He stated that he has had Labs for 50 plus years and they currently have four. He stated this is the first time in those 50 plus years they have had a situation like this. He said his understanding of the statute, reading into the legislative intent, and the notices provided by the Police Department in which he was provided notice of a potentially dangerous dog hearing He stated that it is 347 not 5, subdivision 2 for a dangerous dog designation. Mr. Rose stated that subdivision 3 is a potentially dangerous dog designation and that is what he was served with. He stated that in his mind the question is not whether the dog should be designated dangerous or potentially dangerous, but rather should the dog be labeled as potentially dangerous. He stated that is a procedural issue that they will have to look into a little bit further. He said that as he reads the statute and the notices that were provided to him with regards to L