Loading...
06-10-08 AGENDA Council/Manager Meeting Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Conference Room June 10, 2008 6:30 pm 1. Confirmation of Conditional Use Permit Requirement - 1405 Lilac Drive North 2. Request for Ban on Pit Bull Dogs 3. Utility Markings on Sidewalks Council/Manager meetings have an informal, discussion-style format and are designed for the Council to obtain background information, consider policy alternatives, and provide general directions to staff. No formal actions are taken at these meetings. The public is invited to attend Council/Manager meetings and listen to the discussion; public participation is allowed by invitation of the City Council. Hey Moran urn Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting June 10, 2008 Agenda Item 1. Confirmation of Conditional Use Permit Requirement - 1405 Lilac Drive North Prepared By Mark Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Summary At the November 20,2007 City Council meeting, the Council approved a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow for the operation of a hair and beauty salon to be operated at 1405 Lilac Drive North. The CUP is necessary in order to operate a retail business within the Business and Professional Offices Zoning District. The CUP listed 12 Conditions of Approval. Since the business began operating in late 2007, the salon has been operating within the requirements of the CUP. The CUP was signed by both the owner of the salon and the owner of the office building. The owner of the office building is Dennis Walsh, President of FTK Properties. There are two conditions that have yet to be met by the owner of the building and are not required to be met until either July 1, 2008 or by the end of the 2008 planting season. Condition No. 10 states that a privacy fence will be constructed no later that July 1, 2008 along the northwest corner of the site. The plan for the fence was to be sent to the City Manager for approval. Mr. Walsh has submitted a plan for the fence along the northwest property line as indicated on the attached photo. The total length of the fence would be 145 feet. Walsh submitted a plan indicating the price for an 8 foot cedar fence and a 6 foot cedar fence. He contends that the City Council action did not specify a fence height. Staff has listened to the tape of the meeting and the 8 foot height is discussed but it is not made a part of the CUP. Mr. Walsh contends that the price of an 8 foot high fence is more than twice the cost of a 6 foot high fence so therefore, the 6 foot high fence is reasonable. Staff has verified that the cost of the 8 foot high fence is twice the cost of a 6 foot high fence. Staff is recommending that the fence of 8 foot in height be constructed along the property line adjacent to the property located at 5545 Golden Valley Road. The remainder of the fencing shown on the aerial map would not be required because it would cause the removal of several significant trees that provide screening and shade. Staff believes that this is in keeping with Condition NO.1 0 because it provides an 8 foot high fence along the northwest corner of the site and it provides a significant screen for the property at 5545 Golden Valley Road. The construction of a fence to the east of the residence at 5545 Golden Valley Road would provide screening in an area that has never been screened in the past. Staff believes that there has not been a significant change to the appearance or use of the 1405 Lilac Drive building with the salon occupancy so a fence in that area is not necessary. As required by Condition No. 11, Mr. Walsh has submitted a revised landscape plan that has been reviewed by the City Forester. The revised plan calls for the removal of existing underbrush material and the planting of numerous new trees to provide improved screening for the properties to the west. This work will be done by the end of the 2008 planting season. Attachments Aerial photo showing City Manager recommended location of 8 foot high fence (1 page) Photos of area where trees would have to be removed for fence (2 pages) Recommended Action Confirm fence plan for an 8 foot high fence along the rear of the property at 5545 Golden Valley Road that is the northwest corner of the 1405 Lilac Drive North property as required by CUP No. 120. ~ These trees would have to be removed if fence was installed along this property line r ~;TI!"""" - -m ~ '~.p ,J l:I III - ~~ ..,~ I)" III. ( }, 1< II i~~.:a ,,11 \I adr ~~ ~ ii'" 11\ ti:(i'.l~ [j c l"J!l' 1 ~. 10' JI' I' I ~Jjl ~ J ~1lI ~ :1' Y" j:" ,:::; : " ,,~ , ~,&..,. ,x. " po :v~ q. Jl ~ n). ,I) Jrl" (j, II' IU, fi'-' l" I' ~;.J (rr'du' ! r.; tb II if 'I ~I J:i : c. ~ 1 It: ~ '<t .r, it " if Tl, :'.,', 'J I." (j t,(,1 luJ ~ rn 1j ~1 ~ '.1: U. ~ j; .~I " i,i ',' Ji.lf ~ ~? , 'j . ,)' ".f II ~ " t., ~ Q '" '!f ';t.~.. I .' 'JIG 'j, 'fJ ~ r, ~\ , ':.~'k ~-if ,~n -1: 'Q. 1",','1 Il'IJ ~ -,~it rA .,( 'f nj~ i,\!~, .1)\." .' ~ ' " , '~ ~:J! ~i&' '_{iJ , ~ ~l?' :l'.'> 1, ,I'" ';I.,.. n 1lI :~~ ~ U.:J '1 ~ 'il', J ~~ IIJ" tf( ~ f. 01' r/l.-.j'J" 1>,'.'" '1':' ~~ ~. !:Ii ~~. "='J",,, ~ .(;' JI , .{I mJ.'J ~ 'D I " .if} SJ ~ ,1 '1 ,~ ~~,. ~f;~ 11 II <\' .~ , I \Jj ~ 'I rl;g'\t, ~,. ~ ,jI/~ IfI, \foUJ!"r:t.6,J. '" I~ 'lr S ,~ ,: 'J 4' ~~ ~~\C ~ \riJ ..lll\ n J J]" tf~, , 11 r.~J ~n'~1 R' , 'fa.';).\i1a-" . ] '" I"~ .. ',lI.:/: .~' 'J 1Ji" 1:111' ' i:l\;~' J:.fP ...~' i "'!}j. ,r 'b ~'J~ .~ '" r'f''t. ~~ ~.;?, ~. .- ];J'~ '1''' ,,' . lJ ~i~,r.iS :l: ll)i:\o ~.~" dl'Lm=t",iJ:' ... ;1 .~~.~<!Jl' ";. [\ ~;o/. .. ~.. ~~r1!'ign ojJfJ .. i ilL f,.' ~,. .~. ~~~ " 1: {l,.... rP' t;\1' ~ ~ '5' ...~ ~ 'J:' f1" ltJ~ ~ II IlC _ 1;'1'\ ~ \ ,~. ~ ~ .~ -4 J'N "I -it~ ft.1tl.'. ~.. m ~~ ~'~li;, llt~~:~l .j,.~'r, CIl'F ~;j' J ~l >"\ L1~ <1)tI. ";J t' .;i~~,~J D~ ~ li ~ ~'" 'I'~, "W - .!!......:..L.&JS1 ' ~ f ~ f tn ns -' ~ Q) 0 C Q) ..... ns ~ "C Q) > 0 E Q) '- Q) .c 0 +"' L J. lJ H \. { f'> ..: alley Moran urn City Administration/Council 763-593-8003 I 763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting June 10, 2008 Agenda Item 2. Request for Ban on Pit Bull Dogs Prepared By Thomas Burt, City Manager Summary Mayor Loomis asked that this item be placed on the agenda. Attachment Letter from Sten and Alice Parson dated May 6,2008 (1 page) Letter from Maria Wetherall and Leo Aufdermauer dated May 7 (1 page) 2007 Minnesota Statutes 347.51 Dangerous Dogs; Registration (2 pages) Proposed Coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 157 and 347 (7 pages) 2438 Parkview Blvd GoldenValley, MN 55422 May 6, 2008 Mayor Loomis and City Council Members 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 Re: Baa on Pit BuD Dogs Ladies and Gentlemen, We request you amend City Ordinance to ban pit bull dogs and their derivatives in the City of Golden Valley. Due to the reputation for unprovoked attacks by these dogs, we are extremely concerned for the safety of our children. This concern is especially acute now that neighbors at 2417 Parkview Boulevard have such a dog. Another neighbor has observed the pit bull unleashed on one occasion. And the resident living next-door to 2417 Parkview Boulevard, an elderly woman in her 90s, is now afraid to enter her backyard because of the aggressive nature of this animal. W~ call the police when we observe unleashed dogs but the police often anive after the dog has left the area or the owners have retrieved the pet It doesn't matter if owners are technically required to leash their dogs. All it takes is one briefunleashedperiod for a life-threatening pit bull attack to occur. . Please help us keep Golden Valley a reasonably safe place to raise children. Sincerely, ~~ Sten and Alice Pearson Resident Owners 3439 Terrace Ln Golden Valley, MN 55422 May 7, 2008 lifr . _.'4. 'Uf'~ ~ Mayor Loomis and City Council Members 7800 Golden Valley Rd Golden Valley, MN 55427 Re: Requesting a ban on Pit Bull dogs as pets in the city of Golden Valley Ladies and Gentlemen, We request you amend City Ordinance to ban Pit Bull dogs and their derivatives in the City of Golden Valley. Due to the significant number of unprovoked attacks by these dogs documented in the media, we are extremely concerned for'the safety of children in our neighborhood. This concern is especially acute now that neighbors at 2417 Parkview Blvd have such a dog. I have observed this dog unleashed on several occasions. I have concerns about the elderly woman who resides next door to 2417 Parkview who has told me that she is now afraid to enter her backyard because of the aggressive nature of this animal. Police have been called when the dog is observed unleashed but the police often arrive after the dog has left the area or the owners have retrieved the pet. The rules that require all dogs be kept on a leash and monitored by their owners are ignored by the residents of2417 Parkview. They routinely play with the dog off leash in the front and back yard and regularly tie the dog to a stake using rope and leave unattended for extended periods. All it takes is one brief unleashed period for a life-threatening pit bull attack to occur. Please help us keep Golden Valley a reasonably safe place to live. ~ u.1 Maria T. Wetherall and Leo Aufdermauer Resident Owners C5Jvai~ 347.51, Minnesota Statute Page 1 of2 2007 Minnesota Statutes 347.51 DANGEROUS DOGS; REGISTRATION. Subdivision 1. Requirement. No person may own a dangerous dog in this state unless the dog is registered as provided in this section. Subd. 2. Registration. An animal control authority shall issue a certificate of registration to the owner of a dangerous dog if the owner presents sufficient evidence that: (1) a proper enclosure exists for the dangerous dog and a posting on the premises with a clearly visible warning sign, including a warning symbol to inform children, that there is a dangerous dog on the property; (2) a surety bond issued by a surety company authorized to conduct business in this state in a form acceptable to the animal control authority in the sum of at least $50,000, payable to any person injured by the dangerous dog, or a policy of liability insurance issued by an insurance company authorized to conduct business in this state in the amount of at least $50,000, insuring the owner for any personal injuries inflicted by the dangerous dog; (3) the owner has paid an annual fee of not more than $500, in addition to any regular dog licensing fees, to obtain a certificate of registration for a dangerous dog under this section; and (4) the owner has had microchip identification implanted in the dangerous dog as required under section 347.515. Subd. 2a. Warning symbol. If a county issues a certificate of registration to the owner of a dangerous dog pursuant to subdivision 2, the county must provide, for posting on the owner's property, a copy of a warning symbol to inform children that there is a dangerous dog on the property. The design of the warning symbol must be uniform and specified by the commissioner of public safety, after consultation with animal control professionals. The commissioner shall provide the number of copies of the warning symbol requested by each county and shall charge the county the actual cost of the warning symbols received. The county may charge the registrant a reasonable fee to cover its administrative costs and the cost of the warning symbol. Subd. 3. Fee. The county may charge the owner an annual fee, in addition to any regular dog licensing fees, to obtain a certificate of registration for a dangerous dog under this section. Subd. 3a. Dangerous dog designation review. Beginning six months after a dog is declared a dangerous dog, an owner may request annually that the animal control authority review the designation. The owner must provide evidence that the dog's behavior has changed due to the dog's age, neutering, environment, completion of obedience training that includes modification of aggressive behavior, or other factors. If the animal control authority finds sufficient evidence that the dog's behavior has changed, the authority may rescind the dangerous dog designation. Subd. 4. Law enforcement; exemption. The provisions of this section do not apply to dangerous dogs used by law enforcement officials for police work. Subd. 5. Exemption. Dogs may not be declared dangerous if the threat, injury, or damage was sustained by a person: (1) who was committing, at the time, a willful trespass or other tort upon the premises occupied by the owner of the dog; (2) who was provoking, tormenting, abusing, or assaulting the dog or who can be shown to have repeatedly, in the past, provoked, tormented, abused, or assaulted the dog; or (3) who was committing or attempting to commit a crime. Subd. 6.[Repealed, ISp2001 c 8 art 8 s 30] Subd. 7. Tag. A dangerous dog registered under this section must have a standardized, easily identifiable tag identifying the dog as dangerous and containing the uniform dangerous dog symbol, affixed to the dog's collar at all times. The commissioner of public safety, after consultation with animal control professionals, shall provide by rule for the design of the tag. Subd. 8. Local ordinances. A statutory or home rule charter city, or a county, may not adopt an ordinance regulating dangerous or potentially dangerous dogs based solely on the specific https:/ /www.revisor.1eg.state.mn.us/statutes/?id=34 7.51 6/6/2008 347.51, Minnesota Statute Page 2 of2 breed of the dog. Ordinances inconsistent with this subdivision are void. Subd. 9. Contracted services. A county may contract with another political subdivision or other person to provide the services required under sections 347.50 to 347.54. Notwithstanding any contract entered into under this subdivision, all fees collected under sections 347.50 to 347.54 shall be paid to the county and all certificates of registration must be issued in the name of the county . History: 1988 c 711 s 2; 1989 c 37 s 6-10; 1991 c 195 s 1; 1994 c 550 s 2; 1997 c 187 art 3 s 32; ISp2001 c 8 art 8 s 16-18 https:/ /www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/statutesl?id=34 7.51 6/6/2008 This document represents the act as presented to the governor. The version passed by the legislature is the final enqrossment. It does not represent the official 2008 session law, which will be available here summer 2008. CHAPTER 325--S.F.No. 2876 An act relating to animals; changing provisions regulating dangerous dogs; providing for certain cities to authorize certain outdoor food and beverage establishments to allow dogs to accompany patrons; amending Minnesota Statutes 2006, sections 347.50, by adding a subdivision; 347.51, subdivisions 2, 2a, 3, 7, 9; 347.52; 347.53; 347.54, subdivisions 1, 3; 347.55; 347.56; proposing coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapters 157; 347. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA: Section 1. r157.1751 DOGS: OUTDOOR FOOD AND BEVERAGE SERVICE ESTABLISHMENTS. Subdivision 1. Municipal authorization. A statutory or home rule charter city may adopt an ordinance to permit food and beveraqe service establishments to allow dOQS to accompany (.>ersons patronizinQ desiQnated outdoor areas of food and beverage establishments. Subd. 2. Dan~erous and potentiallv danaerous doas. The ordinance must prohibit dangerous and potentiallv danQerous doqs. as defined in section 347.50. from accompanvinq patrons to food and beveraqe establishments. Subd. 3. Bannina doas. The ordinance may not prohibit a food and beverage establishment from bannin~ dogs. A person accompanied bv a dog who remains at an establishment knowinQ that the operator of the establishment or its aqent has posted a si~n banninQ dogs or otherwise informed the person that doqs are not permitted in the establishment may be ordered to leave the premises. Subd. 4. Permit process. (a) The ordinance must require (.>articipatinQ establishments to applv for and receive a permit from the city before allowing (.>atrons' dogs on their premises. The city shall require from the applicant such information as the local government deems reasonablv necessary. but shall require, at a minimum. the followinq information: (1) the name, location. and mailing address of the establishment; (2) the name, mailinq address. and telephone contact information of the permit applicant; (3) a description of the desi~nated outdoor areas in which the permit applicant intends to allow dOQs; and (4) a description of the days of the week and hours of operation that patrons' doqs will be permitted in the designated outdoor areas. (b) A permit issued pursuant to the authority granted in this section must not be transferred to a subsequent owner upon the sale of a food and beverage establishment but must expire automaticallv upon the sale of the establishment. The subsequent owner shall be required to reapplv for a permit pursuant to this section if the subsequent owner wishes to continue to accommodate patrons' dOQs. (c) A city may incorporate the permit requirements of this section into a permit or license issued under an existing ordinance if the city ensures that current and future permit and license holders complv with the requirements of this section. A city may exempt current permit and license holders from reapplvinq for a permit. if the current permit or license holder provides the city with the information required in paraqraph (a) and any other information that the Citv requests. Subd. 5. Minimum requirements. The ordinance must include such regulations and limitations as the local Qovernment deems reasonably necessary to protect the health, safety, and Qeneral welfare of the public, but must require, at a minimum, the followinQ requirements, which must be clearly printed on a sign or signs posted on premises in a manner and place that are conspicuous to employees and patrons: (1) employees must be prohibited from touchinQ, petting, or otherwise handling dOQs; (2) employees and patrons must not allow dogs to come into contact with servinQ dishes, utensils, tableware, linens, paper products, or any other items involved in food service operations: (3) patrons must keep their dOQS on a leash at all times and must keep their dOQS under reasonable control: (4) dogs must not be allowed on chairs, tables, or other furnishings: and (5) dOQ waste must be cleaned immediately and the area sanitized. Subd. 6. Service animals. NothinQ in this statute, or an ordinance adopted pursuant to this statute, shall be construed to limit: (1) the right of a person with disabilities to access places of public accommodation while accompanied by a service animal as provided in sections 256C.02 and 363A.19: or (2) the lawful use of a service animal by a licensed peace officer. Subd. 7. Desianated outdoor area. The ordinance must include a definition of "desiQnated outdoor area" that is consistent with applicable rules adopted by the commissioner of health. EFFECTIVE DA TE.This section is effective the day followino final enactment. Sec. 2. Minnesota Statutes 2006, section 347.50, is amended by adding a subdivision to read: Subd. 8. Provocation. "Provocation" means an act that an adult could reasonably expect may cause a dOQ to attack or bite. Sec. 3. Minnesota Statutes 2006, section 347.51, subdivision 2, is amended to read: Subd. 2. Registration. An animal control authority shall issue a certificate of registration to the owner of a dangerous dog if the owner presents sufficient evidence that: (1) a proper enclosure exists for the dangerous dog and a posting on the premises with a clearly visible warning sign that there is a dangerous dog on the property, including a warning symbol to inform children, that there is a dangerous dog on the property; (2) a surety bond issued by a surety company authorized to conduct business in this state in a form acceptable to the animal control authority in the sum of at least $50,000 $300,000, payable to any person injured by the dangerous dog, or a policy of liability insurance issued by an insurance company authorized to conduct business in this state in the amount of at least $50,000 $300,000, insuring the owner for any personal injuries inflicted by the dangerous dog; (3) the owner has paid an annual fee of not more than $500, in addition to any regular dog licensing fees, to obtain a certificate of registration for a dangerous dog under this section; and (4) the owner has had microchip identification implanted in the dangerous dog as required under section 347.515. Sec. 4. Minnesota Statutes 2006, section 347.51, subdivision 2a, is amended to read: Subd. 2a. Warning symbol. If a county an animal control authority issues a certificate of registration to the owner of a dangerous dog pursuant to subdivision 2, the county animal control authority must provide, for posting on the owner's property, a copy of a warning symbol to inform children that there is a dangerous dog on the property. The design of the warning symbol must be the uniform and specified symbol provided by the commissioner of public safety, after consultation with animal control professionals. The commissioner shall provide the number of copies of the warning symbol requested by each county the animal control authority and shall charge the county animal control authority the actual cost of the warning symbols received. The county animal control authority may charge the registrant a reasonable fee to cover its administrative costs and the cost of the warning symbol. Sec. 5. Minnesota Statutes 2006, section 347.51, subdivision 3, is amended to read: Subd. 3. Fee. The county animal control authority may charge the owner an annual fee, in addition to any regular dog licensing fees, to obtain a certificate of registration for a dangerous dog under this section. Sec. 6. Minnesota Statutes 2006, section 347.51, subdivision 7, is amended to read: Subd. 7. Tag. A dangerous dog registered under this section must have a standardized, easily identifiable tag identifying the dog as dangerous and containing the uniform dangerous dog symbol, affixed to the dog's collar at all times. +Re commissioner of public safety, after consultation ':lith animal control professionals, shall provide by rule for the design of the tag. Sec. 7. Minnesota Statutes 2006, section 347.51, subdivision 9, is amended to read: Subd. 9. Contracted services.!". county An animal control authority may contract with another political subdivision or other person to provide the services required under sections 347.50 to 347.51 347.565. Notwithstanding any contract entered into under this subdivision, all fees collected under sections 347.50 to 347.54 shall be paid to the county animal control authority and all certificates of registration must be issued in the name of the county animal control authority. Sec. 8. Minnesota Statutes 2006, section 347.52, is amended to read: 347.52 DANGEROUS DOGS; REQUIREMENTS. (a) An owner of a dangerous dog shall keep the dog, while on the owner's property, in a proper enclosure. If the dog is outside the proper enclosure, the dog must be muzzled and restrained by a substantial chain or leash and under the physical restraint of a responsible person. The muzzle must be made in a manner that will prevent the dog from biting any person or animal but that will not cause injury to the dog or interfere with its vision or respiration. (b) An owner of a dangerous dog must renew the registration of the dog annually until the dog is deceased. If the dog is removed from the jurisdiction, it must be reg istered as a dangerous dog in its new jurisdiction. (c) An owner of a dangerous dog must notify the animal control authority in writing of the death of the dog or its transfer to a new jurisdiction location where the dog will reside within 30 days of the death or transfer, and must, if requested by the animal control authority, execute an affidavit under oath setting forth either the circumstances of the dog's death and disposition or the complete name, address, and telephone number of the person to whom the dog has been transferred or the address where the do!:! has been relocated. (d) An animal control authority may shall require a dangerous dog to be sterilized at the owner's expense. If the owner does not have the animal sterilized within 30 days, the animal control authority may shall seize the dog and have the animalj! sterilized at the owner's expense. (e) A person who owns a dangerous dog and who rents property from another where the dog will reside must disclose to the property owner prior to entering the lease agreement and at the time of any lease renewal that the person owns a dangerous dog that will reside at the property. (f) A person who seUs transfers ownership of a dangerous dog must notify the purchaser new owner that the animal control authority has identified the dog as dangerous.The seUeF current owner must also notify the animal control authority in writing of the sale transfer of ownership and provide the animal control authority with the new owner's name, address, and telephone number. Sec. 9. Minnesota Statutes 2006, section 347.53, is amended to read: 347.53 POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS AND DANGEROUS DOGS. Any statutory or home rule charter city, or any county, may regulate potentially dangerous and danQerous dogs. Except as provided in section 347.51, subdivision 8 , nothing in sections 347.50 to 347.54 347.565 limits any restrictions that the local jurisdictions may place on owners of potentially dangerous or danQerous dogs. Sec. 10. Minnesota Statutes 2006, section 347.54, subdivision 1, is amended to read: Subdivision 1. Seizure. (a) The animal control authority having jurisdiction shall immediately seize any dangerous dog if: (1) after 14 days after the owner has notice that the dog is dangerous, the dog is not validly registered under section 347.51; (2) after 14 days after the owner has notice that the dog is dangerous, the owner does not secure the proper liability insurance or surety coverage as required under section 347.51, subdivision 2; (3) the dog is not maintained in the proper enclosure; 9f (4) the dog is outside the proper enclosure and not under physical restraint of a responsible person as required under section 347.52.: or (5) the dog is not sterilized within 30 days. pursuant to section 347.52. paraQraph (d). (b) If an owner of a dog is convicted of a crime for which the dog was originally seized, the court may order that the dog be confiscated and destroyed in a proper and humane manner, and that the owner pay the costs incurred in confiscating, confining, and destroying the dog. Sec. 11. Minnesota Statutes 2006, section 347.54, subdivision 3, is amended to read: Subd. 3. Subsequent offenses; seizure. If a person has been convicted of a misdemeanor for violating a provision of section 347.51.347.515. or 347.52, and the person is charged with a subsequent violation relating to the same dog, the dog must be seized by the animal control authority having jurisdiction. If the owner is convicted of the crime for which the dog was seized. the court shall order that the dog be destroyed in a proper and humane manner and the owner pay the cost of confining and destroying the animal. If the person is not convicted of the crime for 'Nhich the dog was seized, the O'Nner may reclaim the dog upon payment to the animal control authority of a fee for the care and bO~lrding of the dog. If the owner is not convicted and the dog is not reclaimed by the owner within seven days after the owner has been notified that the dog may be reclaimed, the dog may be disposed of as provided under section 35.71, subdivision 3, and the owner is liable to the animal control authority for the costs incurred in oonfin~ng, impounding, and disposing of the dog. Sec. 12. r347.5411 DISPOSITION OF SEIZED ANIMALS. Subdivision 1. Hearina. The owner of any doa declared danaerous has the right to a hearina by an impartial hearing officer. Subd. 2. Security. A person claiming an interest in a seized doa may prevent disposition of the doa by postinq security in an amount sufficient to provide for the dog's actual cost of care and keepina. The security must be posted within seven days of the seizure inclusive of the date of the seizure. Subd. 3. Notice. The authority declaring the doa dangerous shall aive notice of this section by delivering or mailina it to the owner of the doa. or by postina a COpy of it at the place where the doa is kept, or by delivering it to a person residina on the property. and telephoning. if possible. The notice must include: (1) a description of the seized doa: the authority for and purpose of the dangerous dog declaration and seizure: the time. place. and circumstances under which the doa was declared danaerous: and the telephone number and contact person where the doa is kept; (2) a statement that the owner of the doa may reauest a hearina concerning the dangerous doa declaration and. if applicable. prior potentially dangerous dog declarations for the dog. and that failure to do so within 14 days of the date of the notice will terminate the owner's riaht to a hearina under this section: (3) a statement that if an appeal reauest is made within 14 days of the notice. the owner must immediately comply with the reauirements of section 347.52. paraaraphs (a) and (c), and until such time as the hearina officer issues an opinion: (4) a statement that if the hearing officer affirms the dangerous dog declaration, the owner will have 14 days from receipt of that decision to comply with all other reauirements of sections 347.51.347.515. and 347.52: (5) a form to reauest a hearina under this subdivision: and (6) a statement that all actual costs of the care. keepina. and disposition of the doa are the responsibility of the person c1aimina an interest in the doa. except to the extent that a court or hearina officer finds that the seizure or impoundment was not substantially iustified by law. Subd. 4. Riaht to hearina. Any hearina must be held within 14 days of the reauest to determine the validity of the dangerous doa declaration. The hearina officer must be an impartial employee of the local aovernment or an impartial person retained by the local aovernment to conduct the hearina. In the event that the danaerous doa declaration is upheld by the hearina officer, actual expenses of the hearina up to a maximum of $1.000 will be the responsibility of the doars owner. The hearina officer shall issue a decision on the matter within ten days after the hearing. The decision must be delivered to the doa's owner by hand delivery or reaistered mail as soon as practical and a coPy must be provided to the animal control authority. Sec. 13. r347.5421 RESTRICTIONS. Subdivision 1. Doa ownership prohibited. Except as provided in subdivision 3. no person may own a doa if the person has: (1) been convicted of a third or subseauent violation of section 347.51.347.515. or 347.52; (2) been convicted of a violation under section 609.205. clause (4): (3) been convicted of a gross misdemeanor under section 609.226. subdivision 1: (4) been convicted of a violation under section 609.226. subdivision 2: or (5) had a doa ordered destroyed under section 347.56 and been convicted of one or more violations of section 347.51. 346.515, 347.52. or 609.226. subdivision 2. Subd. 2. Household members. If any member of a household is prohibited from owninQ a dOQ in subdivision 1. unless specifically approved with or without restrictions by an animal control authority. no person in the household is permitted to own a dOQ. Subd. 3. Do~ ownership prohibition review. Be~inninQ three years after a conviction under subdivision 1 that prohibits a person from owning a dOQ. and annually thereafter. the person may request that the animal control authority review the prohibition. The animal control authority may consider such facts as the seriousness of the violation or violations that led to the prohibition. any criminal convictions. or other facts that the animal control authority deems appropriate. The animal control authority may rescind the prohibition entirely or rescind it with limitations. The animal control authority also may establish conditions a person must meet before the prohibition is rescinded. includinQ. but not limited to. successfully completinQ dOQ traininQ or dOQ handlinQ courses. If the animal control authority rescinds a person's prohibition and the person subsequently fails to compl\( with any limitations imposed by the animal control authority or the person is convicted of any animal violation involvinQ unprovoked bites or dOQ attacks. the animal control authority may permanently prohibit the person from owninQ a dog in this state. Sec. 14. Minnesota Statutes 2006, section 347.55, is amended to read: 347.55 PENALTY. (a) My- A person who violates aAY~ provision of section 347.51.347.515. or 347.52 is guilty of a misdemeanor. (b) It is a misdemeanor to remove a microchip from a dangerous or potentially dangerous dog, to fail to renew the registration of a dangerous dog, to fail to account for a dangerous dog's death or removal from the jurisdiction chanQe of location where the dOQ will reside, to sign a false affidavit with respect to a dangerous dog's death or removal from the jurisdiction chanQe of location where the dOQ will reside, or to fail to disclose ownership of a dangerous dog to a property owner from whom the person rents property. (c) A person who is convicted of a second or subsequent violation of paraQraph (a) or (b) is Quilty of a gross misdemeanor. (d) An owner who violates section 347.542. subdivision 1. is Quilty of a Qross misdemeanor. (e) Any household member who knowingly violates section 347.542. subdivision 2. is Quilty of a Qross misdemeanor. Sec. 15. Minnesota Statutes 2006, section 347.56, is amended to read: 347.56 DESTRUCTION OF DOG IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. Subdivision 1. Circumstances. Notwithstanding sections 347.51 to 347.55, a dog that inflicted substantial or great bodily harm on a human being on public or private property without provocation may be destroyed in a proper and humane m~.mner by the animal control authority. The animal control authority may not destroy the dog until the dog owner has had the opportunity for a hearing bef-ore an impartial decision maker. may be destroyed in a proper and humane manner by the animal control authority if the dOQ: (1) inflicted substantial or ~reat bodily harm on a human on public or private property without provocation; (2) inflicted multiple bites on a human on public or private property without provocation; (3) bit multiple human victims on public or private propertV' in the same attack without provocation; or (4) bit a human on public or private property without provocation in an attack where more than one dog participated in the attack. Subd. 2. Hearina. The animal control authority may not destroy the do~ until the dog owner has had the opportunity for a hearing before an impartial decision maker. The definitions in section 347.50 and the exemptions under section 347.51, subdivision 5 , apply to this section. Sec. 16. [347.5651 APPLICABILITY. Sections 347.50 to 347.56 must be enforced bv animal control authorities or law enforcement agencies, whether or notthese sections have been adopted into local ordinance. alley Me oran urn City Administration/Council 763-593-8003 I 763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting June 10, 2008 Agenda Item 3. Utility Markings on Sidewalks Prepared By Thomas Burt, City Manager Summary Council Member Scanlon asked that this item be placed on the agenda.