►
From YouTube: CEAC 02/02/2021 Special Meeting
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
C
D
D
I
had
to
have
someone
smarter
than
me:
do
it
so
I
do
whenever
I
look
at
it.
I
like
this
one
and
I
always
think
that
is
a
very
hefty.
C
Cat,
he
looks
a
little,
he
looks
like
he's,
got
an
attitude
as
well.
B
B
For
for
having
me
it's
great.
B
I
believe
it's
based
on
the
email.
I
thought
it
was
the
february.
B
A
E
Of
course
you
are,
of
course
you
are,
I'm
sorry.
I.
F
G
A
A
A
E
E
E
E
I
don't
know
why
that
was
difficult
to
say,
and
a
special
welcome
to
christopher
and
robert
watson,
christopher
underwood,
and
robert
watson,
who
both
were
sworn
in
yesterday
as
new
members,
christopher,
is
a
full-term
member
and
then
robert
is
our
alternate
and
then
I
would
also
like
to
welcome
alex
dortek,
who
is
from
the
city
attorney's
office
and
is
here
to
answer
any
questions
we
may
have
for
the
proposed
edits.
So
the
purpose
of
this
meeting.
E
By
maureen,
do
we
have
any
other
attendees
that
have
joined
onya
just
to
speak?
Okay,
but
I
mean
in
terms
of
speakers.
E
E
In
november
we
submitted
a
proposal
to
city
council
to
update
the
code
for
section,
seven
or
7.1
animals
and
fowl,
as
it
related
to
code
enforcement's
ability
to
impound
animals
other
than
dogs
and
cats,
and
we
asked
at
the
time
we
requested
that
the
city
attorney
make
the
recommended
edits,
because
there
were
several
different
ways.
E
The
code
could
be
modified
to
incorporate
animals
other
than
just
dogs
and
cats,
in
terms
of
protecting
them
from
the
cruelty
and
neglect,
and
so
that
was
presented
to
city
council
in
january,
and
then
city
council
requested
the
city
attorney's
office
to
make
them
propose
modifications.
E
So
if,
if
I
could,
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
carson
is
not
able
to
join,
he
lost
his
internet
from
some
work.
They
were
doing
on
the
street
by
his
house,
so
he
sent
me
some
proposed
edits.
If
it's
okay
with
you
all
I'll,
go
ahead
and
share
with
you
what
his
comments
were.
Basically,
he
felt
like
the
edits
were
appropriate
and
did
cover
animals
other
than
dogs
and
cats.
E
E
E
Spelling
checks
and
grammar
checks
that
I'll
send
to
alex,
but
I
don't
think
that
I'm
gonna
I'm
going
to
to
go
through
those.
It's
it's
basically
a
spell
check
and
a
grammar
type
situation,
so
that
was
carson's
feedback.
I'm
going
to
go
around
the
committee
and
ask
for
feedback
from
everyone.
Why
don't?
I
start
with
sonya
sonia?
You
were
the
first
person
I
heard
from
when
I
sent
those
edits
out.
E
D
D
Is
that
it's
not
any
any
committee's
burden
to
actually
write
the
code?
I
I'm
not
saying
I
welcome
any
edit
any
any
comment
or
anything,
but
it's
my
burden
to
do
the
actual
writing
again.
D
I
welcome
any
any
thoughts,
any
assistance,
any
editing,
but
the
goal
here
was
to
make
it
so
that
if
any
code
enforcement
officer
comes
across
any
domesticated
animal,
which
is
any,
as
you
had
stated
about
in
any
either
pet
or
livestock,
that
is
either
being
neglected
that
is
being
treated
cruelly,
or
that
is
running
at
large
that
cod
enforcement
officer
has
the
ability
to
impound
that
animal
now
for
a
while
wild
animals
are
a
totally
different
circumstance.
D
So
it
doesn't
really
come
into
play
for
this,
but
that
was
the
whole
goal
in
writing
this
and
so-
and
I
do
believe
that
I've
gotten
to
that
goal.
But
I
again,
I
welcome
any
comment
or
any
question
or
anything,
but
if,
if
if
the
question
is
what
you
know,
what
we're
trying
to
accomplish?
It's
just
that
that
if
any
code
enforcement
officer
sees
any
animal
that
is
domesticated
in
the
in
the
broad
sense,
he
or
she
can
impound
that
animal.
If
it's
necessary
to
do
so,.
E
Great,
thank
you
supervisor
louis.
I
guess
I
should
have
started
with
your
feedback
and
especially
in
the
the
sense
that
do
you
believe
this
helps
code
enforcement,
protect
all
animals
in
the
city
of
englewood.
Is
this
what
you
were
looking
for.
H
Thank
you,
chair,
bolton
first
off.
Let
me
just
welcome
the
new
members.
I
look
forward
to
potentially
meeting
with
you
in
the
near
future
I'd
love
to
set
up
a
scheduled
meeting
in
the
near
future
with
each
of
you.
Yes,
so
the
problem
was
posed
to
this
group
that
we've
encountered
multiple
cases
where
we
weren't
able
to
impound
certain
animals,
and
we
left
them
in
horrific
situations,
because
a
court
made
a
ruling
regarding
this,
this
particular
ordinance,
and
so
I
pose
that
to
you,
you
presented
it.
H
H
This
is
exactly
what
we
were
asking
for,
and
I
greatly
appreciate
the
city
attorney
and
every
single
member
on
this
on
this
committee
that
moved
this
forward.
This
really
does
it
saves
animals
and
it
allows
us
to
do
what
people
think
we
already
do,
which
we
weren't
able
to
do
for
half
the
animals
in
the
city
of
inglewood.
G
E
Oh,
when
you
say
definitions
and
dogs
and
cats,
are
you
referring
to
the
beginning
of
the
article?
That's
titled.
G
There's
definitions
that
define
at-risk
and
dangerous
dog:
it's
only
dogs
and
cats
that
are
defined
for
at
risk
or
dangerous.
So
unless
you
change
that
to
domesticated
animals
in
the
definition,
wherever
it
appears
only
as
dogs
and
cats,
the
the
code
is
meaningless.
G
Definitions
in
7-1-8-1
classified
any
dog
or
cat
adjudicated
as
at-risk
or
dangerous
at-risk
animal,
any
dog
or
cat
repeatedly
runs
a
large
any
dog
or
cat,
dangerous
animal,
any
dog
or
cat
at
risk.
Animal,
any
dog
or
cat.
G
The
definitions
can
stay
but
on
dog
or
cat,
but
the
dog
or
cat
owner
has
to
change
too
domesticated
dog
or
cats
stray
and
or
running
at
large.
These
are
all
definitions,
so.
G
Large
private
public,
it
just
identifies
dog
and
cat.
G
Kennels
or
cattery
any
place
where
dogs
are
cats.
Let's
see
yeah
muzzle,
it's
only
referencing
a
dog,
the
definition
in
7
1c-1,
any
anima
being
excluding
the
dog
and
cat
that
needs
to
be
removed.
I.
E
Have
some
a
question
for
you
cohen?
Does
this
have
to
relate
to
animals
that
have
been
deemed
treated
cruelly
or
neglected.
E
So
so
let
me
stop
you
there,
so
our
focus
tonight
is
we're
just
looking
at
the
section
of
the
code
that
addresses
the
ability
to
impound
animals
other
than
dogs
and
cats.
So
I
think
I
I
hear
what
you're
saying,
but
it
really
doesn't
relate
to
the
section
that
we're
reviewing.
G
It
most
definitely
does
it's
a
ripple
effect
if
you're
going
to
change
and
the
title
even
just
says,
dogs
and
cats.
That
needs
to
be
changed
and
I
haven't
finished,
there's
another.
I
have
another
thing:
we
need
a
definition
of
impound
because,
according
to
6-5-1,
all
code
enforcement
can
do
is
write,
summons
and
complaints.
They
have
no
police
powers
if
you
take
a
dog
or
a
cat
or
any
animal
or
any
property
from
an
individual
private
property
that
has
to
be
a
police
action,
because
you're
seizing
private
property.
E
Let
me
let
me
go
back
to
alex
in
a
minute:
let's,
let's
let
colleen
go
ahead
and
finish
so
colleen.
Do
you.
G
Think
there's
a
couple
of
codes
that
refer
to
dogs
and
cats
and
it
has
to
do
with
tethering
and
their
welfare.
G
Let's
see
where'd
it
go,
I
went
through
the
definitions
and
that
was
a
nightmare.
Okay,.
G
Yes,
7-1
c-2,
it
has
to
do
with
animal
welfare,
keeping
them
clean
and
removing
manure.
G
I
think
it's
7-1-8-2,
I
don't
believe
you
address
that
at-risk
and
dangerous
behavior
prohibited.
It
shall
be
unlawful
for
any
dog
or
cat
or
any
dog
or
cat
owner,
and
on
7-1
a-4
tethering.
G
You
would
need
to
include
those
if
you're
going
to
be
talking
about
cruelty
because
that's
part
of
the
cruelty,
but
if
I
think
it's
incumbent
upon
us
there's
nothing
in
the
code
that
says
code
enforcement
can
impound
and
impounding
is
a
specific
police
action,
because
it's
seizing
property,
and
it
also
says
when
it
talks
about
impounding.
G
It
says
the
city,
it
doesn't
define
code
enforcement
and
the
title
6-5-1
that
does
define
the
duties
of
code
enforcement,
says
they
don't
have
police
powers,
they
can't
make
arrests
and
impounding
is
the
equivalent
of
arrest,
seizing
private
property
or
family,
because
a
lot
of
people
consider
their
pets
family.
It's
seizing,
and
I
think
we
need
due
process
here
too,
that
just
because
they
think
it
might
be
neglected.
G
Yeah
there's
a
lot
of
stuff,
that's
very
confusing
and
leaving
the
definitions
the
way
they
are
in
in
the
separation.
G
Really,
the
thing
needs
to
be
brought
together
because
there's
in
I'm
losing
track
of
this
I'm
having
to
operate
from
a
second
computer
and
wasn't
able
to
get
a
lot
of
stuff.
Oh
yes,
the
prohibition
of
livestock.
It
shall
be
unlawful
and
this
is
in
the
section
under
other
animals.
It
shall
be
unlawful
for
anyone
within
the
city
limits
to
keep
harbor
or
maintain
cattle
horses,
sheep,
goats
or
swine
on
their
premises.
G
So
the
definition
of
domestic
animals
domesticated
animals
includes
livestock,
but
livestock
are
prohibited.
So
it's
not
going
to
solve
the
problem
of
allowing
swine
as
pets,
because
swine
are
prohibited
so
either
that
whole
section
has
to
go
away
or
he
won't
be.
Nobody
will
be
able
to
impound
anything
that's
listed
as
livestock,
and
I
remember
back
when
this
was
all
being
discussed
to
allow
pot-bellied,
pigs
or
other
animals
or
livestock
is
well.
G
Where
do
we
draw
the
line
on
pigs
because
somebody
wanted
to
keep
a
pot-bellied
pig
and
up
until
about
a
year
or
so
old?
They
can
stay
under
130
pounds,
and
that
was
the
limit
they
were
talking
about.
It
never
made
it
into
the
code.
It
never
went
past
the
discussions
stage,
but
they
said
after
130
or
150
pounds
it
becomes
dinner,
but
they
never
change
the
code
livestock.
G
If
it's
domesticated
animals
are
included
in
the
first
section
as
livestock,
but
they're
prohibited
in
another
section.
That's
an
inconsistency
one
one
of
two
things
has
to
happen:
either
the
prohibition
goes
away
or
adding
livestock
to
the
definition
of
domesticated
animals
as
pets
has
to
go
away
because
livestock
are
domesticated
so
either
they're
included
or
they're.
Not
so
I'm
not
sure
that
changing
this
domesticated
thing
is
going
to
do
us
any
good,
and
we
need
to
have
some
very
specific
due
process
things
built
into
the
impounding.
G
G
And
those
are
the
main
ones:
impounding
definitions
and
the
issue
of
domesticated
animals
that
are
also
livestock.
Okay,.
E
No,
it's!
Okay,
I'm
glad
you
did
because
sometimes
it's
hard
to
keep
track
when
you've
got
a
screen
full
of
people.
So
I
appreciate
that
I
just
wanted
to
go
ahead
and
get
through
colleen's
comments
and
I'm
sure
that
you
have
some
further
insight
that
you
can
provide
there.
D
I
do
I
mean
first,
I
would
note
that
a
number
of
the
things
that
miss
dickerson
said
is
correct,
that
there
are
some
things
that
could
be
cleaned
up
within
this
code
and
I
did
bring
that
up
to
city
council
on
was
about
a
week.
It
was
about
eight
days
ago.
I
can't
remember
when
we
had
the
tuesday
meeting
and
gave
them
the
option.
D
Do
we
want
to
go
forward
with
just
this
sort
of
quick
fix
to
allow
code
enforcement
to
impound
at
large
and
dangerous
animals,
or
do
we
want
to
do
sort
of
the
big
fix
that
will
take
more
time
and
sort
of
synthesize
and
then
clear
up
any
sort
of
confusions
or
or
perceived
inconsistencies
within
the
code
and
city
council
specifically
instructed
me
to
bring
this
to
you
so
that
we
could
clear
this
up,
make
it
so
that
code
enforcement
could,
as
mr
lewis
so
eloquently
said,
do
the
job
that
everyone
expects
them
to
and
then
go
back
and
look
at
whether
or
not
we
want
to
do
to
sort
of
take
on
the
challenge
of
cleaning
up
everything
so
that
it
flows.
D
Well.
The
other
thing
I
would
know-
and
I
really
want
to
remind
you-
you'll-
be
much
more
effective
as
a
body
if
you
focus
on
these.
This
is
what
we
want
to
have
happen,
not
necessarily
the
specifics
of
well
the
way.
The
legalese
reads,
because
you're
not
expected
to
be
lawyers,
and
that's
that's
not
the
role
that
you
have
you're
expected
to
be
citizens
who
come
in
and
say
look
from
a
code
enforcement
perspective.
This
is
what
we
want
to
see
happen
so,
for
instance,
to
sort
of
pick
up
what
miss
dickerson
was
saying.
D
E
Alex
is,
is
it
appropriate
to
say
that
there
is
further
work
being
done
on
the
remainder
of
the
animals
and
foul
article?
Yes
great?
So
so
I
I
assumed
that
you've,
you
did
you
take
notes
on
coin's
input,
because
I
think
you
know
her
input
belongs
in
the
in
the
bigger
article
and
really
what
we're
doing
is
we're
just
focusing
on
this
one
section.
D
And
certainly-
and
I
would
welcome
if
ms
dickerson
wanted
to
send
me-
an
email
delineating
that
at
any
detail,
she
wanted
that's
very
helpful
to
me
and
certainly
a
number
of
the
things
that
she
mentioned.
I'm
I'm
certainly
aware
of
that.
This
was
originally
written
so
as
to
only
apply
to
dog
and
dogs
and
cats,
and
I
can't
speak
as
to
why
that
is.
D
But
the
goal
of
this
sort
of
patch
fix
was
that
if
we
do
have
some
sort
of
any
animal
that
fits
the
definition
of
an
animal,
it's
being
treated
cruelly,
well,
a
domesticated
animal
that's
being
treated
cruelly,
or
that
is
a
danger,
or
that
is
at
large
that
that
animal
can
be
impounded
if
appropriate.
Right.
E
Thank
you.
Thank
you
very
much.
So
when
are
you
presenting
those
the
further
edits
to
council?
Is
there?
Is
there
a
a
deadline
on
that.
D
There
there
wasn't
a
deadline.
Okay,
as
and
I
and
I
apologize,
I
can't
give
you
a
specific
date
at
all.
It's
one
of
the
many
sort
of
projects
and
we'll
we'll
certainly
be
helpful
when
we'll
clean
things
up,
but
won't
have
the
same,
immediate
and
helpful
effect
that
this
will
okay,
great.
E
Thank
you.
What
I'd
like
to
do
is
I'd
like
to
hear
from
other
the
other
members
of
the
committee.
Let's
see
monica
did
you
have
any
comments.
C
Well,
just
looking
at
it
with
my
non-legal
eye,
it
looked
fine
to
me-
and
I
came
to
this
meeting
wanted
to
wanting
to
hear
if
the
code
enforcement
division
would
find
this
helpful,
and
I
appreciate
alex
kind
of
steering
us
and
it's
it's
feels
so
much.
It
feels
good
to
just
know
that
what
what
we've
done
is
is
appropriate
and
it's
okay
to
like
eat
this
elephant
one
bite
at
a
time.
So
if
it's
getting
the
job
done,
I'm
all
for
it.
Thank
you.
F
Oh,
I
completely.
Can
you
hear
me?
We
can
okay,
good
all
right.
I
completely
agree
with
alex
and
I
felt
like
that
the
code
was
rewritten
to
serve
its
purpose
to
help
code
enforcement
with
everything
they
come
across,
whether
it
be
backyard,
chickens
or
some
kind
of
animal.
That's
not
even
supposed
to
be
here,
so
I
agreed
with
it.
I
thought
it
was
good
for,
and
it
was
simple
enough
that
I
felt
like
most
people
could
read
it
and
understand
what
it
meant.
I
Kara
hi
yeah,
so
I
think
I
agree
if
this
you
know,
if
dave
lewis
is
happy
with
these
changes,
and
this
is
going
to
you
know,
work
for
him
and
his
group.
I
also
am
100
all
for
it
and
thank
you
alex
for
you
know
doing
the
the
drafting,
and
I
think
we
all
realize
that
you
know
the
code
does
need
a
larger
overhaul
and
that's
going
to
take
time,
but
there's
an
immediate
need
here
right
now,
and
I
think
this
solves
that.
So
thank
you.
B
I
appreciate
that
absolutely
reading
through
it,
everything
to
me
seems
very
reasonable
and
also
comprehensive.
I
agree
with
that.
I
think
it
looks
good
and
I
also
think
there
are
going
to
be
unique
situations
that
arise
at
which
point
that
you
know
we
can
either
make
amendments
to
it
or
make
changes
as
they
come
up,
but
everything
I
saw
looked
great.
E
And
robert
watson
did
you
have
any
comments
or
questions.
E
Okay.
Wonderful!
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
So,
at
this
point
I'd
like
to
see
if
we
can
do
a
motion
to
approve
the
edits
to
section
1-a
in
terms
of
impounding
animals,
so
that
code
enforcement
can
protect
all
animals
in
inglewood.
Could
I
have
a
first
and
second
motion.
E
Thank
you,
cara,
okay,
those
in
favor
of
approving
the
edits
to
this
section,
as
proposed
by
the
city's
attorney's
office
and
alex
I'll
forward
to
you,
the
the
grammatical
things
that
I
received.
Please
raise
your
hand
in
favor,
so
it
looks
maureen.
Can
you
see
our.
A
E
A
Yes,
I
approve
and
okay
all
right
carol.
I
approve
okay
and
colleen.
A
Okay,
that's
then
that
would
be
six
to
one:
okay,
wonderful,.
E
Dave,
do
you
have
what
you
need
from
us
in
order
to
to
move
forward
and
alex,
or
do
you
need
a
this?
In
writing.
E
Very
helpful:
well,
thank
you.
I
it
we're
impressed
at
how
quickly
this
was
taken
care
of,
and
I
will
go
ahead
and
send
to
you
the
comments
that
I
received
from
carson
and
then
cohen.
I
encourage
you
to
share
the
insight
you
gained
from
reviewing
it
with
alex
so
that
they
can
consider
that
when
they
do
the
larger
overhaul,
so
thank
you.
G
B
E
I
don't
have
that
in
front
of
me.
Oh
I'm
looking
at
the
wrong
thing
here,
sorry
so
so
what
does
that
mean?
Cohen,
you're
well,.
G
I'm
I'm
happy
to
send
it
out
to
him
and
I
will
send
it
to
you
also,
and
you
can
disseminate
it
to
the
committee
if
and
when
we
ever
want
to
discuss
it.
Okay,
great,
but
it
was
some
something
we
discussed,
because
I've
pointed
some
of
this
out
before
that.
That
is
not
a
simple
change.
It
is
a
pretty
massive
one
and
that
there
were
a
lot
of
issues
involved.
G
H
H
Okay,
so
it
because
this
is
a
public
forum
and
we
have
new
members.
I
feel
that
it's
very
important
that
I
make
this
statement,
because
some
opinions
were
shared
by
member
dickerson
that
are
not
factual
and
I
do
need
to
make
sure
that
the
public
knows
that,
and
this
body
knows
that
ms
dickerson
did
make
claims
that
we
do
not
have
the
authority
to
impound
animals
and
that
we
are
not
considered
peace
officers.
H
I
do
want
to
make
sure
that,
in
our
code
that
inglewood
code
enforcement
officers
are
defined
as
a
peace
officer,
we
do
have
limited
authority,
we
cannot
make
an
arrest,
but
we
do
have
the
authority
to
impound
animals
within
the
inglewood
municipal
code.
Secondly,
ms
dickerson
needs
to
be
aware
that
we
are
also
given
that
authority.
Under
the
colorado
revised
statute,
we
are
defined
as
peace
officers
also
under
that
statute.
H
There
are
hearings
that
are
built
into
not
only
the
inglewood
municipal
code
to
prove
that
we
have
a
case
just
like
with
a
child.
You
can
remove
a
child,
you
can
remove
an
animal,
but
you
do
have
to
have
a
due
process
hearing
and
that
is
set
up
a
municipal
code.
It's
also
set
up
within
the
state
statute
and
further
just
so.
Everyone
within
the
community
in
this
board
knows
is
we
are
certified
and
trained,
and
we
are
agents
with
the
department
of
agriculture.
H
Therefore,
we
are
bureau
of
animal
protection
agents
with
the
department
of
agriculture
which
further
defines
us
as
peace
officers
and
gives
us
this
authority.
We
also
have
the
authority
to
inspect
animals
for
a
variety
of
reasons:
considered
administrative,
not
just
criminal,
so
I
do
want
to
let
you
know
the
community
know
that
we
are
doing
our
jobs.
We
do
have
the
authority
and
the
information
that
was
given
by
miss
dickerson
is
not
factual.