►
Description
San Bruno City Council Meeting April 13, 2010
8c. Animal Control
B
Thank
You
mr.
mayor
members
of
the
City
Council
staff,
recommends
introduction
of
a
new
ordinance
that
clarifies
the
appeal
procedures
for
animal
control
laws.
The
ordinance
will
make
clear
that
a
person
who
is
challenging
in
a
determination
that
an
animal
is
dangerous
or
vicious
has
an
appeal
to
a
hearing
officer
and
then
a
further
appeal,
if
necessary,
to
a
port.
Also
someone
who
has
a
challenge
who
is
challenging
a
determination
for
some
other
animal
control
procedure,
such
as
a
permit
for
additional
animals
or
for
nuisance
determination.
B
They
have
an
appeal
to
the
City
Council
and
then
a
further
appeal,
if
necessary,
to
a
court.
The
reason
this
clarification
is
necessary
is
that
we've
seen
litigants
confused
the
applicable
appeals
process
and
claimed
that
they
were
entitled
to
both
a
hearing
hearing
officer
and
a
city
council
appeal
prior
to
an
appeal
to
a
court.
This
can
result
in
extending
litigation
by
adding
further
appeals
processes
where
AM
pulping
process
was
already
given.
B
So
here's
some
background
in
2005,
the
City
Council
amended
Stan
bruno's
animal
control
laws
by
incorporating
San
Mateo
County's
laws
relating
to
dangerous
and
vicious
animals,
as
well
as
other
matters.
Such
as
licensing
procedures
under
the
san
mateo
county
code
are
enforced
by
the
Humane
Society,
which
is
currently
under
contract
to
provide
animal
control
services
for
the
county.
All
other
animal
control
matters
such
as
permits
for
additional
animals,
nuisance,
determinations
and
appeals
to
City
Council
are
all
dealt
with
under
San
Bruno's
laws.
B
Now
under
San
Bruno's
code
appeals
to
the
City
Council
are
only
meant
to
apply
to
those
matters
that
the
city
itself
in
forces
such
as
nuisance
findings.
However,
some
aggrieved
parties
have
claimed
that
they
have
a
right
to
appeal:
County
determinations
to
the
City
Council.
For
example,
an
animal
owner
whose
dog
has
been
deemed
dangerous
or
vicious
by
a
county
official,
may
try
to
appeal
that
decision
to
the
City
Council,
even
though
city
staff
had
not
no
involvement
in
the
original
County
determination.
B
So
the
main
issue
is
that
there
are
two
sets
of
appeal
rights
and
the
these
sets
of
rights
should
not
be
confused
with
one
of
with
one.
Another
staff
recommends
that
San
Bruno's
code
be
amended
to
clarify
that
the
appeal
rights
contained
in
the
city's
regulations
don't
apply
to
those
County
determinations.
B
This
can
be
accomplished
with
a
simple
amendment
that
separates
those
regulations
from
enforced
by
San
Bruno
from
those
enforced
by
the
county,
and
this
amendment
will
clarify
that
the
rights
procedures
and
entitlements
granted
under
the
city's
code
are
separate
and
distinct
from
those
rights
procedures
and
entitlements
granted
by
reference
from
the
county
scope.
At
this
time,
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
you
may
have
any.
C
B
There's
no
actual
case
on
point
where
this
has
been
an
issue.
It's
just
that
the
appeals
process
is,
as
they
are.
Big
can
unclear
as
to
far
brief
parties
as
to
where
to
direct
their
appeals.
What
this
ordinance
will
help
to
do
is
to
help
streamline
the
appeals
processes
so
that
for
County
determinations
their
help,
their
appeals
are
handled
by
a
hearing
officer
and
then
any
further
appeals
are
handled
by
a
court.
Whereas
with
city
practices,
the
appeals
would
go
to
the
City
Council
then
to
another
court.
It
would
help
to.
A
D
D
Through
the
chair,
I
was
going
to
say
that
I
think
this
is
good,
clean
up
language
I
think
it
there's
already
a
due
process
in
place
with
the
county
and
that's
why
we
adopted
the
county
code.
So
I
think
it
helps
clear
it
up
and
streamlines
the
process
so
with
that
I'll
go
ahead
and
make
motion
to
wade
the
first
reading.
Second,.