City Council Minutes 2016 11 15 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Meeting Minutes November 15, 2016 Page 8 of 14 o Given the small percentage of dogs actually getting a license, it is not a useful way to ensure dogs are getting rabies vaccinations. • It is not helpful in identifying lost dogs. If a dog is picked up with a collar it generally has its full tags including an identification tag. If a dog is without a collar the license is also missing. In these cases identification is generally made by a chip scan. ® The Municipal Court has received three tickets in the last ten years for unlicensed dogs, the last one was written in 2009. Clerk Muth noted at first reading some Councilmembers were not supportive of this ordinance. Staff is certainly open to alternatives or other suggestions. Among staff there has been discussion around the goal of the program and it was determined that it is to ensure dogs in Louisville have current rabies vaccinations. As such, staff suggests a practical and easy alternative to dog licensing is to amend the code to require all dogs have rabies vaccinations and carry that proof on their collars with a standard rabies tag. Such an amendment would allow code enforcement and open space staff to ticket dog owners who do not have proof of vaccinations but would also reduce the staff time and cost of licensing. Staff believes this would meet the same objective as dog licensing without the overhead of a licensing program. Staff recommends against changing the program in any way that increases workload unless there is a corresponding benefit. If Council desires an expanded dog licensing program, staff recommends considering that during the January 10th priority setting meeting. The fiscal impact of discontinuing the dog licensing program would be a decline of approximately $4,000 in revenue annually. The City currently brings in about $6,000 per year from licensing and spends approximately $2,000 on supplies and staff time. Mayor Muckle asked for public comment. There were no public comments. Councilmember Loo stated she doesn't support the ordinance. She would like to see a bigger effort to advertise licensing and to use it as an education tool for owners on proper dog etiquette. Councilmember Leh stated this is a law that has outlived its usefulness and he supports ending dog licensing. Councilmember Stolzmann stated her opposition to this ordinance noting she thinks dog licensing is a great opportunity to interact with staff and discuss all aspects of dog ownership rules. We should make the licensing program more effective not get rid of it. Councilmember Leh stated he would rather money be put into enforcement than the dog licensing program which is not meeting the needs of the City.