Thanks to Jason for the heads up.
The original alert for Mobridge was issued in May 2009. Next council meeting and second vote on the proposed ordinance is in two weeks.
City of Mobridge
City Hall
114 1st Ave E
Mobridge, SD 57601-2604
(605) 845-3555
(605) 845-3521
FAX: 605-845-3309
steveg@westriv.com
Council resurrects the dog ordinance
By Katie Zerr
Wednesday, October 21, 2009 4:03 PM CDT
Ongoing problems in the city were the focus of the Mobridge City Council Monday, Oct. 19, as the dog ordinance was resurrected and nuisance properties discussed.
. . . .
Dog Ordinance
Jensen told the council he had put the first reading of Ordinance 881 (concerning pets), that died for lack of majority at the Oct. 5 meeting, back on the agenda.
"We started this discussion a few months ago and gave to the Police Advisory Board. They put a lot of work into this," he said. "We need to get something done on this."
Councilman Tony Yellow Boy said he voted against the first reading because he disagreed with the requirement that a licensed veterinarian must administer the required vaccinations in order for an owner to be able to get a pet license in Mobridge.
The license specification was written into the ordinance to cover any legal action taken if an incident should occur. According to Cain and the PAB, if a licensed veterinarian does not inoculate a dog, the state veterinarian would not recognize the vaccinations as legal.
The requirement is for the city's protection in a legal action.
Cox said his disagreement with the ordinance is that it only requires pit bull owners to adhere to the special requirements for ownership that includes a six-foot fence, with signage noting the presence of the dog and proof of $250,000 in liability insurance. He said other breeds should be included in those restrictions and that is why he voted against the first reading.
"What everybody is misunderstanding here is that this is just the first reading," said Councilman Tom O'Connell. "Stopping this ordinance from moving on was just stupid."
Cain told the group who had problems with the ordinance or with a specific paragraph of the ordinance should contact himself or Nehls.
"We will have the opportunity to make some changes and offer alternatives to the council," he said.
In a vote on the first reading of the ordinance, the council approved it by a three to one vote, with Cox voting against the ordinance and Ward III Councilman Rick Godkin absent from the meeting.
http://www.mobridgetribune.com/articles/2009/10/23/local_news/news01.txt
Jodi Preis
