 |
|||||
|
Will RB anti-barking law turn out to be a real dog?
by George Wiley
It isn't law yet, but Redondo Beach is proposing to unleash its policemen on city's barking dogs.
While no one seems to doubt the city's sincerity in attempting to tackle the complex issue, some city officials are speculating that the city council doesn't know when to say "no" to constituents complaining about their neighbors' noisy pets.
Last week the city council was poised to enact its dog-barking ordinance for a six-month trial. At the last moment, the ordinance was sent back to staff for a rewrite in order to clear up details about giving dog owners notice that they were about to be hit with $78 in fines if they didn't muzzle their canines.
The ordinance is coming back to the council Feb. 15. If city animal control or police officers responding to complaints of a barking dog hear the animal continuously for five minutes, they can issue a warning to the pet owner. If called back the same day for a continued problem, the citation can be issued for the $78 fine. If unpaid after two weeks, the fine would escalate to $98. No more than one fine could be imposed upon the pet owner in any one day.
If repeated infractions occurred, pet owners could be cited with a misdemeanor and face possible criminal prosecution.
Animal control officers would respond to noise complaints when on duty, but police would be called after-hours.
Up to now, Redondo has essentially relied on dispute resolution procedures and small claims court actions to settle barking-dog complaints. The city would still like barking victims to use these services, but the new ordinance is an attempt to discourage scoff-law dog owners who ignore their neighbor's discomfort.
Under the noise reporting procedure, dog owners would not be given the names of those complaining against them until a case is filed in court. At that time, the complainant's name would appear on court documents.
Redondo Code Enforcement Manager Mike Magdaleno told the city council last week that there was a chance, as dog owners have already pointed out to the council, that code enforcement officers, whether animal control or police, might cause animals to bark by coming to the reported residence. But Magdaleno also said that barking-dog laws need teeth. "Our staff does attempt to meet with an animal's owner," he said. "We often meet with resistance. People don't want to be told what to do with their dogs."
Magdaleno estimated the city receives about three dog-barking complaints per day.
In 1998, Redondo police logged 408 animal disturbance calls. As of Nov. 18, they had received 305 calls for 1999.
Residents at the council meeting voiced fears that imposing fines would cause animosity to escalate, "pitting neighbor against neighbor," and that dispute resolution and small claims should remain the favored options.
At a city meeting of department heads later in the week, several persons mentioned the barking-dog ordinance when voicing concern that the city council sometimes went overboard to meet residents' demands for all sorts of services that the city cannot really provide. Based on council comments last week, the law will be given a trial run and dog owners who don't keep their pets quiet may pay for it.ER