SL council to update animal ordinances

“If the dog ran past and got away from the signal and, in the worst case scenario, they harm someone, you wouldn’t know whether they had that electronic device until there was some kind of intervention."”

Meg McKeon

The Storm Lake City Council will continue to review and revise the city’s ordinances on dogs, cats and “dangerous and vicious” animals. The city council agreed to ordinance that outline a procedure for licensing pets with the city, rules for leashing and potential penalties for having an unlicensed animal or an animal deemed dangerous by the city. 

The city council agreed to consolidate the separate ordinances into one, per recommendation of City Attorney Maria Brownell. 

The city council is expected to review ordinance changes by the end of the year. 

Brownell joined the city council for a work session on the new ordinance on June 17. The animal ordinance had not been updated since 2008, and City Manager Keri Navratil explained that Brownell advised the city council to update and clarify some of its legal language and policies. The process of amending and editing the new animal ordinance is still underway and will not be finalized for at least a month. 

Brownell worked to clarify and differentiate the definition of an “owner,” which includes “any person, firm or corporation owning, harboring, sheltering or keeping a dog, including any person who feeds or otherwise cares for a dog.”

Additionally, Brownell edited the definition of “at large,” which refers to “any dog running otherwise than upon the premises of its owner when the dog is not attached to at least six feet or less in length, or other similar physical constraint.”

Councilperson Meg McKeon first brought up concerns with the proposed leashing policy, questioning how to identify whether an owner has an electronic leash. 

“If the dog ran past and got away from the signal and, in the worst case scenario, they harm someone, you wouldn’t know whether they had that electronic device until there was some kind of intervention,” McKeon said. “I don’t know any way around it.”

The sections on cats found running at large still require significant discussion and edits. Brownell temporarily included language about a possible Trap-Neuter-Return program that could help manage the local cat population. The city council held a public forum on the potential TNR program on Wednesday, June 26, to field community opinion before they reassess the policy for the ordinance. 

Lastly, the ordinance would delineate a process for determining whether an animal is “dangerous” or “vicious.” For example, if a dog bites someone in the community, the police would make a recommendation to the city based on their experience on the scene. 

McKeon cited concerns about who makes those determinations. She said she would prefer a trained veterinary expert’s opinion over that of the city manager. 

“An officer saying a dog is vicious doesn’t mean it’s so,” said Chris Cole, Storm Lake police chief, at the council meeting. “Once we make that assessment, then the city manager makes a decision based on the evidence that’s turned in.”

Animals that the police deem vicious would be impounded at Lake Animal Hospital while Navratil would review all evidence before officially deciding whether the animal is a danger to release. She said she consults evidence like police body camera footage, police reports, hearings and testimony from the owners. 

Owners can choose to appeal that ruling before the city council. Navratil said she has only taken part in two appeal hearings, one of which the council denied. 

Animal licensure

Brownell, Navratil and the city council also discussed changes to animal licensure requirements. Under the most recent draft of the ordinance, owners would be required to apply for a license within six months of owning their dog or cat. At the city council meeting, McKeon questioned how soon a person who moves to Storm Lake would have to register their animal. Navratil said it would likely also be six months and that they would add that to a new section in the ordinance. 

Navratil highlighted that the drafted ordinance requires owners to annually procure a license from the city and pay no later than Jan. 1 each year. The fee would be around $20, which Mayor Mike Porsch said seemed reasonable. That fee could potentially be higher if the pet is not spayed or neutered. 

“Is annual licensure too restrictive?” McKeon asked. “Do we want to be that extreme?”

The license application would also require the owner to prove their pet has up-to-date vaccinations as approved by the state. 

Under the proposed ordinance updates, it would be unlawful for an owner to have an unlicensed animal or allow their dog to run at large. Unlicensed dogs found running at large would be seized and impounded — most likely taken by the police and transported to Lake Animal Hospital. The owner would also be cited with a municipal infraction. 

McKeon requested adding a section requiring owners to clean up after their dogs. Any violation of the ordinance could result in a municipal infraction.

Those found to have violated any part of the ordinance might also have to pay a fine to the city. Councilperson Kevin McKinney called for a discussion on setting specific fees, hoping they would prevent repeat offenses.