CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, JANUARY 22, 2007
PRESENT: Mayor Bill Cross
Mayor Pro Tem Les Smith
Councilman Carol Rudi
Councilman Wayne Beer
Councilman Mark Revenaugh
City Manager Kirk Davis
City Counselor David Ramsay
Executive Assistant/Acting City Clerk Diane Whitaker
ABSENT: City Clerk Cathy Swenson
Mayor Bill Cross opened the Regular January 22, 2007, City Council Meeting at 7:30 PM in the Gladstone City Council Chambers.
Item 3. on the Agenda. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
Mayor Cross welcomed Boy Scout Troop 260, sponsored
Mayor Cross thanked the Scouts for their attendance at this meeting, and encouraged them to attend future meetings.
Item 4. on the Agenda. APPROVAL OF THE JANUARY 8, 2007, REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES.
Councilman Wayne Beer moved to approve the January 8, 2007, Regular City Council Meeting Minutes as presented. Councilman Carol Rudi seconded. The vote: All “aye” – Councilman Mark Revenaugh, Councilman Wayne Beer, Councilman Carol Rudi, Mayor Pro Tem Les Smith, and Mayor Bill Cross. (5-0).
Agenda Items 4a., 4b., and 4c., on the Agenda. PROCLAMATIONS recognizing First
Mayor Cross invited First Bank of Missouri President and Chief Executive Officer Kenneth Hollander, and Gladstone Hy-Vee Store Manager Steve Bindseil to join him in the front of the room.
Mayor Cross said he was sorry that Outback Steakhouse Managing Partner John Lillibridge was not able to be in attendance this evening; however, he and Mr. Hollander and Mr. Bindseil are not only active in the Gladstone Area Chamber of Commerce, but they go way beyond what is asked of them by their community.
Mayor Cross stated that Mr. Bindseil and Gladstone Hy-Vee
had a large role in the success of the City of
Mayor Cross stated that the Mayor’s Holiday Tree Lighting program set a record in funds raised this year, and thanks to the assistance of Mr. Hollander and Mr. Bindseil, over $12,000 was raised to help our community. Tim Flink and Bryan Busby of KMBC TV Channel 9 News volunteered to assist with the Mayor’s Holiday Tree Lighting event, as well as a helicopter pilot from the news station. The Mayor’s Holiday Tree Lighting event was aired live on the 6:00 PM KMBC TV Channel 9 News on November 21, 2006.
Mayor Cross invited everyone to watch a video of the Mayor’s Holiday Tree Lighting event newscast provided by KMBC TV Channel 9 News. Following the video, Mayor Cross pointed out that the cameraman fell off the stage, and a young lady pushed him back up onto the stage, and he never missed a shot of the video. Mayor Cross pointed out that the two children turning on the Holiday Tree lights in the video are his grandchildren. Mayor Cross said on behalf of City Council members and the City, he wished to thank Mr. Hollander, Mr. Bindseil, and the many citizens who contributed to the Mayor’s Holiday Tree Lighting event, which helped to raise a record amount of money to fund such organizations as Neighbors Helping Neighbors and the Northland Christmas Store.
Mayor Cross asked Mayor Pro Tem Les Smith to conduct the rest of the City Council meeting.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith stated a few years ago Mayor Cross and his lovely wife, Mary, were responsible for the purchase of the beautiful tree that the City uses every year for the Mayor’s Holiday Tree Lighting event. The City used to struggle with live trees that were usually more crooked than not. Mayor Pro Tem Smith thanked Mayor Cross, and said the tree he purchased should be around for another 100 years or so.
Item 5. on the Agenda. CONSENT AGENDA
Councilman Wayne Beer moved to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Councilman Carol Rudi seconded. The vote: All “aye” – Councilman Mark Revenaugh, Councilman Wayne Beer, Councilman Carol Rudi, Mayor Pro Tem Les Smith, and Mayor Bill Cross. (5-0).
Councilman Wayne Beer moved to approve RESOLUTION R-07-07, authorizing acceptance of work under contract with American Marking and Paving, Incorporated, for the Municipal Pool North Parking Lot; and authorizing final payment in the amount of $9,048.47 for Project IN0614. Councilman Carol Rudi seconded. The vote: All “aye” – Councilman Mark Revenaugh, Councilman Wayne Beer, Councilman Carol Rudi, Mayor Pro Tem Les Smith, and Mayor Bill Cross. (5-0).
Beer moved to approve RESOLUTION
R-07-08, authorizing the City Manager to pursue the National Registry of
Historic Places nomination with the National Historic Preservation Office for
the Atkins Johnson Farm located at 6508
Beer moved to approve a CLASS
A&B LIQUOR BY THE DRINK LICENSE for Players Bar & Grill,
Councilman Wayne Beer moved to approve the FINANCIAL REPORTS FOR DECEMBER 2006. Councilman Carol Rudi seconded. The vote: All “aye” – Councilman Mark Revenaugh, Councilman Wayne Beer, Councilman Carol Rudi, Mayor Pro Tem Les Smith, and Mayor Bill Cross. (5-0).
Item 6. on the Agenda. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said that there might be some folks in the audience who wish to address the Animal Control Ordinance. Generally the City Council does not take public input, unless there is a Public Hearing, but with City Council’s blessing this evening, that will be allowed, but it is asked that those comments be made under Item Number 9. on the Agenda. Mayor Pro Tem invited anyone who wished to address the Council about another item to step forward and give their name and address for the record.
John Houlihan, 2313 NE 75 Terrace, said he was present at the meeting on behalf of the Gladstone Parks and Recreation Advisory Board to present to Mayor Cross a piece of Gladstone history. Mr. Houlihan said last Fall, Mayor Cross took Parks and Recreation Advisory Board members on a tour of the demolition of the old outdoor municipal pool. During that tour, Mayor Cross explained how he was instrumental in the design and function of the pool, having been the pool manager for about 20 years, from roughly 1977 to 1996. Mr. Houlihan said he got the idea after the tour, having seen some of the old parts of the pool, that it might make a fitting presentation to the Mayor. Mr. Houlihan said he hoped to make the presentation during the Mayor’s Holiday Tree Lighting ceremony, but time got away from him. Mr. Houlihan said over the holidays he was able to complete work on the presentation with the help of City staff, and his wife, Beth Houlihan.
Mr. Houlihan stated they salvaged an old light guard from
the pool and framed it along with a plaque.
The plaque reads, “Gladstone Municipal Pool Original Light Guard. Doctor Bill Cross, Mayor, first pool manager,
1977-1996. Twenty years of teaching the
community’s children to stay afloat”, and was signed by the
Richard Hinderliter, 7143 North Norton Avenue, said
he came forward tonight not as a Scoutmaster, but as a member of the Board of
Directors of the Stonebrook Estates development. Mr. Hinderliter said a couple of years ago,
Gladstone approved a development at the end of Norton Avenue, which is 44
homes, with a new road going from the end of a former cul-de-sac, around
through that development and coming out onto Antioch Road, at the water tower. The road is now in place. Mr. Hinderliter said members of his
development were concerned at that time that there would be a lot of
construction traffic going up and down their road. There are families with little children
Mr. Hinderliter said their concerns with the construction
traffic were met with assurances that the construction vehicles would all go
Mr. Hinderliter said he does not like to present a
problem for which he does not have a solution.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said Mr. Hinderliter is correct, and he and Assistant City Manager Scott Wingerson had a conversation about this 2 or 3 weeks ago.
Mr. Wingerson agreed, and said he has been in touch with
the Peterson Company, and they are advising all builders in The Preserve
development to use the
Mayor Pro Tem Smith asked if the signs are not effective, what is the next step? Mr. Hinderliter is exactly right; these folks were told this was not going to happen, and if it is happening, how do we stop it?
Mr. Wingerson said the original Ordinance requires the development construction traffic to not use North Norton, but now that the street is open to the general public, it becomes a little more difficult. Mr. Wingerson said the first call he received on this matter was from a resident of Stonebrook Estates, who asked the City to please not close that street, because she uses it as a “cut through” now. There are people using the street to access their homes; although, the concern of the heavy construction builder traffic is more important than a “cut through” for the time being. Mr. Wingerson said, with Council’s permission, City staff will continue to work with the Peterson Company, continue to monitor the situation, and make it as bearable as possible during home construction.
Councilman Mark Revenaugh asked if this is the road with a roundabout or circle in the road.
Mr. Hinderliter said there is a circle in the road.
Councilman Revenaugh asked if it is slowing down the construction trucks.
Mr. Hinderliter replied that the construction trucks do not go past the circle if they come down his street, but if they go out onto Antioch Road, they go past the circle. It is at the Antioch end of the road. Mr. Hinderliter said he does not believe the circle is the problem, the construction trucks are just taking a shortcut, especially the Geiger cement trucks. It is shorter for them to go up to 72nd Street and back, than it is to go out to Antioch and back.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said it has been seen what the constant construction traffic has done to the roads near City Hall, and if they are traveling through Stonebrook Estates, on residential streets, with heavy truck traffic, and if those streets fall apart, who will be making those repairs? There are a couple of issues with this situation, but the main issue is that these folks were told by the City that the construction traffic would be controlled, and we need to control it.
Mr. Hinderliter said the road was just repaved last year, and the construction trucks are not helping the road at all.
Councilman Carol Rudi said if she lived on this street, she would make note of the license plate numbers.
Mr. Hinderliter said the next time he sees construction trucks on his street, he will not only make note of the license plate numbers, but he will also take pictures with his digital camera. Mr. Hinderliter said as he was present at this meeting, he thought he would bring this issue up to see if signs might be installed. He does not think the construction companies are trying to be mean, and his area wants to be good neighbors with their neighbors in the new development, but this is a concern, and if the signs are installed and there is still a problem, he will be back before City Council.
Mr. Wingerson said he would talk to the Peterson Company tomorrow and encourage them to have the signs installed by the end of the week, and then monitor the situation. Mr. Wingerson said he would talk to Mr. Hinderliter after he speaks to the Peterson Company to let him know what to expect.
Mr. Hinderliter thanked Mr. Wingerson and City Council members for their assistance.
Item 7. on the Agenda. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL.
Councilman Mark Revenaugh had no comments at this time.
Councilman Carol Rudi had no comments at this time.
Councilman Wayne Beer had no comments at this time.
Mayor Bill Cross stated that after our recent snowstorm, Gladstone was the first to have their streets cleaned – another job well done. Mayor Cross said he hoped that City Manager Kirk Davis mentions to City staff what a good job they did.
Mayor Pro Tem Les Smith had no comments at this time.
Item 7a. on the Agenda. Board and Commission Appointments/Reappointments.
Councilman Carol Rudi moved that the following list of Appointments and Reappointments to the City’s Boards and Commissions be approved. Councilman Wayne Beer seconded.
PLANNING COMMISSION TERM EXPIRATION
Reappointment Anita Newsom December 2010
Reappointment Mike West December 2010
New Appointment Bill Garnos December 2010
New Appointment Nina Babich December 2010
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM
New Appointment Summer Austin December 2009
New Appointment Mark Bertholf December 2009
CODE BOARD OF APPEALS
Reappointment Roger Buckner December 2009
Reappointment Ken Christeson December 2009
New Appointment (electrical) Dennis Garrison December 2009
GLADSTONE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD
Reappointment John Houlihan December 2009
Reappointment Freddie Nichols December 2009
CABLE TV ADVISORY BOARD
Reappointment Bob Lohmeyer December 2009
Reappointment Tim Robertson December 2009
GLADSTONE RECYCLING AND SOLID WASTE COMMITTEE
Reappointment Burt Comstock December 2009
Reappointment Bill Stone December 2009
New Appointment James Austin December 2009
New Appointment George Smith December 2009
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING (TIF)
Reappointment Pete Hall January 2011
Reappointment Jean Moore January 2011
The vote: All “aye” – Councilman Mark Revenaugh, Councilman Wayne Beer, Councilman Carol Rudi, Mayor Pro Tem Les Smith, and Mayor Bill Cross. (5-0).
Mayor Pro Tem Smith stated that although it does not need an official appointment at this time, there are three or four other people who were interviewed by City Council members that are being asked to participate heavily in the City’s Comprehensive Plan review. It is not a committee that needs an official appointment, but when the time comes, these people will be invited to take a leadership role in that process.
Item 8. on the Agenda. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE CITY MANAGER.
City Manager Kirk Davis had no comments at this time.
Item 9. on the Agenda. FIRST READING BILL 07-03, amending Title II, Chapter 105 of the City Code of Ordinances regulating the care, keeping, and licensing of animals within the City of Gladstone.
Councilman Carol Rudi moved to place Bill 07-03 on First Reading. Councilman Wayne Beer seconded.
City Counselor David Ramsay provided replacement pages to the Bill, which, he said, he believed met with Council’s direction. Counselor Ramsay pointed out that the new Page 5 is a replacement for Page 5 of the “B” version of the Bill. (There were three versions of Bill 07-03 discussed by City Council members during their Open Study Session earlier this evening). Counselor Ramsay reported that at the top of Page 5, under Subsection “j”, where there was a provision for payment of a $100 license fee for dangerous dogs, he changed that to say “the payment of the standard City dog license fee”. At the bottom of Page 5, under Subparagraph 1, it says “Owners of licensed dogs, defined as “Pit Bull Breed” under this Chapter, shall be provided with written notice by Animal Control that such owners must comply with the dangerous dog provisions of this section, unless such owners meet the provisions of Subsection (2) below”. City Counselor Ramsay said Subsection 2 is an exemption for the grace period, and as a couple of different periods were mentioned, he left the number of days blank.
Counselor Ramsay said Subsection (2) provides that “Owners receiving such notices, and owners of pit bull breed dogs that have not been previously licensed, shall be allowed a grace period of (blank) days from the effective date of this Chapter to properly identify and license their dogs as pit bull breeds. Owners that comply within this grace period shall be exempt from the provisions of this Section relating to dangerous dogs, including the enhanced restraint and insurance requirements, for the lifetime of each dog so licensed, unless such dog is in the future determined to meet the conditions of this Section to be designated as a “dangerous dog”.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith asked if this replacement page contains all of the items that were in the “A” version of Bill 07-03, as far as Councilman Rudi and Councilman Revenaugh were discussing earlier.
Counselor Ramsay said, yes, because the difference between the “A” and “B” version of the Bill is simply the designation or presumption that Pit Bulls are in fact dangerous dogs.
Councilman Rudi stated for clarification, that what this does is it allows dogs currently in the City of Gladstone, especially those already licensed, to continue to be “dogs” currently within the City of Gladstone – they don’t have to be listed as “dangerous” because they are of a pit bull variety, and this is forever until that dog is deceased, or the dog becomes designated, like any other dog could become designated, as dangerous.
Counselor Ramsay agreed that was correct.
Councilman Rudi stated for clarification, the second part of this will set a period of time that will allow owners of pit bull type dogs to come into the City, and license their dog appropriately. Once that period is over, this version “B” will go into full effect, and any dog that is found in the City that is a Pit Bull and not licensed will be under the very strict regulation of the Dangerous Breed.
Counselor Ramsay agreed that was correct. After the grace period, version “B” will go into effect with any Pit Bull breed dog that a person chooses to license or is unlicensed. This only applies to dogs that are living and properly licensed within the grace period provided.
Councilman Wayne Beer asked if there is a provision for those dogs that are new in the City to be in the exempt group.
Counselor Ramsay replied the exemption would apply to any Pit Bull that is presented for licensing within the grace period.
Councilman Beer asked for clarification, if that applies to dogs that are properly registered per the City Ordinances, without regard that it may be a dog new to the City.
Counselor Ramsay agreed that was correct.
Councilman Beer said, in other words, if the exemption period expires tomorrow, and the next day he should buy a Pit Bull dog, it is just a “dog”.
Counselor Ramsay said, no, it would be deemed a “dangerous dog”.
Councilman Beer said he believed the idea behind the compromise offered by the Mayor Pro Tem was to affect dogs, which are owned by noncompliant owners and choose to remain noncompliant. Councilman Beer said if he were to buy a dog the day after tomorrow, and bring in a brand new pup, which has not been here long enough to have gone beyond what would normally be considered the grace period, is his new pup considered a “dangerous dog” as far as this Ordinance is concerned, or is this dog, since it is being registered in compliance with the Ordinance, still considered just a dog, instead of a “dangerous dog”.
Counselor Ramsay said the intent was that any pit bull breed dog that is properly identified as a Pit Bull, and licensed by the owner within the grace period of 60 to 90 days, (whatever time period Council chooses), those dogs for their lifetime will be considered just regular dogs, not “dangerous dogs”. At the end of the 60 or 90 day grace period, for anyone who wants to bring a Pit Bull into the City, whether they try to license it or whether they try to avoid licensing it, that dog will be presumed to be a “dangerous dog” under the Ordinance.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said he believes Counselor Ramsay has it right as far as the intent. The bottom line is that it is status quo for the grace period, rewarding the behavior of those who properly license their animals. Mayor Pro Tem Smith said this way we are not changing the rules on folks in midstream, but anyone who chooses not to license their dog and be a responsible owner, or brings a new animal into the City, would fall under the presumed to be dangerous category, so those folks that are already responsible pet owners are rewarded for that good behavior.
Councilman Rudi said she is not inclined to make the grace period very lengthy, but what if the period is set at 30 days and notices are sent out, and the City advertises, and does everything possible so people know that is what they need to do if they don’t already have their dog licensed. What if a person is a “snow bird” and is out of town for three months and they come back and find out they have missed the opportunity, but the dog has already been here for five years. We might have a special request of “change it for me”.
Councilman Rudi stated in regard to puppies, the City does not require licensing until the age of six months, and if someone has a puppy today, and our time limit is 30 days, and the puppy is only a month old right now, we don’t require that puppy to be licensed for another five months, which is beyond the grace period time frame. What happens with this? Is the puppy then automatically in the “dangerous dog” category, or is he a regular dog? Councilman Rudi said there are some issues that need to be worked through with this Bill. Councilman Rudi said we still need to nail this down a little bit better, so her recommendation is to go ahead and adopt Version “A” of the Bill, which is the non-breed specific version, then get these issues worked out and bring in the additional sections that pertain to the Pit Bulls, and Council can discuss again whether or not we want to do that, but have the time limits in place without spending the next one and a half hour trying to figure it out tonight.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said he would prefer to enact the compromise Ordinance, and amend it. There was a similar issue not too long ago that Council decided to move forward, at Councilman Rudi’s suggestion, and adopt the action, knowing that Council could come back and amend it later. That course was set then, and Council could do the same thing now without any harm to anyone.
Councilman Rudi said her preference is still the non-breed specific version, and then hopefully, at the next meeting everything will be nailed down, and Council can amend the Ordinance with the appropriate sections. Councilman Rudi said she would like her motion to indicate Version “A” of the Bill, and the second to the motion would also have to agree.
Councilman Beer said, as second to the motion, he would concur, but he would not be voting in favor of this Bill.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said there was a motion and a second to adopt Version “A” with a good faith commitment from Councilman Rudi that Council will act on the compromise version at the next City Council meeting.
The vote: “Aye” – Councilman Carol Rudi. “Nay” - Councilman Wayne Beer, and Mayor Pro Tem Les Smith. (1-2).
Councilman Revenaugh apologized and said the process was moving along faster than he could absorb, and said he thought the way Mayor Pro Tem Smith stated it was that Council was going to pass Version “A” of the Bill, with a commitment that Council would pass the compromise version at some time in the near future.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said the motion reflected that City Council would address this Ordinance in the near future. One cannot commit City Council to passing something in the future.
Counciman Revenaugh stated all Council is saying is that as Version “A” is the minimum that all Council members agree is necessary, then the strategy is to go ahead with Version “A”, that is non-breed specific, and then address in the near future, additional amendments to this Ordinance to perhaps single out specific breeds for additional constraints, and asked if that was correct.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith replied that was correct.
Councilman Revenaugh said he believes this is a good idea, because otherwise Council is talking about voting on an Ordinance that we just received 30 to 40 seconds ago. Councilman Revenaugh said there is obviously some confusion as to exactly what the intent or meaning is, so he believes this is a great idea. Councilman Revenaugh said he did not want to be voting for something that he wasn’t clear on what he was voting for.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith asked Councilman Revenaugh what his vote was.
Councilman Revenaugh inquired into the motion.
Councilman Rudi said the motion is to adopt the non-breed specific version of the Dangerous Animal Ordinance.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith stated it boils down to adopting a non-breed specific Version “A” with good faith promise that Council will at least address going breed specific on the compromise versus passing the compromise and a good faith effort to revise and clarify if Council has “what if” type questions.
Councilman Revenaugh said his question was the good faith effort to address the compromise, because Council can always go back and address any Ordinance at any time without the statement that we are somehow entwined in a good faith effort to address a specific agreement.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said he was merely trying to clarify what Councilman Rudi said.
Councilman Revenaugh said he was also trying to clarify the motion, which is why he could not vote. Councilman Revenaugh asked Acting City Clerk Diane Whitaker to please read the motion on the floor.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said this was not fair, as Ms. Whitaker is the Acting City Clerk, and is only filling in for this evening.
Councilman Carol Rudi said the motion is as follows: “moved to place Bill 07-03 on First Reading, and this motion implies Version “A”, the non-breed specific version.”
Councilman Revenaugh said his vote is “aye”, and asked if the motion carried.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith replied, not yet, right now the vote is 2 to 2.
Mayor Bill Cross said his vote is “no”.
The vote: “Aye” – Councilman Carol Rudi and Councilman Mark Revenaugh.
“Nay” - Councilman Wayne Beer, Mayor Pro Tem Les Smith, and Mayor Bill Cross.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said this motion has failed, and asked Councilman Beer if he would like to make a subsequent motion.
Councilman Wayne Beer moved to place on its First Reading Bill 07-03B, as amended, and that amendment to include a grace period as discussed in Section 2.105.050, Paragraph b (2) to make the grace period 90 days, with the stipulation of the same revisit for amendment as would have been considered with Version “A”.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said this is Bill 07-03, which is Version “B”, substituting Page 5 as provided by Counselor Ramsay, and the grace period will be 90 days. Mayor Pro Tem Smith said there has been a motion and he would second the motion. Mayor Pro Tem Smith said that although at this time there is only a voice vote required, he would request a roll call vote at this time.
Councilman Revenaugh said he would not be able to vote “yes” on this motion, but he thinks it is important to point out something that hasn’t been brought up, that is also written into this Ordinance that is new to the community is that when and if this Ordinance is in effect, it will be unlawful to transport a dog or any other animal in the open bed of a truck, unless it is confined within a secure cage. Councilman Revenaugh asked if this is a new addition to the current Animal Control Ordinance.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith replied he believed so, and that was contained in Versions “A, B & C” of the Bill.
Roll Call Vote: “Aye” – Councilman Wayne Beer, Mayor Pro Tem Les Smith, and Mayor Bill Cross. “Nay” - Councilman Mark Revenaugh, and Councilman Carol Rudi. (3-2)
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said the Bill is on the table, and as promised, Council would like to hear from those in the audience, and if anyone has any questions to please ask those questions, as well. Mayor Pro Tem Smith invited anyone who would like to address the Council to step forward and give his name and address for the record.
Phil Kline, 6008 North Main, said he really appreciates having spent the time with the City Council. It has been an education and he knows and truly believes that everyone here is trying to do the right thing. Mr. Kline said the first couple of times he spoke on this issue he talked about it on moral, ethical, and philosophical grounds. Tonight he would like to speak to this issue on legal grounds. Mr. Kline said he brought on Friday to the City Counselor a court case where breed specific laws were found to be unconstitutional by an appellate court in the State of Ohio. This is a March 2006 court case. The original case took five days of testimony from PhDs, dog scientists, and a whole list of people. Mr. Kline said he hopes copies can be made of this case so everyone can read it. It was found to be unconstitutional on grounds of procedural due process and substantive due process. Mr. Kline said he is not a lawyer, but he read this case three times and has spent about 12 hours with it. Mr. Kline said he looked up some legal terms and thinks he understands it a little bit. Mr. Kline said the procedural due process has to do with whether the procedure is correct for everyone, and as in his case, personally, his veterinarian has registered his dog with the City of Gladstone. Mr. Kline did not come to City Hall to do it, he did it at his vet’s. Mr. Kline said on the registration, the vet calls Mr. Kline’s dog a mixed breed dog, so how is he to know if his dog is a mixed breed dog or a pit bull type dog without not registering it as a Pit Bull, and then finding out that he has committed a crime? This has to do with procedural due process. Mr. Kline said substantive due process has to do with is the law rational and does it apply to defined law. Mr. Kline said in that regard, he would read a very short part as follows:
As scientific information advances and becomes available, courts have a duty to reconsider issues and make decisions, which are supported by the actual evidence presented, instead of relying on common knowledge, and the opinion generated by newspapers, sensationalism, and hearsay, rather than accurate scientific evidence. Previous cases involving vicious dog laws in the 1980’s and 1990’s relied on what is now outdated information, which perpetuated a stereotypical image of Pit Bulls, not perpetuated it in the Public’s mind, but it perpetuated it in law, because courts have had to rely on the testimony and findings of other courts.
Mr. Kline said in the testimony and findings of other courts, there has never been a case that hasn’t involved five days with 20 expert witnesses, who are not just Animal Control Officers, but are PhDs in animal behavior. They dissected the Pit Bull to see if it had a locking jaw. They looked at its muscular structure and testified that the Pit Bull’s muscular structure is no different than any other dog of its size. Mr. Kline said there are many cases listed that have precedence. These cases, do in part to unavailable scientific evidence based on expert testimony about the breed, branded all Pit Bulls as vicious on the basis of what was known and believed at the time. Things have changed.
Mr. Kline said the City Council has been researching this issue, but some of what you have is most likely based on some of the old evidence, which is disproved in this case, at least to the judge’s belief. Mr. Kline said what if someone has a job and moves to Gladstone, and they have a Pit Bull, and the dog’s a good citizen like Mr. Kline’s dog. Mr. Kline said his wife and his dog are learning how to dance at dance school, and his dog is in the class with other dogs. Mr. Kline said he hopes City Council members will read this case and it has a lot of scientific evidence in it. This is being appealed and is going to the Ohio Supreme Court.
Mr. Kline said in April, House Bill 1086 was considered, which is a Bill that required all Pit Bulls to be muzzled if they were in the public and required a $500 registration fee with the State. This Bill had 50 cosponsors and was brought before the House of Representatives here in Missouri and had two readings, and was referred to the Agriculture Committee, where it died without a hearing. Mr. Kline said he does not know if part of the reason for that is that it has been found to be unconstitutional or it could be any number of reasons. Mr. Kline shared pictures from his vet who has Pit Bulls that are registered. Mr. Kline said one picture shows a Pit Bull with a squirrel on its back, which is a pet of the vet, and another picture shows a Pit Bull with a small kitten.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith thanked Mr. Kline, and said he is obviously a well-read gentleman who has been very helpful with his testimony at the last couple of meetings. Mayor Pro Tem Smith said Council appreciates that Mr. Kline recognizes that Council is not trying to do anything malicious, but each in their own way trying to act responsibly.
Brent Holmer, Kansas City, Missouri, said he believes it is also relevant in this situation to note that the court case, Appellee versus Tellings was overturned. This is the same court case that the State of Missouri Statute is based upon, so by overturning that, the precedent for the Kansas City case upholding the right of cities to go with breed specific legislation will in essence be overturned, which is relevant in this case.
Mr. Holmer said one thing that Mayor Pro Tem Smith talked about earlier that really caused him to stand up and speak, was addressing the concerns of people in this City, and the responsibility the government has in fulfilling that. Mr. Holmer said from a government standpoint, we, as citizens, can get very concerned about a lot of different things, because a lot of decisions are based upon what is heard on the news or what is heard from other things. From a government standpoint, it is our responsibility to do what is in the best interest of the people. When people say they want Pit Bulls banned, what they really mean is they want to feel safe from dogs. There is a big distinction between what people are saying that they want, versus what they actually feel that they need.
Mr. Holmer said what is being proposed, and is on the table right now, is in essence after 90 days going to be more or less a breed specific ban of sorts, a person can still have the dogs, but they will be a dangerous dog, and no one is really going to go through all that “hassle”. Mr. Holmer said this makes someone like him, if he decides he does not want to put his children through the Kansas City, Missouri School District, an irresponsible owner, because he didn’t live here at the time the Ordinance was passed. Mr. Holmer said he does have two Pit Bulls at home. Mr. Holmer said what is on the table now is very similar to what was put in place in Council Bluffs, Iowa, two years ago. Council Bluffs, Iowa, two years ago, had a record number of dog bites for the City. Twenty-nine of them, or 18 percent of the bites, were by Pit Bulls, so they enacted legislation very similar to what is on the table this evening. Mr. Holmer said two years later, in 2006, he received an email from the Animal Control officer in Council Bluffs with all his final numbers for 2006. They had more bites in 2006, in Council Bluffs, Iowa, than they did the year before they passed the Pit Bull ban.
Mr. Holmer said the Pit Bull bites went down, but bites from Labs, Boxers, and German Shepherds increased. Council Bluffs added staff in order to fulfill their job of trying to pass the Pit Bull ban; so Staff was added, and their dog bites increased over the past two years. Mr. Holmer said people want safety from dogs; they don’t really care what dog it is and probably don’t know what type of dog it is, they just know it is mean. Mr. Holmer suggested doing something that makes people safe from whatever dog it happens to be, and not add Staff to do something that is not enforceable, that will just create more problems and bites down the road.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith thanked Mr. Holmer, and said the City needs to add staff anyway, and the memo addresses that. The City’s Animal Control officers work an incredible amount of hours and spend a lot of time in the shelter, instead of out on the streets, and they need to be on the streets more. Mayor Pro Tem Smith said it is amazing the job they do with the Staff they have now.
John Garner, 111 Heatherton Court, noted that in Section 2.105.030 of the Bill it states anyone 65 years of age and older will be exempt from being required to obtain a dog license. Mr. Garner asked if this would also include the dangerous animals – the way it reads, it could be. Mr. Garner said under paragraph J, of the same section, if you put it back down to $25, it would be $25 there.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said he asked Counselor Ramsay that question today, and asked Counselor Ramsay to give the answer to that question.
Mr. Garner said he was just curious if that would include the exemption for a dangerous dog to be licensed for free.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said Counselor Ramsay’s answer to that question was, no, but this Bill has been edited a few dozen times since then.
Counselor Ramsay said Section 2.105.035 (c) says that the yearly license fee per dog shall be as set forth in the City’s schedule of fees and charges. No fee shall be required for a dog (but not more than one) owned by a blind person or a person 65 years of age or older. Counselor Ramsay said the dog still requires licensing, it just waives the fee.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said the question is if an animal is deemed dangerous, and there is a fee to register a dangerous dog, is the senior citizen or blind person still exempt even if the dog is deemed dangerous?
Counselor Ramsay replied he believed City Council members are considering the Page 5 amendment, which has been amended to read that the license fee shall be the standard City dog license fee, so under that change, there is not a different fee for a Pit Bull or for a dangerous dog.
Councilman Beer said there is no other reference to non-compliance, so he would not expect that just because a person is 65 years of age, that any other form of non-compliance would be any different than any one else’s non-compliance.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said to Mr. Garner that when they spoke earlier today, there was being considered a $100 fee to license a dangerous dog, and now it’s going to be the same license fee as other dogs.
Mr. Garner said he was just curious if a person did own a dangerous dog, and was 65 years of age, is it going to be free to them?
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said he would see that Mr. Garner’s question is answered, and asked Mr. Garner his opinion on the issue.
Mr. Garner stated if they do have a dangerous dog, they should be required to pay, if they are a concerned citizen.
Ray Park, 2502 NE 65 Terrace, began by inquiring into what specific instances have brought this problem with Pit Bulls in Gladstone to light.
Councilman Beer said he does not recall the exact address or the exact date, but in a neighborhood near City Hall there was, as reported to Councilman Beer, a “Pit Bull dog” that escaped its restraints; Councilman Beer said he did not know what those restraints were, whether it was a leash, a fence or an open door, but the dog was intimidating to the neighbors and it had attacked a neighbor’s dog in the neighbor’s yard. Public Safety was called. The officer who responded tried to do whatever he could to disengage the dog from its attack, and was unable to do so, felt threatened, and killed the dog.
Mr. Park stated there was also the incident involving the man going out to get his paper. Mr. Park said we spent hours and hours talking about a situation that has been decided is now a gigantic problem in this town. We have a situation in which really nobody had the specifics on and we have perhaps two people who have had a problem, and 20 to 30 people present tonight who are trying to explain this is not a problem. Mr. Park said the two people who had the problem are not present to say they had a problem. There are many people present who are trying to bring common sense to this Council. Mr. Park said he has been a Gladstone resident for 14 years, and has worked in the area all his life. He worked in North Kansas City for Union Carbide, which became Praxair, and is now another company. Now after 38 years, he is close to being able to retire. Mr. Park said six years ago he rescued a Boston Terrier, and it has turned out to be a sweet little dog. Mr. Park said his address has never shown up on the Animal Control agenda, because they take care of their dogs; they get their shots and tags.
Mr. Park said he has trained and competed for six years with this one particular dog. Mr. Park said he could put his Boston Terrier in the corner on a “sit/stay” and she would remain sitting in the corner until he gave her the release command. Mr. Park said there are many people who are in control of their animals, and he knows a number of people who have Pit Bulls, German Shepherds, and Rottweilers, all the dogs that have been named enemies of this community, and these are some of the sweetest dogs he has ever met. Mr. Park said he knows people that have five Doberman Pinschers, and if you get close enough to them, they would simply lick your face off. Mr. Park said what really troubles him is some of the language that he hears about what is being discussed. Mr. Park stated it was said that government is to do for the people what the people can’t do for themselves. Mr. Park said that is not his idea of government at all, and to him government should be a force to enact the will of the community. Mr. Park said we sit here listening to what you guys are saying, and it isn’t until now that we finally get a chance to say something, and he knows Council already has their minds made up, and will do whatever they want to do anyway.
Mr. Park said right at the very beginning of the meeting, you not only wanted Pit Bulls banned from this community, you also wanted a vehicle where you could add other breeds to it, and he sat right there and heard it said.
Councilman Beer stated Mr. Park did not hear “banned”.
Mr. Park said, well, maybe not banned, but you wanted to be able to add not just Pit Bulls, but German Shepherds, and Rottweilers. You wanted the ability to be able to add those if the opportunity came up.
Councilman Beer said that was correct.
Mr. Park said today it might be Pit Bulls, but if this Council is going the way it is going, it’s not going to just be Pit Bulls, it’s going to be German Shepherds, Rottweilers, and the people who have these loving animals are either going to be faced with moving out of the community, or dumping their dogs in the country.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith stated what was done with the recent amendment to the Bill was to protect each and every one of you who are those responsible pet owners. We commend you for that, and we want you to be a part of this community. Mayor Pro Tem Smith asked Mr. Park if he does not feel that those people who have not even licensed their dogs, should do so?
Mr. Park said not very long ago he took his dog for a one-hour walk through his neighborhood, when four dogs that were off-leash approached him, and none of the dogs were close to any of the breeds that have been mentioned. Mr. Park said what Council is saying does not make sense. If it is a dangerous dog, let our Animal Control people decide if it is a dangerous dog or not. They are the people that are paid to do that job – let them do that job, and not ban specific breeds from the community.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said City Council is not banning any breed from this community.
Mr. Park said what Council is saying is after 90 days you cannot buy a Pit Bull and bring it into this community.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said that was not correct, one could bring a Pit Bull into this community, but one would have to have an additional quarter million dollars per year in insurance, and depending on which company is contacted, is between $16 and $24 per year, which is not unreasonable. After that point in time, the dog is presumed a dangerous dog, which very far from a ban.
Mr. Park said if you guys make these decisions about the insurance rates, he could go to his insurance guy and he might say he doesn’t do that, and he would be stuck. Mr. Park said if you are going to pass this as a law, find some hard facts about whether people are going to be able to find insurance and what are the rates going to be.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said that has been done, some companies will insure and some will not.
Mr. Park said this is still a generalization. Where can we go to get our insurance and what are the rates really going to be?
Councilman Beer said this is not unlike those who have to insure their car, they find someone who will insure their car.
Mr. Park said a lot of people may not be able to afford this.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said those of you who are responsible pet owners and license their dogs, do not have that issue.
Mr. Park said he realizes that, but there are those people who are just moving into the community. Mr. Park said he does not feel this is fair. If a dog is a problem, regardless of the breed, address that problem. This is not proactive; it is a witch-hunt.
Don Faudel, 6209 North Michigan, stated the reason he chose Gladstone as his home is because of his dog. Mr. Faudel said he is a member of the German Shepherd Dog Club of Greater Kansas City, and has been on the Board of Directors for about five years, and is the Club librarian. Mr. Faudel says he has more knowledge at his house than anyone would want to read. Mr. Faudel said he was present because the City Council wants to label certain dogs as dangerous dogs. Mr. Faudel said he has been to many AKC (American Kennel Club) animal shows, and he has never heard any dog called a Pit Bull. They have a specific name and it is not Pit Bull. Mr. Faudel said City Council members want to classify German Shepherds as dangerous dogs. Mr. Faudel asked how anyone could consider a German Shepherd dangerous, when they are rescue dogs, canine dogs, search dogs, drug dogs, and dogs for the blind. Some of these dogs are in hospitals right now with children, making them feel better. German Shepherds are loyal, love their families, and want nothing more than to protect and serve their families, just like City Council members want to protect and serve the people of Gladstone.
Mr. Faudel said dogs bark for a reason. They bark to let us know someone is out there – somebody is there that shouldn’t be there. Mr. Faudel said all dogs bite; in fact he was watching the Animal Whisperer the other day, and a little Chihuahua severely bit the animal whisperer’s hand. A Chihuahua could be considered a dangerous dog. It is in the people that raise the dog, not the dog itself, and labeling dogs as people killers is not right. Mr. Faudel said there is a leash law in Gladstone, and we should enforce these problems as they come up, and not jump to conclusions and say these are dangerous dogs just because there are one or two instances. If there is a problem with a gentleman who is a drunk driver, they send him to drunk driving school. Maybe these problem owners should go to obedience school, and if they are deemed not to be responsible owners, take the dog away from them. Mr. Faudel said in most cases when one sees a bad dog, it is because there is a bad owner. Mr. Faudel said he feels we should enforce the rules we have, fix the potholes, and let the dog legislation lay and leave our pets alone.
Pat Gannon, 604 NE 67th Terrace, stated she is a 35-year resident of Gladstone, and this is the first time she has spoken to the City Council. Ms. Gannon said she has been attending the Open Study Sessions pertaining to Pit Bulls. Ms. Gannon said she has seen two Pit Bull attacks on her street within the last three years. Ms. Gannon said she has given the information to Public Safety Director Bill Adamo. The first incident was due to a bad owner, because the Pit Bull was kept chained to a tree in the front yard. The dog was constantly getting loose, and the neighbors were constantly calling Animal Control. Animal Control did respond, and told the neighbors the only way they can do anything is if they catch the dog running loose, which they never did. Ms. Gannon said one night this dog cornered her next-door neighbors as they were returning home. The man got into his vehicle, and his wife got into the house, where she called the police. Ms. Gannon said Gladstone responded, a complaint was signed, and she does not know if a court appearance was set. The lady who owned the dog agreed to get rid of the dog, if the neighbors would drop the charges. The neighbors agreed and the dog was gone.
Ms. Gannon said the second incident is the one that Councilman Beer mentioned where the Gladstone Public Safety officer had to shoot the dog. Ms. Gannon said the Pit Bull was a pet, and never to her knowledge and to any of her neighbors’ knowledge, bothered anyone. One day it jumped the fence into the next-door neighbor’s yard, and attached two large mixed breed dogs. The owner of the mixed breed dogs was able to get one dog into the house, the Pit Bull attacked the other dog. A neighbor across the street hit the Pit Bull with a rake, which did nothing. They sprayed it with water from a garden hose, which did nothing. Gladstone Public Safety shot the dog and killed it. The officer who shot the dog made the comment to the neighbors standing around that he chose to shoot the Pit Bull instead of the other dog, because he was afraid the Pit Bull would attack him if the other dog were dead.
Ms. Gannon said she would love to see Pit Bulls banned, not only from the City, but from the State, and from the country. They are unpredictable dogs and are not used in any canine units, by the military for trained dogs or anything like that. They can be sweet and loving one minute and they attack the next. Ms. Gannon said she talked to several Animal Control officers in the Greater Kansas City area, when this first came up, and unpredictable is the word they all used for Pit Bulls. One Animal Control officer said it is not a question of if a Pit Bull attacks, but when. Ms. Gannon said she understands that there is no breed that is called a Pit Bull; that is why you have to be very specific, as Council is being. Ms. Gannon said there was conversation about comparing this issue to licensing a car and speeding, she would compare it more to a terrorist attack. Gladstone has not been attacked by terrorists, but our Civil Defense certainly has a plan in case we are. Our City needs a plan, and this Council needs to do something to prevent this. Ms. Gannon said she knows the work Council members have put into this. Ms. Gannon said she has two grandchildren, and there is a Pit Bull that lives down the street from her, and she does not like the grandchildren to be in the yard, even though the Pit Bull has not caused a bit of problem that she is aware of. Ms. Gannon said she does not want her 4 or 6-year-old grandsons playing in her yard, even in the back fenced yard.
Laura Marshman, said she lives in Kansas City; however, her parents live in Gladstone at 6509 North Park. Ms. Marshman stated any dog can be dangerous, and she does own a Pit Bull, a Pit Bull mix and a Jack Russell, all of which are well-behaved dogs. Ms. Marshman said she is not hearing anyone holding owners responsible for their animals. License fees and insurance don’t matter, because they are not following the laws to begin with, so they won’t do that. You can take the dog away from the owner, but who would suffer – the dog. The dog is impounded, but what happens to the owner? What are the penalties? Ms. Marshman said if one looks at the cases, 99 percent of the time it is a neglected dog that has not been trained or is running loose that has done the attacks. That is one of the reasons that Kansas City passed a spay or neuter law, because a majority of the males that were attacking were intact.
Ms. Marshman said a dog is like a child, and at the same time it is an animal, and cannot be held responsible for its actions – the owner has to be held responsible. There needs to be stiffer penalties against owners for how they treat their dog and what they are doing to the public.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said depending on the violation, there are monetary penalties and jail time, depending on how grievous the violation is. The City is somewhat limited by State laws as to what sort of penalties that we can impose in our own courts, but the City is maxing out on those the best we can with the Ordinances.
Debbie Noonan, 2807 NE 57 Terrace, stated she feels the Pit Bull issue is interesting in that this is a breed or type of dog that has really undergone a very negative reputation change. Ms. Noonan said we have gone from Little Rascals to killer, but that is really not her worry. Ms. Noonan said many people have mentioned Pit Bull type. Who is going to determine a Pit Bull type? Will this be a disgruntled neighbor? A person down the street who was reported because they had a car parked on the grass? Ms. Noonan said this is her first concern – who is going to determine Pit Bull type. Ms. Noonan said she believes a dangerous dog Ordinance like Version “A” is a good thing. People need to be responsible owners, and if a dog is dangerous there needs to be something done. Ms. Noonan said if this is about a staff increase for Animal Control, she supports that; they need more people and more time to enforce the current laws or Version “A”. Animal Control can be preventative if they have enough people to be on the streets and doing enforcement, opposed to cleaning kennels. Ms. Noonan said she does not support breed specific legislation, but does support Animal Control, and if they need more people, it would be wonderful if money could be found from the budget.
Barry McCullough, 3928 NE 59 Terrace, began by saying since no one else can do it that is present, he will respond to the insurance questions, as he is an insurance agent. The costs associated with owning one of these dogs is not the $22, that is the cost of having $300,000 worth of coverage on a standard policy. If one falls outside of that norm, one cannot get insurance. You cannot go to the State pool. The State pool does not offer liability on that homeowner’s product. There really are no insurance companies that will willingly take on a dog that is classified as dangerous or has any kind of biting history. Mr. McCullough said he agrees that Version “A” should be supported, primarily because it make sense to allow Animal Control to do the job that they are here to do.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith stated from what he understands from the people with whom he has visited, and Mr. Garner did some research as well, technically Mr. McCullough is correct, everyone assumes that the homeowner will have liability insurance. What was being quoted was the difference between a standard policy that might be $100,000 versus a policy that might be $300,000. That extra cost is $22 or in that range according to the insurance companies that were contacted. Mayor Pro Tem Smith said Mr. McCullough is correct in that some companies will not write such policies; State Farm is one, and State Farm is very conservative. They go back and forth on what they will write and what they won’t write. At the present time they are not allowed to write any dangerous animal policies.
Mr. McCullough said he represents five insurance companies, and none of them will knowingly take any of those breeds – any of them listed in even Version “C”. The problem comes back to chasing people who are not going to comply with the laws anyway.
Kim Krohn, 4600 SW Hickory Lane, Blue Springs, Missouri, said she will be 50 years old in two days and is too old to be fighting about what breed of dog she wants to own. This is insanity. Ms. Krohn said her mother told her when she was a kid that when she grew up and moved out and had her own house, she could have whatever dog she wanted. Ms. Krohn said her mother lied to her and she’ll be sure to bring that up with her the next time she visits her grave in England. Ms. Krohn said the City Council has spent six months talking about 15 bites in a City of about 27,000 people. That is time well spent, but it is not as bad as Lee’s Summit, where the Mayor made fun of Independence for wasting so much time and not doing anything, and Lee’s Summit has now wasted six months, it’s gone through three committees, and they still have not done anything.
Ms. Krohn said cats do a lot of damage, and she noticed the City only has had two cat bites, which is good, because in a lot of cities, Lee’s Summit and Raytown in particular, cats top the bite list. Cat bites can be deadly because of the infection rate. Ms. Krohn said she would rather be bitten by any dog, no matter what breed, than a cat. Ms. Krohn said City Council addressed Liberty and Excelsior Springs as passing breed specific legislation, and it was said Liberty was in 1990 and Excelsior Springs was in 1987. Ms. Krohn said she believes those dates are reversed, but in answer to the question, was there an incident, the answer is no. Ms. Krohn said she and her husband probably know more about this topic than anyone else in the City, and if you ever want to know why a City passed this, call her and she will tell you. Ms. Krohn said if anyone wants to know about Independence, Missouri, they should allow about three days, because that is a pretty complex topic that had nothing to do with dogs.
Ms. Krohn said there is a law that says all drivers have to be licensed and insured in this State. Ms. Krohn asked how many are carrying uninsured and underinsured motorists insurance? Ms. Krohn said our forefathers were very smart when they separated the civil courts from the criminal courts. A dog bite belongs in a criminal court. If you want restitution, that goes to the civil court. Ms. Krohn said increasingly lawmakers are trying to push civil actions into the criminal courts. Ms. Krohn said she is not an attorney. Ms. Krohn said Michigan is trying to make adultery a felony, and everyone would agree that adultery is bad, but it doesn’t belong in the criminal courts. When we were young, everyone’s dog ran loose, there were no leash laws, and no one neutered their dogs. If your dog bit someone, it was a civil action. Now, government is trying to protect us from everything all the time, which may not be good.
Ms. Krohn said she does agree with a good enforcement of a generic dangerous dog Ordinance and enforcement of a leash law, and that is really what is important. Ms. Krohn said a lot of people do not license their dogs, not because they are irresponsible, but because one reason is they don’t trust government. Ms. Krohn said she is a member of Show Me State American Pit Bull Terrier Club, and they do not have a club member that’s licensed a dog in 20 years. This is why. It is not because they are irresponsible. It is because they are responsible and they know what is going to happen to them when people get silly. Ms. Krohn said she took the liberty of going through all the City Council meeting minutes, and said she wished to commend the City Clerk, because she takes really good minutes. At the June 12th meeting, Anne Alexander talked about the three-year rabies vaccination. This is the reason a lot of people don’t license their dogs – they don’t want to vaccinate their dogs for rabies every year. The three-year vaccination is fine. Ms. Krohn suggested revisiting that issue, because there are a lot of people who will license their dogs if a three-year rabies vaccination is allowed.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said that is in all three versions of the Bill.
Ms. Krohn said she is also a member of the Greater Kansas City Dog Training Club. A few years ago, Kansas City began talking about mandatory spay/neuter legislation, and her club members quit licensing their new puppies. Ms. Krohn said this is an area where government does not belong. Government does not need to be telling people to alter their animals. That is a personal choice issue. Ms. Krohn said she was interested in the woman who spoke who said she talked to several Animal Control officers and they said Pit Bulls were unpredictable and it’s not a matter of if they attack but when. Ms. Krohn said that is interesting, because most Animal Control officers don’t favor breed specific Ordinances. Ms. Krohn said in regard to the point someone made about most dog bites are from intact males, she feels the biting issue goes more toward the demographic rather than whether or not the dogs are intact. Kansas City, Missouri passed mandatory spay/neuter on the Pit Bull breeds, which was politically motivated. In the western part of Jackson County, west of Highway 291, when you get into Independence and Kansas City, you are getting into a lot of political issues that really have nothing to do with the dogs themselves, and goes beyond that. Ms. Krohn said she faxed a letter some time ago to the City Clerk, and hopefully City Council members received a copy of the letter.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said they did receive a copy of the letter.
Ms. Krohn encouraged Council to stick with a generic dangerous dog Ordinance, which is being called Version “A”, which doesn’t single out any specific breed. Ms. Krohn said she could talk all night about the horror stories of what has happened in Independence with their Ordinance. Ms. Krohn said her phone is ringing off the wall, and she is giving people the phone numbers of the Mayor and Council members who passed the legislation.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said he looked at the Independence requirements, and they threw everything, including “the kitchen sink” into their legislation, and it really is incredible.
Ms. Krohn said whenever something like this is enacted, it puts an undue burden on people. When people have to decide between licensing the dog or feed the kids, the choice is simple. Ms. Krohn said what the Gladstone Council has set up is a two tiered system, which was making her head hurt, so she didn’t want to talk about that. Ms. Krohn suggested volunteers to help with the clean up at the Animal Shelter, which would free up the officers to patrol. Ms. Krohn said dogs are animals, and those who work with dogs don’t consider a dog that attacks another dog necessarily dangerous or vicious. Dogs speak a language all their own. Ms. Krohn said they are similar to kids; you may think you know who started it, but you don’t always know. Dogs don’t live by our moral code. The fact that a dog jumped a fence and attacked a neighbor’s dog is not good, but they are still animals.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith thanked Ms. Krohn and everyone who spoke and shared their opinions.
The Clerk read the Bill.
Councilman Wayne Beer moved to accept the First Reading of Bill 07-03 (B) as amended to Waive the Rule, and place the Bill on its Second and Final Reading. Mayor Pro Tem Les Smith seconded.
The vote: “Aye” – Councilman Wayne Beer, Mayor Pro Tem Les Smith, and Mayor Bill Cross. “Nay” – Councilman Mark Revenaugh and Councilman Carol Rudi. (3-2).
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said a unanimous vote of the Council is required in order to Waive the Rule, which means the Bill may receive more than one reading and be enacted as an Ordinance in the same evening. The reading of the Bill has passed, but the ability to continue on with it has not; so therefore, it will be on the next regularly scheduled City Council agenda. Mayor Pro Tem Smith said there will not be public input at that time, but if anyone has anything they would like to pass along to City Council members, please feel free to do so through the City Clerk’s office, and that information will get to Council members.
Item 10. on the Agenda. FIRST READING BILL 07-04, approving the Final Plat of Lot 2, “Tower Plaza”, a subdivision in the County of Clay, City of Gladstone, Missouri, and directing the appropriate officials to affix their signatures to said Plat for recording.
Councilman Wayne Beer moved to place Bill 07-04 on First Reading. Councilman Carol Rudi seconded. The vote: All “aye” – Councilman Mark Revenaugh, Councilman Wayne Beer, Councilman Carol Rudi, Mayor Pro Tem Les Smith, and Mayor Bill Cross. (5-0). The Clerk read the Bill.
Councilman Wayne Beer moved to accept the First Reading of Bill 07-04, Waive the Rule and place the Bill on Second and Final Reading. Councilman Carol Rudi seconded. The vote: All “aye” – Councilman Mark Revenaugh, Councilman Wayne Beer, Councilman Carol Rudi, Mayor Pro Tem Les Smith, and Mayor Bill Cross. (5-0). The Clerk read the Bill.
Councilman Wayne Beer moved to accept the Second and Final Reading of Bill 07-04 and enact the Bill as Ordinance 4.021. Councilman Carol Rudi seconded.
Roll Call Vote: All “aye” – Councilman Mark Revenaugh, Councilman Wayne Beer, Councilman Carol Rudi, Mayor Pro Tem Les Smith, and Mayor Bill Cross. (5-0)
Item 11. on the Agenda. APPROVAL OF A BUILDING PERMIT: for the construction of a commercial structure that will be occupied by Bank Liberty located at 6410 North Prospect. Applicant: W.A. Noll & Associates, Inc. Owner: Bank Liberty. (BP 06-10001064).
Councilman Wayne Beer moved to approve A BUILDING PERMIT: for the construction of a commercial structure that will be occupied by Bank Liberty located at 6410 North Prospect. Applicant: W.A. Noll & Associates, Inc. Owner: Bank Liberty. (BP 06-10001064). Mayor Bill Cross seconded. The vote: All “aye” – Councilman Mark Revenaugh, Councilman Wayne Beer, Councilman Carol Rudi, Mayor Pro Tem Les Smith, and Mayor Bill Cross. (5-0).
Item 12. on the Agenda. PUBLIC HEARING: on a request for a Site Plan Revision at property located at 6305 North Prospect Avenue. Applicant: Shafer, Kline & Warren, Inc. Owner: Eldon M. King Trust. File #1292.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith opened the Public Hearing and said the Public Hearing would be continued pending receipt of a recommendation from the Planning Commission. Public Notice will be provided prior to additional City Council or Planning Commission hearings on this application. Mayor Pro Tem Smith closed the Public Hearing.
Item 13. on the Agenda. OTHER BUSINESS.
There was no other business.
Item 14. on the Agenda. QUESTIONS FROM THE NEWS MEDIA.
There were no questions from the News Media.
Item 15. on the Agenda. ADJOURNMENT.
There being no further business to come before the January 22, 2007, Gladstone Regular City Council Meeting, Mayor Pro Tem Les Smith adjourned the meeting.
Councilman Wayne Beer moved to adjourn to Closed Executive Session pursuant to the Missouri Open Meeting Act exemptions 610.021(1) for Litigation and Confidential or Privileged Communications with Legal Counsel, 610.021(2) for Real Estate Acquisition Discussion, and 610.021(3) for Personnel Discussion. Councilman Mark Revenaugh seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote: All “aye” – Councilman Mark Revenaugh, Councilman Wayne Beer, Councilman Carol Rudi, Mayor Pro Tem Les Smith, and Mayor Bill Cross. (5-0).
Cathy Swenson, City Clerk
Approved as submitted: ___
Approved as corrected/amended: ___
Mayor Bill Cross