08-18-2014 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MEMORANDUM DATE: August 7, 2014 TO: Joel Hanson FROM: Kevin Beck RE: Amendments to Ord. 1101 A "service animal" is "any dog that is individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an individual with a disability, including a physical, sensory, psychiatric, intellectual, or other mental disability." 28 C.P.R. § 36.104. The work or tasks performed by a service animal must be directly related to the individual's disability. Id. For example, assisting individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing to the presence of people or sounds. There is no requirement under that ADA that service animals be certified or licensed as such, just that the dog is (i) individually trained and (ii) works for the benefit of the individual with a disability. Courts have found that most animals are not equipped "to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an individual with a disability." See I3ronk, 54 F.3d at 429 n.6. There must instead be something -- evidence of individual training — to set the service animal apart from the ordinary pet. See id.; Fulciniti, 1998 U.S. Dist. Lexis 23450, at *6-8; Green, 994 F. Supp. at 1256; In re Kenna Homes, 557 S.E.2d at 797. Courts have also held that the service animal at issue must be peculiarly suited to ameliorate the unique problems of the disabled individual, Green, 994 P. Supp. at 1255, because "a dog cannot acquire discernable skills as a service dog without some type of training." In re Kenna homes, 557 S.E.2d at 797. This is not a difficult requirement, however, as there are no federally -mandated animal training standards. See Green, 994 F. Supp. at 1255-56. In sum, applicants to license service animals must provide evidence that the dog is individually trained and that it works for the benefit of the applicant. Federal regulations provide, however, that a "public entity shall not ask about the nature or extent of a person's disability, but may make two inquiries to determine whether an animal qualifies as a service animal. A public entity may ask if the animal is required because of a disability and what work or task the animal has been trained to perform." 28 C.F.R. § 35.136(0. We have recently had a situation where an individual was charged with having animals in excess of what is allowed under the ordinance. The citizen argued that some of the dogs were service animals trained to perform tasks related to disabilities for her, her partner, and her partner's daughter. Courts have held that service animals under the ADA cannot he counted for purposes of local animal control ordinances. A review of Ordinance 1101 revealed two issues. First, there is no language regarding service animals. Accordingly, we are proposing an amendment to add a definition of "service animals" using the current definition under the ADA. Although the City cannot license service animals, we do recommend requiring that they be registered by providing the same information for non - service animals and answering the questions the City is allowed to ask—if the animal is required because of a disability and what work or task the animal has been trained to perform. The proposed amendment reflects that. Second, there is no provision in the existing ordinance authorizing the City to deny or revoke licenses. Accordingly, we are proposing an amendment granting the City the ability to deny/revoke a license for any reason reasonably related to the regulation of animals within city limits, including but not limited to, protecting the health, safety, and welfare of the public. As a procedural issue, we are proposing an appeal process for an applicant to challenge the City's denial/revocation. It would be set up similarly to the appeal process for dangerous and potentially dangerous dog determinations.