Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council April 25, 2005 <br />Regular Meeting Page 8 <br /> <br />spent approximately $9,000.00 to install a fence, which was for the safety of their animals, as 1 <br />they do not want them in the streets. He stated that they dogs are not left unsupervised noting 2 <br />that they are members of their family. He stated that their are never off their leash noting that if 3 <br />the barking becomes excessive conditional behavior training is implemented. He stated that he 4 <br />has already noticed many of the walkers in his area have their dogs off the leash, running ahead 5 <br />and assured Council that this would not be the case with their dogs. He acknowledged the 6 <br />neighbors’ frustrations and concerns noting that they have met the requirement for the number of 7 <br />signatures needed for the permit. He stated that he also wrote notes to their neighbors asking 8 <br />them to contact them with any problems at any time. He stated that he and his wife are new to 9 <br />the area and are trying hard to work with their neighbors. He asked Council to give them the 10 <br />chance to prove their honor. 11 <br /> 12 <br />Mayor Marty closed the public hearing at 9:25 p.m. 13 <br /> 14 <br />Council Member Flaherty clarified that what he is hearing is that they want a trial period with the 15 <br />option, after 60-days, to determine if three dogs is working or not. He asked the neighbors to 16 <br />verify whose dog is barking before making any reports. He stated that he is in support of tabling 17 <br />this issue for the duration. 18 <br /> 19 <br />Council Member Thomas stated that she would be against tabling this request. She stated that 20 <br />she does not think that a 60-day period would change the decision and postponing would not 21 <br />accomplish anything during this timeframe. She stated that there is a fairness issue to be 22 <br />considered as they have a resident with more than two dogs and neighbors with concerns about 23 <br />the noise. She stated that she is concerned about neighborhood relationships adding that the City 24 <br />has a process in place and the Council should make a decision tonight. 25 <br /> 26 <br />Council Member Gunn agreed with Council Member Thomas. She stated that she does not think 27 <br />that a 60-day period would make much difference. She agreed that if there are other dogs 28 <br />barking in the area that this issue should also be addressed. She asked if the applicant would be 29 <br />able to keep all three dogs or would one dog have to be boarded until the kennel license is 30 <br />approved. 31 <br /> 32 <br />Mayor Marty stated that if this request is tabled everything would remain status quo while 33 <br />reviewing the request. He stated that in his view, tabling the application might give the 34 <br />neighbors some peace of mind while they work this situation through. He acknowledged that 35 <br />tabling this would leave the application open and pending and if they approve this application the 36 <br />Council, at their discretion, can review the application at a later date. He expressed concerns 37 <br />stating that he does not want to send the message to the residents that Council is not listening to 38 <br />their concerns. He stated that he does not have a problem with tabling the application for the 60-39 <br />day period. He stated that it is his hope that by the end of the 60-day period the situation will 40 <br />have improved. He stated that he sees this as a potentially positive step for everyone concerned. 41 <br /> 42 <br />Council Member Gunn clarified that the neighbors would still have the same recourse to come in 43 <br />and express concerns about the noise whether the application is tabled or approved. She stated 44 <br />that she could see where both options are positive noting that the Residents are all aware of their 45