Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission July 5, 2006 <br />Regular Meeting Page 20 <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br /> <br />B. Continuation: Review Amendments to Chapters 701 and 1106 Regarding Dog <br />Kennels. <br /> <br />Director Ericson stated Staff is seeking Planning Commission review of a proposed ordinance that <br />would eliminate residential dog and cat kennels as a conditional use. <br /> <br />Director Ericson stated that the Planning Commission had asked to have stronger language added to <br />the ordinance so that loopholes by which someone that should not be given a kennel license are given <br />one. He indicated that at the recommendation of the prosecuting attorney, the only change from the <br />version presented and considered at the June 21, 2006 Planning Commission meeting, is the addition <br />of the words “who has mistreated animals” to page two of Ordinance 774, item e under Persons <br />Ineligible. “No license shall be granted to an applicant who has mistreated animals or has been <br />convicted for animal cruelty offenses.” Director Ericson indicated that the prosecuting attorney felt <br />by adding “who has mistreated animals” the City has the discretion it needs to deny someone a <br />license where there have been problems in the past. He stated that this is the only change made to the <br />resolution. <br /> <br />Director Ericson stated that if this wording accurately reflects what the Planning Commission is <br />looking for, he would have it forwarded on to the City Council for consideration. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller asked about the order of the new clauses. She indicated she thought the clause <br />for persons ineligible should be located closer to the license fees. Director Ericson said that typically <br />when they talk about ineligibility it is usually placed later on in the document. He stated it could be <br />written in anywhere the Planning Commission feels is appropriate. He does not feel the order makes a <br />difference. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson stated if it follows the way other ordinances are written and addresses eligibility at <br />the end; it should be left where it is. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hegland asked if it should be “anyone being charged with” or can anyone accuse <br />someone of mistreatment of animals. Director Ericson clarified the prosecuting attorney said in his <br />opinion having the language “mistreated animals” is sufficient to provide just cause to deny a license <br />where there is sufficient justification to do so. <br /> <br />MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Scotch /Commissioner Miller to approve the ordinance 842-06 <br />amending the procedures and regulations pertaining to dog kennels. <br /> <br /> Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried <br /> <br /> <br />7. Next Planning Commission Meeting: <br />A. July 19, 2006. <br />B. August 2, 2006. <br />______________________________________________________________________________ <br />