Category Archives: Results of BSL

Ashtabula, OH: Council exempts adopted dogs from breed ban

Ashtabula council has passed a revised dog ordinance that allows residents to keep “pit bulls” in town IF and ONLY IF the dog was adopted from the Ashtabula County Animal Protective League (APL). Additionally, APL must attest that the “pit bull” is and has never been human or animal aggressive; and the “pit bull” must be neutered, microchipped, and registered with APL and with the county.

All other “pit bulls” will continue to be banned in Ashtabula. We are sorely disappointed that the council did not completely repeal the breed ban. This “compromise” is unnecessarily complicated and arbitrary.

We believe this is the version of the ordinance that passed: Ashtabula Proposed Vicious Dog / Pit Bull Law

Please RESPECTFULLY contact Ashtabula city council, thank them for taking the first step, and ask them to please fully repeal the city’s breed ban.

City Council, 4717 Main Avenue, Ashtabula, Ohio 44004
Phone: (440) 992-7119
Fax:(440) 998-4457
Council Clerk email: lavetteh@cityofashtabula.com
PLEASE ALWAYS BE RESPECTFUL WHEN YOU CORRESPOND WITH COUNCIL.

City Council lifts ban on pit bulls if they are adopted from APL

By SHELLEY TERRY – Star Beacon
August 21, 2012

ASHTABULA — City Council on Monday lifted a ban on owning or harboring a pit bull, but only if the dog is adopted from the Animal Protective League, and has been determined by that organization to be neither people-aggressive nor animal aggressive. […]

Full article retrieved 8/26/12 from http://starbeacon.com/locvid/x257412694/City-Council-lifts-ban-on-pit-bulls-if-they-are-adopted-from-APL

Advertisements

Boston, MA: City leaders will fight to keep BSL

Boston city officials have unhappily realized that the city’s discriminatory breed-specific ordinance will be nullified on the effective date of the new MA state animal law (October 31). The new state law, which preempts local laws, forbids the regulation of dogs based on breed.

Boston Mayor Menino and City Councilor Rob Consalvo plan to approach the state legislature and request a home rule petition that would exempt them from the state law against BSL. This would allow Boston to keep its BSL.

Worse still, if the legislature approves the petition, it could encourage other cities in MA to apply for home rule petitions in order to implement or keep BSL. In MA, home rule petitions are not at all uncommon. Many cities in the state apply for home rule petitions. Boston, as the largest city in the state, is certainly no stranger to these petitions.

We do not know whether the legislature would approve a home rule petition to allow Boston or any other municipality to keep BSL. We recommend that residents of Boston write the Mayor (mayor@cityofboston.gov) and Council (city.council@cityofboston.gov) and encourage them to stick with breed-neutral, effective laws, rather than pursue BSL.

Residents of Massachusetts can contact their state legislators and ask them not to approve any home rule petitions that would allow a city to circumvent state law, pass BSL, and undo the legislature’s very wise move to prevent breed discrimination. Legislator finder: http://www.malegislature.gov/people/findmylegislator

City Leaders Outraged Over Law That Allows Pit Bulls To Be Unmuzzled

By Karen Anderson, WBZ-TV
August 23, 2012 6:22 PM

BOSTON (CBS) – City leaders in Boston are outraged over a new law that will allow pit bulls to be unmuzzled in public in the city.

The new animal rights law signed by Governor Patrick bans any breed specific rules and regulations, which mean pit bulls can’t be singled out. […]

The city can ask the state for a home rule petition, which would make them exempt from this part of the law. Consalvo and Mayor Menino plan to do that. […]

Full article retrieved 8/24/12 from http://boston.cbslocal.com/2012/08/23/city-leaders-outraged-over-law-that-allows-pit-bulls-to-be-unmuzzled/

Sioux City, IA: Group presents data in support of BSL repeal

Sioux City, IA, has had a controversial breed ban in place for several years. Despite local efforts to show city officials that the ban has had no effect on public safety (in fact, some data indicates that dog bites have increased since the ban), it looks like city council is just not interested in repeal. It may take an election and a significant change in council makeup to get them to reconsider.

Facebook page for Sioux Empire Pit Bull Rescue, the group heading up this attempt to change minds in Sioux City: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Sioux-Empire-Pit-Rescue/113194522025974

All alerts for Sioux City, IA, including background information: https://stopbsl.org/?s=%22sioux+city%2C+ia%22

Pit Bull Advocacy Group Tries To Lift Pit Bull Ban

Posted: Aug 22, 2012 5:15 PM CDT
By: Diana Johnsend

[…] The group met with Sioux City Council Member John Fitch today in hopes of getting the whole council to take up the issue again, which doesn’t seem that likely.

“My guess is it’s just additional information. This council is not going to take the issue up again, and I would be surprised if you see it taken up any time soon,” said Fitch.

[…] The group added that they hope the council will take into consideration the stricter pet ownership laws they presented because if anything should be taken away from today’s meeting, they said, it should be they’re working for pet safety and proper ownership.

Full article retrieved 8/24/12 from http://www.kcautv.com/story/19345573/pit-bull-advocacy-group-tries-to-lift-pit-bull-ban

Ashtabula, OH: Council will consider breed ban semi-repeal, Aug 20

This issue (below) will be discussed and possibly voted on during the August 20 council meeting. It failed to pass during the August 6 council meeting.

Ashtabula, OH, has a breed ban on “pit bulls,” defined as American Pit Bull Terriers, American Staffordshire Terriers, and Staffordshire Bull Terriers, and any mixed breed of such, and any dog that looks like a pit bull.

Rather than repeal their ban completely, Ashtabula will consider allowing residents to keep “pit bulls” in town IF and ONLY IF the dog was adopted from the Ashtabula County Animal Protective League (APL). Additionally, APL must attest that the “pit bull” is and has never been human or animal aggressive; and the “pit bull” must be neutered, microchipped, and registered with APL and with the county.

While we appreciate the efforts that APL has made to try to repeal the ban and improve “pit bull” adoption rates, the city’s “compromise” falls seriously short in many ways: enforcement will be a bureaucratic nightmare, residents won’t grasp the superficial distinction between a “legal pit bull” and a “banned pit bull,” and, when it’s all said and done, it’s STILL BSL, it’s STILL a breed ban, and people are STILL being discriminated against based solely on what their dog looks like.

The current draft of Ashtabula’s proposed dog ordinance can be read here (received from city clerk, 7-17-2012, and subject to change): Ashtabula Proposed Vicious Dog / Pit Bull Law

Please RESPECTFULLY contact Ashtabula city council, thank them for taking the first step, explain why their “compromise” falls short, and ask them to please fully repeal the city’s breed ban.

City Council, 4717 Main Avenue, Ashtabula, Ohio 44004
Phone: (440) 992-7119
Fax:(440) 998-4457
Council Clerk email: lavetteh@cityofashtabula.com
PLEASE ALWAYS BE RESPECTFUL WHEN YOU CORRESPOND WITH COUNCIL.

Pit bull decision to wait

August 7, 2012
By SHELLEY TERRY – Star Beacon

ASHTABULA — […] City Council failed by a 4-3 vote to repeal an ordinance which outlaws pit bulls. As a result, the measure must go at least one more meeting, taking it to Aug. 20.

[…] The new legislation, if it passes Aug. 20, will more broadly define a vicious dog as “any dog with a propensity, tendency or disposition to attack, to cause injury or to otherwise endanger the safety of human beings or other domestic animals.”

[…] Pit bulls would still be banned from the city, unless the pit bull is adopted from the APL and has been determined to be a non-aggressive canine.

Full article retrieved 8/19/12 from http://starbeacon.com/local/x1402348350/Pit-bull-decision-to-wait

Earlham, IA reminder: City to vote on animal ordinance revisions, Aug 13 (still BSL)

Earlham, IA already has BSL. They are revising their animal ordinance, but the BSL will be retained. Although the agenda has not been posted, we believe the proposed revisions will be voted on at the council meeting on August 13 at 7:00 PM. Council meetings are held at Earlham City Hall, Council Chambers, 140 South Chestnut Avenue.

To read more about Earlham’s proposed ordinance revisions or to get contact information for city officials, please visit our previous Earlham alert: https://stopbsl.org/2012/07/11/earlham-ia-city-considering-revisions-to-current-bsl-still-bsl/

Manchester, MO: Resident sues city for “unconstitutional” BSL

Manchester Sued Over Dog Ordinance

In a recently filed lawsuit, a resident claims Manchester’s pitbull ordinance is unconstitutional and vague.

By Carlos Restrepo
August 10, 2012

[… Manchester resident] McRoberts said in the lawsuit that her dogs were only characterized by Manchester police as “vicious” based on their appearance, not the actual breed or behavior of the dogs. The lawsuit states that appearance is subjective and open to interpretation, which gives Manchester too much discretion over what constitutes a vicious dog.

“…and thus violates the plaintiff’s constitutional rights (of due process),” the lawsuit states. […]

McRoberts seeks for the court to declare Manchester’s ordinance unconstitutional and to be refunded for expenditures relating to this lawsuit. […]

Full article retrieved 8/12/12 from http://townandcountry-manchester.patch.com/articles/manchester-sued-over-dog-ordinance

Massachusetts: New state law will nullify cities’ BSL

Reports out of Lowell and Worcester, MA, indicate that the breed-specific ordinances in both cities—and by extension, any other MA city with BSL—will be nullified by the new MA state law when it goes into effect on October 31. The new state law prohibits municipalities from regulating dogs based on breed.

Many attorneys in MA seem to agree that MA “home rule” does not allow city ordinances to conflict with state law. Even if cities do not officially repeal their BSL, the laws will be preempted and nullified by the new state law when it goes into effect.

Tracking page for MA S.2192: http://www.malegislature.gov/Bills/187/Senate/S02192

New state law could maul Lowell’s pit-bull ordinance

By Lyle Moran, lmoran@lowellsun.comlowellsun.com

Updated: 08/09/2012 08:18:00 AM EDT

LOWELL — […] City Manager Bernie Lynch told The Sun that the city’s Law Department is reviewing the new animal-control legislation to determine whether it affects Lowell’s ordinance. […]

“It seems like it may have an impact on whether the pit-bull ordinance is sustainable,” Lynch said.[…]

Full article retrieved 8/12/12 from http://www.lowellsun.com/todaysheadlines/ci_21271643/new-state-law-could-maul-lowells-pit-bull

Worcester pit bull regulations nullified

By Scott J. Croteau TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF
scroteau@telegram.com

WORCESTER — An animal control law signed by Gov. Deval L. Patrick includes language that effectively nullifies Worcester’s pit bull ordinance.[…]

City Solicitor David M. Moore said he will have to review the new law and report on it to City Manager Michael V. O’Brien. Even if the city doesn’t repeal the pit bull ordinance, enforcing it will be moot when the state law takes effect. […]

Jonathan S. Rankin, a Framingham-based lawyer and chairman of the Massachusetts Bar Association’s Animal Law Practice Group, said the new law says communities can make additional ordinances as long as the language is not breed-specific.

“I think these breed-specific laws have to be changed or they will be invalidated,” he said. […]

Full article retrieved 8/12/12 from http://www.telegram.com/article/20120807/NEWS/120809656/1116