Under new McCandless dog law, owners face steep fines for pet’s bark, scratch, odor
Share this post:
McCandless residents who can’t keep their dogs from barking constantly or running free through the neighborhood will face steep fines if they are convicted of creating a nuisance.
Council narrowly passed revisions to its animal control ordinance Aug. 23 that eliminate the $25 fine for each incident in which a resident is convicted of violating the law.
The new fine for the first offense is now $50 and will double with each subsequent violation. The maximum fine is capped at $500 for the sixth offense.
The ordinance retains a provision calling for up to 30 days in jail for scofflaws who fail to pay up.
The measure passed by a 4-3 vote. Voting in favor of the changes were council President Kim Zachary and Councilmen Bill Kirk, Greg Walkauskus and Bill McKim.
Council members Steve Mertz, Joan Powers and Carolyn Schweiger voted against the revised dog law.
The fine can be levied for having animals that create offensive odors; and habitually bark, howl, scratch, dig or defecate on other peoples’ properties.
More than a dozen residents addressed council about the changes during the meeting. They were generally split on whether they supported the measure.
Kay Womsley of Montgomery Road complained the revised law is too vague in its explanation of what constitutes an offense.
She said while she understands pets can be an annoyance, she noted there is no language in the law that exempts people who clean up after their pets. Without such a protection it “includes a person who brings a bag to clean up,” she said. “That kind of means we can’t walk our dogs anywhere, which is excessive.”
Jack Owen of Park Edge Drive supported the changes in the ordinance, but said it should have been tougher.
“I commend you for your step in the right direction,” he said. “But it doesn’t go quite far enough and needs to be stronger. You should consider limiting the number of dogs that are allowed.”
Alan Cecala of Katherine Drive agreed.
“I think there’s a problem when we don’t provide our code enforcement and law officers with clarity,” he said. “The current ordinance doesn’t provide clarity. It’s hard to enforce a situation where there are an extreme number of animals, that’s the problem.”
Denise Fuller of Park Edge Drive said council has no business telling residents what they can do when it comes to owning pets.
“I do not agree that people should be fined for having pets,” she said. “I do not agree with limiting the amount of pets people can own. It’s uncalled for and I don’t think the town should get involved in my personal life.”
Stephen Pavlick of Adams Street called the fines “excessive” and said the new law does not address a key issue — preventing residents from using their law to harass a neighbor they don’t like.
“You need to consider the habitual complainer and if they’re going to be fined for habitually complaining when there is really nothing founded,” he said.
Before the measure was passed, McCandless police Chief David DiSanti tried to calm fears that residents would try to manipulate the law to cause grief.
“When we investigate, we base everything on fairness and common sense,” he said. “The information that is conveyed to us is documented precisely and every attempt is made to speak to all the parties so we can hear every side to the story.”
He said he is aware of concerns that some people might be unjustly punished, but said: “that’s not going to happen.”
DiSanti said “good, sound judgment” is applied when a complaint of any kind is reported. “We try to resolve things as a neighborhood police department and as amicably as possible,” he said.