Sample Agenda Template Word Doc

ANIMAL CONTROL COMMISSION MEETING

June 2, 2021

FAIRBANKS NORTH STAR BOROUGH ANIMAL CONTROL COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA

THIS MEETING WILL BE HELD IN-PERSON AND BY ZOOM OR BY ZOOM ONLY

HOSTED FROM THE MONA LISA DREXLER ASSEMBLY CHAMBERS AT THE JUANITA HELMS ADMINISTRATION CENTER 907 TERMINAL STREET, FAIRBANKS, ALASKA

June 2, 2021 at 6:00 PM

Please use the link below to join the webinar: https://fnsb-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1611328507

Or Dial (Toll Free) 1-833 568 8864 Webinar ID: 161 132 8507

A. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL

B. MESSAGES

1. Citizen’s Comments – limited to three (3) minutes

a. Agenda items not scheduled for public hearingb. Items other than those appearing on the agenda

2. Disclosure & Statement of Conflict of Interest

C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA

Approval of consent agenda passes all routine items indicated by asterisk (*) onagenda. Consent agenda items are not considered separately unless anyCommission member or citizen so requests. In the event of such request, the itemis returned to the general agenda.

D. *MINUTES

1. *Minutes from June 15, 2020.

E. NEW BUSINESS

1. Review and Comment on Ordinance No. 2021-15: An ordinance AmendingFNSBC Title 22, Animals, And FNSBC 1.20.070(E), Fine Schedule, IncludingAdding A Definition For Animal Rescue Facilities, Clarifying Responsibilities OfCaretakers, Requiring Proof Of Immunization And Registration In Certain

Page 2 of 21

https://fnsb-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1611328507

https://www.fnsb.gov/DocumentCenter/View/6488/ORDINANCE-NO-2021-15




Circumstances, Removing Mandatory Warnings, Adding An Animal Ownership Section, And Other Related Changes. (Sponsor: Assemblymember Cash)

2. Manager’s Report F. EXCUSE FUTURE ABSENCES

G. COMMISSIONER’S COMMENTS/COMMUNICATIONS H. ADJOURNMENT This meeting will be conducted in-person and by Zoom or by Zoom-only, to be determined after considering the FNSB Operational Status as determined by the FNSB Risk Matrix and if the Juanita Helms Administration Center is otherwise open to the public. Please visit https://www.fnsb.gov/835/Stay-Connected-with-Your-Boards-and-Comm or contact the Department of Community Planning by calling 459-1260 or emailing [email protected] for more information.

Page 3 of 21



https://www.fnsb.gov/835/Stay-Connected-with-Your-Boards-and-Comm

mailto:[email protected]

MINUTES

June 15, 2020

Page 4 of 21

Page 1 of 8

FAIRBANKS NORTH STAR BOROUGH ANIMAL CONTROL COMMISSION

MINUTES

June 15, 2020 A regular meeting of the Fairbanks North Star Borough Animal Control was held in the Mona Lisa Drexler Assembly Chambers, Juanita Helms Administrative Center, 907 Terminal Street, Fairbanks, Alaska. The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Alex Thornton, Chair. A. CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL

MEMBERS PRESENT: Gail Gardner Ronnie Rosenberg Mary Ann Fortune Tom Swan

Scott Chesney Alex Thornton Jamie Marschner MEMBERS ABSENT:

OTHERS PRESENT: Sandy Hill, Animal Control Manager Sharon Wittenkeller, Recording Clerk Jessica Davis, Zoom Technician Jill Dolan, FNSB Attorney Jim Williams, FNSB Chief of Staff

B. MESSAGES

1. Citizen’s Comments – limited to three (3) minutes – None. a. Agenda items not scheduled for public hearing b. Items other than those appearing on the agenda

2. Disclosure & Statement of Conflict of Interest – None.

C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA

Motion to approve the agenda and consent agenda made by Commissioner Chesney and seconded by Commissioner Swan. Carried without objection or roll call vote.

D. MINUTES

Minutes from February 18, 2020 approved on consent. E. UNFINISHED BUSINESS

1. Shelter report and Commissioner questions.

Page 5 of 21

Page 2 of 8

Ms. Hill reported on shelter stats and euthanasia rates with comparisons from the year prior, employee status due to COVD-19 pandemic, operational and fee changes due to COVID-19, adoption support from the community, daily operation changes due to COVID-19, open positions, budget, shelter population, and employee training. Discussion and questions ensued among commissioners and staff.

2. An Ordinance 2020-02 Amending FNSB Code Of Ordinances Titles 4, 15,

17, 18, And 22 Regarding Quasi-Judicial Appeals To Add A New Board Of Appeals And New Appeals Officer Section.

The sponsor, Mayor Ward, was not available to give a report. Christine Nelson, Director, Department of Community Planning presented the staff report on the ordinance: Ms. Nelson noted the following:

• The ordinance amends many titles to standardized quasi-judicial processes regarding appeals and establishes a new board of appeals and an appeals hearing officer sections.

• The history of the ordinance is that more than three years ago the borough

administration established an internal boards and commission working group to review the functionality and the roadblocks to efficient and effective public meetings borough wide. Some of the issues were the consistency of meetings, the transparency of meetings for the public and clarity and confusion of the public about how a meeting is supposed to function and how they can participate, compliance with the open meetings act, lack of standardized processes and needs for training. Many of the issues have already been addressed.

• One of the concerns raised about borough meetings is associated with appeals;

including complexity of the process, the requirements, the infrequency of appeals, and lack of experience on boards and commissions with appeals, and efficient use of tax payer resources, including the number of local appeals, and staff as a party.

• The ordinance is intended to standardize processes for appeals including

administrative decisions, the Animal Control Commission decisions on animal bites, the Board of Adjustment appeals on various land use cases, Planning Commission and Public Transportation Advisory Commission, and Platting Board with the exception of one local appeal process.

• The ordinance is based on several premises; the limited number of local

government appeals to one, one initial application decision and one appeal. It is also based on appeal of decision by staff which would be heard by a citizen

Page 6 of 21

Page 3 of 8

body. For example, if animal control staff made a decision it would go to a body, not an individual hearing officer. An appeal of a decision made by a citizen body would go to an appeals hearing officer.

• How it relates specifically to the Animal Control Commission is that section 4,lines 211 – 212, of the Ordinance, repeals the authority of the Animal ControlCommission to act as the appeal hearing body for animal bite appeals. Section5 and 6, Lines 214-248, repeals the procedures for the Animal Control appealhearings. Section 21, lines 754-758 amends the appeal body from the AnimalControl Commission to the new board of appeals. Section 8, lines 252-281,establishes the new appeals body, and establishes the procedures for appealsboard, and appeal hearings. If the ordinance is adopted those newrequirements would apply to animal bite appeal hearings.

• The benefits of the ordinance is that it standardizes the processes, it helpsclarify the process for the public, it also benefits the board of adjustment inthat they are not appeal body, so they are not therefore limited in serving theirconstituents. If they are an appeal body, because of the quasi-judicial naturethey can’t speak to any other constituents about that matter, otherwise it isconsidered ex parte contact. The ordinance allows the board of adjustments tofully serve their constituents in their role as policy makers and exempts themfrom the appeal process. It removes staff as a party, which allows staff to dealwith questions from their boards and commissions ahead of a meeting, actingas expert staff assisting each board and commission, rather than a party to adecision or appeal. It allows for one level of appeal, not multiple levels of anappeal which saves the tax payer money.

Ms. Nelson shared a matrix and flow chart of the current and proposed process for animal bite appeal hearings.

The commission questioned and discussed with staff the following:

• The flow chart; there is no difference with a two-step process for the public onanimal bite appeal hearings.

• What advantage there is for the borough removing the Animal ControlCommission from the process, and transferring the responsibility with little tono expertise in regard to animal issues.

• An advantage would be a matter of standardization.• Pros and cons on what the commission would bring to an appeals process and

what an appeals board would bring to the process.• Have the commission remain as jurors for the appeal hearings, with an appeals

hearing officer to run the hearing.• As proposed in the ordinance, the Animal Control Commission would have no

role in an animal bite appeal hearing.• The importance of having commissioners serve with their expertise knowledge

of animals and animal behavior.

Page 7 of 21

Page 4 of 8

• Role of staff as part of an appeal, they offer animal expertise, and can includewitnesses during an appeal.

• Conflict of interest with staff as animal expert in appeal hearing depending onthe role of staff.

• Staff’s decisions are being appealed in hearings and staff cannot serve as theexperts due to their recommendation for an animal’s release, which is thedecision that is being appeal.

• Citizen involvement with citizen issues moving towards a more bureaucraticprocess.

• Hearing officer as chair of the hearing, and have the commission remain as thedecision making body.

• Whether or not any other boards have the same type of law enforcementauthority that the Animal Control Commission has.

• Positions of those with animal expertise in the appeal process.

Jill Dolan, Borough Attorney share the following information with the commission:

• The Borough Attorney’s office assists boards and commissions with quasi-judicial matters.

• The role of legal during quasi-judicial procedures; provide procedural advice, abenefit for both public and staff participation, and provide commissionassistance.

• The legal department is fairly limited in what they can do ethically when theyrepresent the entire entity and not a specific party, part of the concept behindcreating the board of appeals was not to take authority away from the AnimalControl Commission as it was to put it in a different body that they would notlegally advise.

• Legal would instead work with staff and staff would be the expert. The role asan attorney and staff’s roll as the expert would be to train the adjudicator.

The commission questioned and discussed with staff the following:

• Conditions of release, not always strictly an issue of law rather than anjudgment call of those with animal expertise.

• Animal Control Commissioners testifying at appeal hearings if they are nolonger part of the appeals board.

• Commissioner’s role in a quasi-judicial matter; serve as judge, the decisionbased on evidence presented.

Chair Thornton opened the public hearing.

The following individuals testified:

Kaz Storm, Chena Ridge, spoke in favor of having individuals with animal expertise when making decisions regarding animals.

Page 8 of 21

Page 5 of 8

MOTION: I move that the Animal Control Commission oppose Ordinance 2020-02 as written made by Commissioner Swan seconded by Commissioner Chesney. Commissioner Fortune agreed with Commissioner Swan’s motion. Commissioner Swan stated he followed the news closely, and over the past two weeks, throughout the major cities and the Lower 48 they have seen massive demonstrations and even very violent riots and civil unrest at a level that we've not seen in this nation for decades. And what many of these protesters are asking for and requesting is something we have right here in our borough. They are asking for citizen oversight of their law enforcement agencies. While the borough has very limited law enforcement authority. One of the most visible parts of that limited authority is within the animal control division, and particularly the animal control officers, that are working very hard and doing in his opinion a very good job. As recently as 2006, there have been significant complaints about animal control officers abusing their authority to the detriment of some of our some of our constituents. In our function as an appeals board we essentially serve as a civilian oversight commission of a law enforcement agency. I believe at a time in history when so many people across the nation are clamoring for exactly the type of oversight that we provide, I feel it would be just extremely unwise for us to abrogate that authority, or that that role. It’s just not a good idea for the animal Control Commission to be included within this ordinance. Commissioner Chesney commented in regards to the motion weather if it would be better to vote for a motion expressing disapproval or to suggest amendments to the ordinance as presented. He further noted that after listening to the staff reports, he was not sure the commission would get anywhere by suggesting that everybody but animal control be addressed by this ordinance, getting them removed from the change in procedure seems very clear that they are set on absolute uniformity. So for that reason he seconded the motion to disapprove. Commissioner Thornton stated having a potential amendment to propose having a hearing officer run the logistical side and having commissioners serve as the expertise would not be agreed upon. For that reason he also supported disapproval of the ordinance and stated being to open discussions with the borough later to work on having a hearing officer to try to improve the process. Commissioner Rosenberg stated in the past, over her 20 years on the commission especially in the summer, they would have upwards of three and five hearings a month. There were times they had scheduled two in one evening and she was the chair for many of those years and conducted the hearings. Only a few of them got appealed and when they did get appealed, they were upheld and they were not appealed because they made technical errors. Nowadays the officers have gained expertise. We have new officers. They have different procedures and hearings are few and far in-between. It would be very difficult for them to serve as hearing officers at this point. She believed, however, the commission should be the people that help craft the decision as to what should be done. The process can’t be totally standardized.

Page 9 of 21

Page 6 of 8

The procedures can be standardized, perhaps, but not the decision of how we're going to try to prevent an injury. She didn’t think having just a neutral hearing officer and not involving the commission is a good thing. Further discussion ensued regarding an amendment to the motion. Commissioner Fortune stated that this standardization across the board will be changing the level of fairness that the presence of the Animal Control Commission is always offered the community and their animals as a result. Further discussion ensued regarding preference on having an administrative law judge or moving to strictly an appeals board. ROLL CALL Seven (7) in Favor: Fortune, Rosenberg, Swan, Thornton, Gardner, Chesney, Marschner Zero (0) Opposed MOTION CARRIED

MOTION: to propose that the Animal Control Commission work with a hearing officer who may or may not be an administrative law judge, but who otherwise has expertise in the appeals process to reside over the procedural aspects of the appeals cases with a minimum of three (3) Animal Control Commissioners to serve as they have and to provide their expertise, and if there is a recommendation of euthanasia, that a minimum of three (3) Animal Control Commissioners be in agreement of the decision made by Commissioner Rosenberg seconded by Commissioner Thornton. ROLL CALL Seven (7) in Favor: Rosenberg, Swan, Gardner, Chesney, Marschner, Fortune, Thornton Zero (0) Opposed:

MOTION CARRIED

F. EXCUSE FUTURE ABSENCES Monday, July 20, 2020 – None. G. COMISSIONER’S COMMENTS/COMMUNICATIONS

Commissioner Rosenberg reported on the shelter fund fundraising efforts and tax filing status.

Page 10 of 21

Page 7 of 8

Commissioner Gardner commented on the new volunteer policy.

H. ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:35.

Page 11 of 21

NEW BUSINESS

Ordinance No. 2021-15

Page 12 of 21

1 By: Jimi Cash

2 Referred to the Animal Control

3 Commission: March 25, 2021 4 5 6 7 8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

FAIRBANKS NORTH STAR BOROUGH

ORDINANCE NO. 2021 - 15

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING FNSBC IDLE 22, ANIMALS, AND FNSBC 1.20.070(E), FINE SCHEDULE, INCLUDING ADDING A DEFINffiON FOR ANIMAL RESCUE FACILffiES,

CLARIFYING RESPONSIBILffiES OF CARETAKERS, REQUIRING PROOF OF IMMUNIZATION AND REGISTRATION IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, REMOVING

MANDATORY WARNINGS, ADDING AN ANIMAL OWNERSHIP SECTION, AND OTHER RELATED CHANGES

WHEREAS, Animal rescue facilities provide animal sheltering and adoption

services, and function similar to the animal shelter; and

WHEREAS, The Fairbanks North Star Borough does not license animals or

facilities, but has the powers to license, impound, and dispose of animals and to prevent

animal cruelty; and

WHEREAS, Having requirements to ensure that animals are properly

immunized and cared for, and putting the responsibility for an animal on a caretaker in

addition to an owner, will assist in ensuring a proper environment for facilities that house

multiple animals; and

WHEREAS, Other related changes to Title 22 will address community

concerns that have been expressed regarding investigation and enforcement of code.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Assembly of the Fairbanks

North Star Borough:

AMENDMENTS ARE SHOWN IN LEGISLATIVE FORMAT Text to be addedis underlined

Text to be deleted is [BRACKETED, CAPITALIZED]

Fairbanks North Star Borough, Alaska ORDINANCE NO. 2021-Page 1 of 9

Page 13 of 21

34 Section 1. This ordinance is of a general and permanent nature and shall

35 be codified.

36

37 Section 2. FNSBC 22.04.010, Definitions, shall be amended as follows [the

38 Clerk shall add the definition in alphabetical order]:

39 "Animal rescue facility" means any premises used for keeping six or more unwanted,

40 abandoned, or surrendered dogs or cats over the age of four months. whether for profit

41 or not.

42 "Owner" means any person over the age of majority[, PARTNERSHIP, OR CORPORATION]

43 owning, keeping, or harboring one or more animals[, AND WITH THE ABILITY TO

44 PROVIDE PROOF OF OWNERSHIP]. An animal shall be deemed harbored if it is fed or

45 sheltered for three days or more.

46 [''PROOF OF OWNERSHIP" MEANS UNDISPUTABLE EVIDENCE OF OWNERSHIP OF AN

47 ANIMAL; EXAMPLES INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO REGISTERED MICROCHIP,

48 HISTORICAL PHOTOS OF THE ANIMAL, RABIES CERTIFICATE, VETERINARY RECORDS,

49 PEDIGREE, BILL OF SALE OR ADOPTION CONTRACT.]

50

51 Section 3. Subsection A of FNSBC 22.16.050, Redemption, is hereby

52 amended as follows:

53 A. Upon providing proof of ownership. [T]the most recent owner [ON RECORD] may

54 resume possession of their impounded animal except as may be provided in this title and

55 if the animal has not already been adopted. The most recent owner [ON RECORD] may

156 only redeem their animal after paying all related fees and may not adopt the animal.

57

58 Section 4. A new section FNSBC 22.16.080, Animal ownership, is hereby

59 added as follows:

AMENDMENTS ARE SHOWN IN LEGISLATIVE FORMAT Text to be added is underlined


Fairbanks North Star Borough. Alaska ORDINANCE NO. 2021-Page 2 of 9 Page 14 of 21

61

62

63

64

available records establish proof of ownership. Proof of ownership includes, but is not

limited to:

1. A voluntary pet registration on record with animal control;

2. A registered microchip showing the animal's and person's current

65 information;

66 3. Veterinary records showing the person has obtained care for the animal;

67 4. An identification tag on the animal with the person's current contact

68 information;

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

5. Purchase or adoption contracts with sufficient information to determine the

animal's identity and date ownership began;

6. Receipts for veterinary or other care indicating the person is the primary

financial caretaker for the animal;

7. AKC or other registration paperwork that reflects the person's ownership

information.

B. A person that operates as an animal rescue facility and accepts a dog or cat into

their possession for the purpose of caring for or selling or adopting the animal to another

must contact animal control and register the animal, including providing proof of rabies

vaccination, within two business days after receipt.

Section 5. Subsection A of FNSBC 22.24.020, Duty to Report, is hereby

amended as follows:

A. It shall be the duty of every person who is bitten by an animal or the owner or

caretaker of an animal that has bitten a person resulting in a break to the skin to report

the incident to animal control.

Section 6. FNSBC 22.24.060, Vaccination, is hereby amended as follows:



Fairbanks North Star Borough, Alaska ORDINANCE NO. 2021-Page 3 of 9 Page 15 of 21

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

A. No person shall own, keep or harbor a dog, cat or ferret over four months of age

within the borough unless such animal is properly immunized against rabies in accordance

with the initial and booster vaccination schedules as recommended in the Compendium

of Animal Rabies Prevention and Control, 2016.

B. Animal control shall, at least annually, hold a rabies vaccination clinic. The clinic

shall be held at such times and places as to encourage the widest participation. Fees to

be charged may not exceed cost plus 10 percent.

C. It is unlawful for a person to issue, transfer or forge a certificate for a rabies

vaccination or rabies tag when no vaccination has been administered.

D. The owner or caretaker of an animal required to be properly immunized against

rabies by this code or other applicable law shall provide proof of vaccination upon request

by animal control when the animal has been involved in an animal bite incident, is

reported to act in a threatening or hostile manner, is running at large, is at a dog park,

is accepted by an animal rescue facility, or has been impounded. Failure to provide proof

of rabies immunization to animal control within two business days is a violation.

E. All animals released from the animal shelter, whether by virtue of redemption,

adoption, release from protective custody, or otherwise shall be vaccinated against rabies.

F. An adoptive owner of an animal without a current rabies vaccine shall pay, at the

time of the adoption, the current fee for a rabies vaccination.

106 G. For all other animals, if the owner cannot provide proof of current rabies

107 vaccination at the time of redemption, the owner shall pay the current fee for a rabies

108 vaccination plus a fee for expired rabies vaccination.

109 ~Hc.:...•_.....,P'--'r-=o=-of:.....;o=f.....,p'-'-ro~p=e=r....:.:im'-'-"-'-m=u=n=iz=a=tio=n--'--'--'-m=u=st:....,b=e~p=r--=o...:..vi=d=e=-d-=to=--=-a..:..:n-=ew.:..:.....;::o'-'-w::...:..n=e'-'-r=p'-'-rio=r----=t=o--=a=n'+-y~p=e.:....::rs=o~n

110 transferring ownership of an animal from an animal rescue facility.

111

112 Section 7. FNSBC 22.28.010, Proper restraint of animals, is hereby

113 amended as follows:



Fairbanks North Star Borough, Alaska ORDINANCE NO. 2021-Page 4 of 9 Page 16 of 21

114

115

A. No [OWNER OR CARETAKER]person shall fail to properly restrain [THEIR

ANIMAL]an animal in their care to prevent it from running at large.

116 =B.,_. _ _,_N_,_,oe.....ap=e=-r=so,._,_n-'-'s=-h=a=-11-=.,ti-=e,.__,,s=ta=k=e=----'o=-r_,_f=as=t=en'-'--=-an'-'-,y,_a=n--'-'-im'--'--=a'-'lw'--'-'i=th--'-'-in'-'--=a'-'-ny----=st'-'--'re=e=t,......,a=ll=ey.,_.,c...::s=id=e=-=-w=a:.:..:.lk-'-'o=--r

117 public place within the borough or in such a manner that the animal can impede or hinder

118 the safe use by the public of such street, alley, sidewalk or public place.

119 C. Every female dog or cat in heat shall be kept confined in such a manner that such

120 female animal cannot come in contact with a male animal except for planned breeding

121 purposes.

122

123 Section 8. FNSBC 22.28.020, Animal Waste, is hereby amended as follows:

124 No [DOG OR CAT OWNER] person shall fail to remove the excreta deposited by [their].a

125 dog or cat in their care on public areas, recreation areas or on any other person's

126 property.

127

128

129

130

131

132

Section 9. FNSBC 22.28.030, Harboring annoyed or diseased animals, is

hereby amended as follows:

A. No person shall knowingly own, harbor or keep any animal infected with a

contagious or pestilent disease, unless confined and under the care of a licensed

veterinarian.

133 B. No person shall fail to exercise proper care and control of [THEIR ANIMAL]an

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

animal in their care to prevent it from becoming a public nuisance.

[C. NO PERSON SHALL TIE, STAKE OR FASTEN ANY ANIMAL WITHIN ANY STREET,

ALLEY, SIDEWALK OR PUBLIC PLACE WITHIN THE BOROUGH OR IN SUCH A MANNER

THAT THE ANIMAL CAN IMPEDE OR HINDER THE SAFE USE BY THE PUBLIC OF SUCH

STREET, ALLEY, SIDEWALK OR PUBLIC PLACE.

D. EVERY FEMALE DOG OR CAT IN HEAT SHALL BE KEPT CONFINED IN SUCH A

MANNER THAT SUCH FEMALE ANIMAL CANNOT COME IN CONTACT WITH A MALE

ANIMAL EXCEPT FOR PLANNED BREEDING PURPOSES.]




142

143 Section 10. Subsections A and B of FNSBC 22.28.040, Cruelty/failure to

144 provide humane care, are hereby amended as follows:

145 A. A person commits the violation of cruelty to animals if the person:

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

1. Places a poisonous substance where an animal could reasonably ingest the

substance, and the substance was placed with intent to harass, torture, injure or kill an

animal; or

2. Intentionally encourages an animal to fight with another animal for sport,

training or entertainment; or

3. Intentionally abandons, harasses, tortures, injures or kills an animal; or

4. Intentionally fails to provide [THAT PERSON'S]an animal in their care with

adequate food, water, shelter or veterinary care[, TO PREVENT PHYSICAL

SUFFERING]which endangers the health or welfare of an animal.

B. A person commits the violation of failure to provide humane care if [THE

PERSON]they endanger the health or welfare of an animal by negligently [FAILS]failing

to provide [THAT PERSON'S]an animal in their care with adequate food, water, shelter or

veterinary care[, TO PREVENT PHYSICAL SUFFERING].

160 Section 11. Subsection E of FNSBC 1.20.070, Minor offense fine schedule,

161 is hereby amended as follows [the Clerk shall add the fines in order]:

Code Section

22.16.080(6)

22.16.080(6)

Offense Penalty /Fine

Failure to contact animal $100.00

control and register animal.

1st offense



2nd offense



Fairbanks North Star Borough, Alaska

Mandatory Warning Required

No

No

ORDINANCE NO. 2021-Page 6 of 9 Page 18 of 21

22.16.080(B)

22.24.060(H)

22.24.060(H)

22.24.060(H)

22.28.010.(A}

22.28.010.(A}

22.28.010.(A}

[22.28.030(()] 22.28.0l0(B)



3rd or subseguent offense

within a five-year geriod

Failure to grovide groof of $100.00

groger immunization.

1st offense



2nd offense



3rd or subseguent offense

within a five-year geriod

Failure to properly restrain $100.00

animal to prevent running

at large.

1st offense Failure to properly restrain $200.00


at large.

2nd offense Failure to properly restrain $300.00


at large.

3rd or subsequent offense within a five-year period Tying, staking or fastening $100.00

animal within street, alley,

sidewalk or public place.

1st offense



Fairbanks North Star Borough. Alaska

No

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

No

ORDINANCE NO. 2021-Page 7 of 9 Page 19 of 21

[22.28.030(()] Tying, staking or fastening $200.00 No 22.28.010(8) animal within street, alley,


2nd offense [22.28.030(()] Tying, staking or fastening $300.00 No 22.28.010(8) animal within street, alley,


3rd or subsequent offense within a five-year period

[22.28.030(0)] Failure to confine female $100.00 No 22.28.0l0(C) dog or cat in heat.

1st offense [22.28.030(0)] Failure to confine female $200.00 No 22.28.0l0(C) dog or cat in heat.

2nd offense [22.28.030(0)] Failure to confine female $300.00 No 22.28.0l0(C) dog or cat in heat.

3rd or subsequent offense within a five-year period

22.28.040(8) Failure to provide humane $100.00 [YES]No care.

1st offense

162

163 Section 12. Effective Date. This ordinance is effective at 5:00 p.m. on the

164 first Borough business day following its adoption.

165

166

167 168 169 170 171

ADOPTED THE _ _ DAY OF ____ 2021.

Mindy O'Neall Presiding Officer




172 ATTEST: 173 174 175 April Trickey, CMC 176 Borough Clerk

APPROVED:

A~ ~fo\Je c) b75 -S S \) Jill. Dolan Borough Attorney




Documents

Sample Agenda Template Word Doc