HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 208-04 ViciousDogApplKing
CITY OF DUBLIN
RESOLUTION NO. 208· 04
*."'*******
A RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS, GRANTING THE APPEAL OF
MORGAN KING FROM THE DECISION OF THE CITY MANAGER FINDING THAT
THE DOG "SAAKE" IS A VICIOUS DOG
WHEREAS, Morgan King appealed the determination that the dog "Saake" is a vicious dog; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, at its October 5, 2004, meeting, heard Morgan King's appeal
pursuant to Dublin Municipal Code § 5.36.080, which provides that any person aggrieved by an
administrative decision pursuant to Chapter 5.36 of the Dublin Municipal Code, may appeal the decision
to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the appeal process, set forth in Dublin Municipal Code § 1.04.050, requires the
appellant to show cause, on grounds specified in the notice of appeal, why the action excepted to should
not be upheld; and
WHEREAS, on July 29,2004, staff received a report trom Alameda County Animal Control
regarding a dog on dog attack, that occurred on July 14, 2004. The report stated that the King dog,
"Saake," and the Kashima dog, "Makaha," engaged in a fight at the common rear fence; and
WHEREAS, the animal control officer's report recommended that a vicious dog hearing be
conducted. Pursuant to Dublin Municipal Code § 5.36.020, the hearing was scheduled for August 11,
2004; and
WHEREAS, the vicious dog hearing was conducted in accordance with Chapter 5.36 of the
Dublin Municipal Code, on August 11,2004. The King Family and the Kashima Family appeared for the
hearing; and
WHEREAS, at the hearing, the Hearing Director determined that "Saake," the King family's dog,
attacked Makaha, the Kashima family's dog, although it appeared that both dogs were engaged in mutual
comba~; and
WHEREAS, it was noted at the hearing that this is "Saake's" first incident, and rabies
vaccinations are current; and
WHEREAS, subsequent to the hearing, property inspections were conducted by Animal Control
and the Hearing Director at both the King and Kashima homes. The Hearing Director concluded that the
common fence was configured such that "Makaha" was physically constrained by a small secondary fence
on the Kashima property tfom entering the King property, and it appeared that the attack could only have
occurred when "Saake's" mouth was physically on the Kashima property; and
WHEREAS, Dublin Municipal Code § 5.36.290(A)(3) requires an attack to occur on property
other than that ofthe attacking dog, and the fence was configured such that it is possible that "Saake" had
her entire body, including shoulders and all four legs, on the King's property; and
WHEREAS, subsequent to the incident, the King family added heavy wire fencing to their side of
the fence that Alameda County Animal Control determined adequate to keep "Saake" in her yard; and
1
WHEREAS, based upon information contained within the Animal Control report, testimony and
evidence presented by the hearing attendees, and property inspections conducted at the homes of both
familÍes, "Saake" was declared vicious, pursuant to DMC § 5.36.290(A)(3); and
WHEREAS, the Findings & Order fÌ"om the vicious dog hearing were issued on August 26, 2004;
and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Dublin Municipal Code § 5.36.080, on August 30,2004, Morgan King
appealed the Hearing Director's determination on the following grounds:
"We believe the evidence does not support the findings, and the statute has not been applied in a
reasonable manner in this instance. We also believe the·statute is too vaguely worded, lacks
adequate definitions, and failed to provide for consideration of all relevant facts."
WHEREAS, at its hearing on October 5, 2004, the Council heard testimony ftom, among others,
Morgan King, the appellant and owner of"Saake," and Myron and Pam Kashima, the owners of
"Makaha;" and
WHEREAS, there was uncontroverted testimony that the King's and Kashima's share a common
backyard fence; that the fence was constructed in a manner that the vertical wooden boards could be
pushed fÌ'om the Kings' backyard towards the Kashima's backyard; that both families' dogs were in the
backyard on July 14,2004; that both dogs approached the fence and barked; that no one was present when
the dogs began barking at each other; that both dogs sustained bites as a result of the incident on July 14,
2004; and that no one was present to witness the bites being inflicted on either dog.
FINDINGS AND DETERMINATION
WHEREAS, after considering the applicable laws, considering all the written and oral evidence
presented at the October 5, 2004 hearing and deliberating on all the evidence received, the City Council,
on the basis of the foregoing Recitals, finds that no substantial evidence exists to conclude that "Saake"
bit "Makaha" on the Kashima family's property within the meaning ofDMC § 5.36.290(A)(3), and,
therefore, there is no basis to find "Saake" to be a vicious dog within the meaning ofDMC Chapter 5.36.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City of Dublin hereby
determines that the August 30, 2004, appeal of Morgan King is granted and the decision of the Hearing
Director regarding "Saake," is hereby reversed.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of October, 2004.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Council members McCormick, Oravetz, Sbranti and Zika, and Mayor Lockhart
None
None
None
ATIEST: ¥
Áu .~
Deputy City Clerk
G:\CC-MTGSI2004-qtr4\Oct\lO-19-04\reso-vicious dog.DOC (Item 4.10)
2