-->
Search the ArchivesNavigationContact InformationThe Citizen Newspapers For Advertising Information Email us your news! For technical difficulties |
Pet limitation tabledTue, 01/09/2007 - 4:47pm
By: Ben Nelms
The issue of limiting the number of dogs and cats per household in Fayetteville all but ended Jan. 4 when the City Council agenda item continuing the discussion from December was removed. “Staff has researched this issue in more detail since our last meeting including reviewing ordinances and regulations from other governments and discussing this issue with our local animal control officials,” said City Manager Joe Morton. “Staff would like to request that this item be removed from the agenda at this time so that further research can be completed. Staff will attempt to address any issues that may arise in the interim through our current animal control and/or nuisance regulations.” Claudia Robinson was one of several residents present at the December and January meetings to request that council members impose no limit on the number of dogs and cats per household. Robinson thanked the board for their decision. The council Dec. 7 heard the first reading of a proposed amendment to the Animals and Fowl Ordinance. Triggered by complaint calls over the number of animals kept in a household, a review of the ordinance revealed that the city does not regulate the number of animals that can be kept in a household, City Clerk Judy Stephens told the council. The proposed change in the ordinance would have limited to three the number of animals allowed per household. The amended ordinance would have been consistent with ordinances already in place in Fayette County and Peachtree City. Fayetteville’s animal control activities are performed by Fayette County, Mayor Kenneth Steele added. Fayetteville has provisions for issues of cruelty to animals and, like Fayette County, has procedures for dangerous animals. Steele said the Animal and Fowl Ordinance had previously stated a limitation of three dogs and/or cats per household. That portion of the ordinance had been inadvertently omitted when city ordinances were codified, he said. The omission was found when recent complaints about the number of dogs and cats per residence surfaced. login to post comments |