|
ENFIELD TOWN COUNCIL
MINUTES OF A PUBLIC HEARING
AUGUST 5, 2002
A Public Hearing was held in the Council Chambers of the Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut on Monday, August 5, 2002. Chairman Vayda called the Public Hearing to order at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL-CALL - Present were Councilmen Edgar, Egan, Fiore, Kaupin, Strom, Tait, and Vayda. Councilman Mangini entered the meeting at 7:01 p.m. Councilman Hall entered at 7:09 p.m. Councilman Tallarita was absent. Also present were Town Manager, Scott A. Shanley; Assistant Town Manager, Daniel Vindigni; Town Clerk, Suzanne F. Olechnicki; Assistant Town Attorney, Maria Stavropoulos; Director of Public Works, John Kazmarski; Deputy Director of Public Works, Geoffrey McAlmond; Director of Finance, Gregory Simmons; Director of Libraries, Henry Dutcher.
Chairman Vayda read the notice of Public Hearing as follows:
TOWN OF ENFIELD
LEGAL NOTICE
PUBLIC HEARING
MONDAY, AUGUST 5, 2002
"Notice is hereby given that the Enfield Town Council will hold a Public Hearing in the Enfield Town Hall, Council Chambers, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut on Monday, August 5, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. to allow interested citizens an opportunity to express their opinions regarding the proposed ordinance addressing the public nuisance caused by vicious and dangerous dogs in the Town of Enfield, Connecticut.
Copies of the proposed ordinance are available for public inspection in the office of the Town Clerk, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut, Monday through Friday 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m."
Chairman Vayda then announced the ground rules for the public hearing and invited speakers to come forward.
Mr. Shanley stated the intent and purpose of this particular ordinance is to promote public safety and general welfare of citizens by giving the animal control officer an opportunity to be more pro-active in identifying dogs that may be vicious in advance of an actual attack. He noted current laws on the books don't really do anything to provide the kind of protection that many people have been asking for. He stated the ordinance outlines the criteria that the Animal Control Officer shall use in order to determine whether or not a dog is vicious. He added it also goes into some detail regarding how one must confine a dog that's determined to be vicious. He stated there's also an appeals process within the ordinance. He noted the body to whom one would appeal was left blank, and that would be for Council discussion. He suggested the Council might consider forming a subcommittee or designating another body.
John Yelle, 3 Williams Street Extension
Voiced his support of this ordinance. He noted about two years ago his daughter was bitten in the face by a dog. He stated recently a neighborhood dog snatched his dog from his side in his own yard. He pointed out he and his children witnessed this incident. He noted his dog was taken and mauled and is now suffering health problems.
Daniel Hosking, 94 North Maple Street
Voiced his support of this ordinance. He stated his belief the person who will be in charge of this ordinance isn't the right person because he believes he will single people out, namely himself as one person.
Steve Graczewski, 102 North Maple Street
Stated he has been walking for 20 years. He noted he just moved to North Maple Street. He pointed out he has to cross the street on North Maple Street due to some dogs who jump at the fence, and he's concerned they will make it over the fence someday. He noted his wife and some neighbors will not walk in this area any more because they're afraid of the dogs.
Karen Hosking, 94 North Maple Street
Stated she has five Rottweilers in her fenced-in yard. She noted the fence was erected in May simply to keep her dogs in the yard so they wouldn't be roaming the neighborhood. She stated her belief it's wrong to assume her dogs are mean. She pointed out her dogs are good-natured. She pointed out just because a person is afraid of a dog, that dog shouldn't be considered mean or vicious. She noted if her dogs are jumping, running, and barking, they only want to play. She feels she should not be singled out because of her dogs. She stated her belief the person who would be in charge of this ordinance has something personal against her because she has been ticketed ten times since she had her fence put up. She noted the ticket was thrown out every time they appeared in court. She concluded she does not raise her dogs to be mean. She pointed out she has a two-year old daughter who plays all day with her dogs.
Henry Mercik, 19 Jewell Street
Stated he has witnessed people exercising their dogs out in a field and has seen dogs approaching another person in the field to see who they are and then turn around and run away. He questioned whether it should be considered terrorism if that person being approached by the dog gets concerned. He pointed out some people are very sensitive and might be afraid while there's no real act of terrorism on the part of the dog.
Neil Narkon, 5 Clear Street
Voiced his support of the ordinance. He stated his perception the dog warden has no real power at all right now. He stated his belief this type of ordinance should be in effect at the state level and it should be in effect in every town.
Mr. Narkon stated his belief certain breeds were bred to be aggressive and he believes it's in their genetic make-up. He pointed out his little dog was attacked by another dog without any warning.
He stated there should also be some clarification somewhere about what's considered excessive barking. He noted he has a dog barking problem in his neighborhood that infringes on his quality of life. He feels people should be responsible for their dogs, i.e., keep them trained, prevent them from roaming, and they should clean up after them.
Mr. Narkon stated Enfield is now #1 for dog population in Connecticut, and this is another reason such an ordinance should be in effect.
Kelly Ash, 4 Freemont Road
Voiced her support of this ordinance. She stated she moved to Freemont Road in October. She noted she bought a miniature Dachshund and recently learned her neighbor across the street owns a Pitbull. She stated the neighbor does have a fenced in yard, however, the Pitbull is always in the front yard. She pointed out about two weeks ago, the Pitbull came into her front yard and about five feet in front of her. She noted nothing happened, however, she was petrified. She stated she has not stepped outside alone since this occurrence. She noted she called the dog warden and he told her there's no leash law. She stated as a result of this incident, she will not walk her dog on the street.
Ms. Ash stated she recently learned this Pitbull attacked a dog down the street. She added she is a runner, however, she will not run on her street because she feels very threatened.
Daniel Hosking, 94 North Maple Street
Disagreed with the speaker who stated viciousness is bred into a dog's genes, i.e., a Rottwieler was bred as a work dog. He noted there are no mean dogs, only mean owners who bring up their dogs to attack people. He pointed out he brings up his dogs with lots of love and attention. He noted his dogs love people. He apologized to the person who is afraid to walk by his house. He stated his dogs do run back and forth along the fence, but they won't harm anyone, they only want to play.
As no others wished to speak, Chairman Vayda closed the Public Hearing at 7:24 p.m.
|
|
|