Ortonville- The village council pushed through an ordinance in perhaps the fastest time ever at their Aug. 24 meeting.
The council passed the dangerous animals ordinance by a 6-1 vote. Council President Ken Qusienberry was the sole dissenter.
‘This is the quickest an ordinance has ever gone through this council,? said Councilmember Melanie Nivelt. ‘It only took two weeks.?
The council discussed the dangerous animals ordinance at their Aug. 10 meeting attended by a standing-room only crowd, the majority of whom spoke up in defense of pit bulls. The council first convened a committee to study dog issues on July 27 after several residents spoke out regarding pit bulls running loose in the village and menacing them, their children, and their pets.
Definitions of a dangerous animal in the newly passed ordinance (full copy available at village offices), include: any animal having a known disposition or propensity to attack, bite or injure any person or animal without provocation.
A dangerous animal does not include an animal that bites or attacks a person who is knowingly trespassing on the property of the animal’s owner; an animal that bites or attacks a person who provokes or torments the animal; or an animal that is responding in a manner that an ordinary and reasonable person would conclude was designed to protect a person if that person is engaged in a lawful activity or is the subject of an assault.
Under the ordinance, village residents who own a dangerous animal are not permitted to allow that animal outside of its kennel, pen or fence unless it is held securely by a leash of adequate strength to restrain the animal by designated policing authority.
The ordinance takes effect in 30 days.
‘I’m very hopeful this will solve the problems,? said Councilmember Kay Green.
A village resident who has had numerous issues with loose pit bulls in his neighborhood and wished to remain anonymous said he appreciates that the council has tried to resolve the issue, but thinks the police have too much else to do.
‘I think the ordinance will help in that people will read about it, but I don’t think the police will have time to enforce it,? he said.
Quisenberry said he voted no on the new ordinance because he believes the law can be enforced with the current ordinance that prohibits dogs being off leash.
‘I’m against having an ordinance that is reactionary,? he said. ‘I think we will wind up with more complaints now than we would have without the new ordinance.?
Oakland County Sheriff’s Office Sgt. Pete Burkett said the new ordinance is very enforceable and a smart move on the council’s behalf.
‘It will give us a little bit of teeth, no pun intended, for people who want to have dangerous animals in this community,? he said. ‘The leash law just deals with any animal that should be on a lead. Even if a dangerous animal is on a lead or in a pen and attacks someone, we can take action to have that animal removed.This is just another tool to protect the citizens in our community and keep them safe.?