Loading...
CC RES 1997-108RESOLUTION NO. 97 -108 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CALIFORNIA, TO UPHOLD THE APPEAL OF A DANGEROUS DOG DETERMINATION REGARDING THE DOG KEPT AT 30043 MATISSE DRIVE (CITY DOG LICENSE NO. 971237) AND ORDERING THAT THE ANIMAL BE REMOVED FROM THE CITY. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY FINDS, RESOLVES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. On October 13, 1997, the City Manager designee, the Assistant to the City Manager, conducted a Dangerous Dog hearing at City Hall pursuant to Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code Section 6.32.050. Proper written notice of the hearing was provided as required by the Code to the dog's owner. Section 2. Appearing as witnesses and testifying at the hearing on October 13, 1997 were John Lukes, dog's owner; Dr. Steven Kastenbaum, bite victim; Renee Kastenbaum, spouse of Steven Kastenbaum and appellant; Charlene Chang, owner of dog injured by being attacked and bit; Norman Birch, attack victim; Sharon Guthrie, witness of dog's aggressive behavior; and Officer Chuck Mauri on behalf of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty of Animals ( "SPCA "). Additionally written statements were submitted from Dee Beaumont, describing an attack to her dog and from Elen and Refaat Bakhoum, describing an incident involving the dog's threatening behavior and a petition signed by over 50 residents expressing concern regarding the dog's violent nature and requesting removal of the dog was submitted. Section 3. By letter dated October 17, 1997, based on the evidence presented at the hearing, the Hearing Officer determined that the dog is "potentially dangerous" and is kept in a manner that constitutes a menace or threat to any person walking in the immediate area of the dog's residence. On that basis, the Hearing Officer ordered the following: a. Properly secured fencing must be installed around the full perimeter of the rear yard to prevent any dog that may be maintained on the property from exiting the property. All gates must have self - closing hinges and latches. b. In order to better socialize the dog, the dog must successfully complete obedience training from a professional dog trainer. Written proof of completion provided to the SPCA. C. The dog must remain on the property at all times, and may only leave that property following completion of the training, and when on a leash not exceeding six feet in length, placed in a muzzle, and be in control by a competent person. d. Install a "potentially dangerous dog" sign on the property, warning that there is a dangerous animal on the premises. If the dog owner did not comply with the Order, the Hearing Officer ordered that the SPCA remove and impound the dog. The dog owner, Mr. Lukes, agreed to comply with the order. By letter dated October 22, 1997, the bite victim appealed that decision in writing to the City Council. The appellant believed the dog should have been determined "vicious" and ordered to be removed from the City. Section 4. The City Council held a properly noticed hearing on the appeal on November 18, 1997 at 6:00 p.m. The record of that hearing indicates the following: 1. Appearing as witnesses and testifying at the hearing were John Lukes, dog owner; Dr. Renee Cohen (wife of Dr. Kastenbaum), appellant; Norman Birch, attack victim; Charlene Chang, owner of injured dog as a result of being bitten by Alex; Dee and Robert Beaumont, owner of dog attacked with no injuries; Sharon Guthrie, witness of dog's aggressive behavior; Elen and Refaat Bakhoum, threatened by dog's aggressive behavior; Lori Potter, witness of dog's aggressive behavior; and Carla Schmidt. 2. The evidence is unconverted that the dog, Alex, (City dog license number 971237) which is kept at 30043 Matisse Drive, in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, has reportedly attacked and bit one individual and one animal in separate unrelated incidents, and attacked without injury another individual and animal in separate unrelated incidents. There were additional incidents, not reported to the SPCA, involving Mr. Lukes' dog that occurred over a two year period, including an individual who was allegedly attacked and bit while performing work on a resident's property; individuals threatened by Alex's aggressive behavior and ferocious barking; and two separate accounts when Mr. and Mrs. Lukes fell to the ground in attempt to control Alex. 3. Dr. Renee Cohen (Dr. Kastenbaum's wife) testified that on September 20, 1997, Alex escaped from the house at 30043 Matisse Drive, attacked and bit her husband, Dr. Steven Xastenbaum while he was standing outside his doorway to pick up his mail. Dr. Kastenbaum was injured and required medical attention. There was no testimony or evidence that Dr. Kastenbaum had made any aggressive moves at the time toward the dog or any member of the Lukes family. 2 Resol. No. 97 -108 Dr. Cohen's testimony indicated that Mr. Lukes could not control his dog immediately prior to or after the incident. Mr. Lukes did not attempt to restrain Alex nor was he able to immediately regaini control of Alex. Dr. Cohen observed that Alex ran down the street attacking moving vehicles immediately after the incident. Dr. Cohen referenced the SPCA incident report of January 29, 1997, to demonstrate that Alex was considered to be "vicious" with a very unpredictable temperament. The SPCA Officer recommended Alex be walked with a well -fitted harness and muzzle. Testimony received from Dr. Cohen and others present at the hearing indicated Mr. Lukes has yet to be seen walking Alex with a muzzle and Alex continues to be a threat to the neighborhood. Dr. Cohen referred to the SPCA recommendation dated October 141 1997, stating Alex to be either humanely destroyed or be permanently removed from the City. Additionally, Dr. Cohen indicated wide - spread concern regarding Alex's violent nature among the neighborhood by referencing to the petition that was submitted, which was signed by over 50 residents requesting Alex to be removed. 4. The dog has exhibited aggressive tendencies by barking and lunging at individuals while on walks and in its own home. The City Council heard first hand verbal and written testimony of incidents involving Alex, some of which were not reported previously to the SPCA. Sharon Guthrie, Lori Potter and Refaat Bakhoum presented testimony that was not reported to the SPCA. Sharon Guthrie testified that she and her dog were nearly attacked by Alex on two separate occasions when walking near 30043 Matisse Drive. Alex exhibited aggressive behavior of barking, straining at the leash and rearing for an attack approximately one year ago. Alex was not wearing a muzzle at the time. On other occasions, Mrs. Guthrie observed Alex barking, growling and slamming himself into the glass',door at 30043 Matisse Drive whenever people walk by. There was no testimony that Mrs. Guthrie made any aggressive moves toward the dog or the owner to provoke any of the incidents. Refaat Bakhoum testified that they have frequently witnessed Mr. Lukes walking Alex without a leash and on one occasion, they could not leave their house in fear of Alex, who was sitting on their front yard. The evidence indicated that the dog owner apparently does not have adequate control over Alex's behavior and that the owners are overpowered by his strength and size. Lori Potter testified that while walking past the Lukes' home, she witnessed Mrs. Lukes topple over and was pulled out of her wheelchair while still grasping Alex's leash, as the dog lunged towards Ms. Potter. Alex was barking and straining at the leash at the time of the incident. 3 Resol. No. 97 -108 5. On January 10, 1996, the dog attacked but did not injure Norman Birch who was walking along Matisse Drive. At the time, the dog was on a leash and Mr. Birch testified that Mr. Lukes could barely restrain his animal. There was no evidence that the attack was provoked by any aggressive actions by Mr. Birch. Mr. Lukes' testimony denied that the incident occurred. 6. Charlene Chang testified that on September 22, 1995, her dog was attacked and bitten by Alex. This incident required extensive medical treatment and 300 stitches. Mr. Lukes testified that while his dog was on a leash, the Chang's dog was not and it was the Chang's dog that provoked the incident on Mr. Lukes' property. Although Mr. Lukes' testimony indicates that he was not at fault, Mrs. Chang's testimony indicates that Mr. Lukes was unable to restrain his dog from attacking her dog in front of her house. Mrs. Chang testified that she has not seen Alex muzzled when walked until recently for the first time with the trainer. In addition, Mrs. Chang testified that an individual performing some work on her property was allegedly bitten by Alex within two years ago. This incident was not reported to the SPCA. Mr. Lukes' testimony denied that the incident occurred. 7. Jeff Beaumont testified that his Saint Bernard was attacked by Alex in November, 1995. Mr. Beaumont's testimony did not indicate where the incident occurred, what provoked such an incident or who witnessed the incident. Mr. Lukes' testimony denied that this incident had occurred. Mrs. Beaumont's testimony indicated that Mr. Lukes is not capable of controlling his dog; she had witnessed Mr. Lukes pulled off his feet and dragged by Alex. 8. Testimony presented by the SPCA indicates that Mr. Lukes complied with all the conditions of the October 17, 1997, Notice of Determination Order. SPCA Officer Chuck Mauri presented a drawing of Mr. Lukes' property demonstrating his compliance. In addition, Officer Maui indicated that the property is secured and confirmed that Alex was indeed a big and unfriendly dog. Mr. Lukes testified that in addition to complying with all the established criteria from the City administered hearing, he has also taken additional safety measures such as installing a fully fenced kennel and transporting Alex by a muzzle and a leash in and out of the kennel. Mr. Lukes stated that his property is fully secured and Alex will never escape from his property again. In addition, Mr. Lukes testified that Alex is not a dangerous dog, but a friendly dog and a close companion for his wife. 9. Mr. Lukes submitted three letters from the following individuals: 4 Resol. No. 97 -108 Gene Muntean, Kevin Abe, and Sean Crean; all the letters indicated positive contact with Alex. Mr. Muntean's letter testified that Mr. Lukes regularly walked Alex past his house without an incident and that his dog had gotten along with Alex for years. Mr. Abbe's letter indicated that he had neither been bitten or attacked by Alex while performing pool service duties on Mr. Lukes' property. Written testimony from Mr. Crean, Alex' dog trainer, indicated that Mr. Lukes and Alex have successfully completed six weeks of obedience and socialization training. Mr. Crean's professional opinion was that with continued practice and follow through of techniques taught to Mr. Lukes, Alex will no longer pose a threat to anyone. 10. Even though Mr. Lukes has complied with the Staff Hearing Officer's order of the October 13, 1997 Hearing, the City Council determined at the November 18, 1997 Hearing that the number of previous incidents involving the dog were significant and caused a significant concern for the public's safety. 11. In addition, the testimony and evidence demonstrated that the owners failed to realize the seriousness of Alex's violent nature. Although Mr. Lukes had knowledge that Alex might attack people or other dogs and that the SPCA recommended that Alex wear a muzzle when being walked in 1996, Mr. Lukes was observed by other residents in 1997, while walking Alex without a muzzle and occasionally without a leash in the neighborhood. 12. The City Council determined at the November 18, 1997 hearing the size and strength of Alex was a significant hinderance in the owner's ability to appropriately control Alex. The City Council concluded that should Alex be permitted to remain within the City and by chance escape, there was a great possibility Alex would cause a serious injury to any child, adult or other animal within the vicinity. Section 5. Briefly summarized are the relevant testimony: 1. On September 20, 1997, Alex escaped from 30043 Matisse Drive to attack and bite Dr. Steven Kastenbaum, causing injury and requiring medical attention. 2. On January 10, 1996, Alex attacked Norman Birch, who was walking along Matisse Drive. 3. On September 22, 1995, Alex attacked and bit Charlene Chang's dog, resulting in extensive medical treatment and 300 stitches. 4. On two separate occasions within the last tow years, Sharon Guthrie and her dog were nearly attacked by Alex while walking with her dog along Matisse Drive. 5. Elen and Refaat Bakhoum were threatened by Alex sitting on their front yard and unable to leave the house in fear of Alex attacking them. 5 Resol. No. 97 -108 6. Approximately a year ago, Dee Beaumont's dog was allegedly attacked by Alex. 7. Mr. Lukes fell to the ground while attempting to control Alex from straining at the leash and rearing for an attack. 8. On another occasion, Mrs. Lukes toppled over and was pulled out of her wheelchair while attempting to control Alex's aggressive behavior, as the dog lunged towards Ms. Lori Potter. Based upon the evidence presented, City Council hereby finds that, Alex, is vicious, dangerous or apt to bite or injure any person, and that the dog is kept in a manner that constitutes a menace or threat to any person lawfully walking in the immediate area adjacent to Mr. Lukes' house, due to the size of the dog and the owners' inability to control him. Based upon that finding, the City Council upholds the appeal of the Hearing Officer's determination and orders that the dog must be permanently removed from the City limits of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes not later than ten (10) business days from the date of the decision, which is December 16, 1997. The SPCA is hereby ordered to inspect the property at 30043 Matisse Drive after December 16, 1997 to verify compliance. If the dog has not been removed from the City within that time, the SPCA is hereby ordered to immediately impound the dog, and to dispose the dog in its discretion including, if necessary, by euthanasia. Section 6. The owner of the dog has five days from the receipt of this resolution to file an appeal of the City Council's decision to the municipal court, pursuant to Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code Seciton 6.32.100. 6 Resol. No. 97 -108 PASSED, APPROVED, ADOPTED this 2nd day of December, 1997. ATTEST: City Clerk State of California ) County of Los Angeles )ss City of Rancho PalosVerdes ) I, JO PURCELL, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby certify that the above Resolution No. 97 -108 was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on December 2, 1997. M:\ GROUP\ CITYMAN \GINA \RESOS \LUKESDOG.RES y Clerk 7 Resol. No. 97 -108