Powell is poised to remain a two-dog town.
While the Powell City Council intends to relax some of the city’s limits on pets, a majority of council members say they and their constituents want …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
The Powell Tribune has expanded its online content. To continue reading, you will need to either log in to your subscriber account, or purchase a subscription.
If you are a current print subscriber, you can set up a free web account by clicking here.
If you already have a web account, but need to reset it, you can do so by clicking here.
If you would like to purchase a subscription click here.
Please log in to continue |
|
Powell is poised to remain a two-dog town.
While the Powell City Council intends to relax some of the city’s limits on pets, a majority of council members say they and their constituents want to stick with the current cap of two dogs per household.
Councilman Geoff Hovivian said Monday that he’s received “numerous” emails opposing an increase in the number of pets and “[not] a single one for it.”
Councilwoman Kristy Fields and Councilman Steve Lensegrav said they’d heard the same thing; Lensegrav said the lone message he received in support of an increase came from a person who lives out of town.
Two residents in attendance at Monday’s meeting reiterated their opposition to more dogs.
Still, the council is preparing to loosen things up a bit. Under the current city ordinance, residents are limited to no more than two adult pets — whether they be a dog, cat, guinea pig, snake or parakeet.
The council is proposing to change the code to instead allow residents to have up to two dogs, plus up to two cats, plus an unlimited number of small indoor pets. That follows a set of recommendations from the city’s Planning and Zoning Commission, which spent a couple months studying the issue.
Debating the limit
Powell residents Chris and Heather Pittman, who moved to town with their four dogs last fall, kicked off the discussion in early March. The Pittmans said they didn’t know about the city’s two-dog limit until neighbors made complaints and they asked the council to raise it.
Council members agreed to consider upping the limit and, because the restriction is contained within the zoning code, asked the Planning and Zoning Commission for a recommendation.
At a late March meeting, the commission heard from residents who generally opposed an increase in the number of dogs. Several people said the city already has issues with noisy dogs and waste.
Councilman Troy Bray was among those who advocated for scrapping a numeric limit altogether and to instead focus the ordinance and enforcement on unwanted dog behaviors, but critics argued that allowing more dogs would just increase the problems.
The commission ultimately split over whether to recommend permitting more dogs or to stick with the current limit. However, the members unanimously agreed that the city should stop limiting the number of small indoor pets and allow residents to have up to two dogs and two cats.
They also agreed that the pet rules should be moved out of the zoning code and put alongside other codes related to animals.
Mayor John Wetzel said he felt the panel’s input was “spot on.”
Wetzel was the first to call for keeping the two-dog limit at Monday’s meeting, though he said he was open to discussion.
“I am not being dogmatic on this,” he quipped.
Wetzel later said he supported a continued cap “because occasionally our hands could be tied if somebody had 12 cats in their house.
“And that becomes a health condition, that becomes a concern for not just the people living in the house, but potentially their kids, their neighbors, that kind of stuff,” he said, saying it made sense to have a clear rule.
Complaint-driven enforcement
The city’s enforcement of the limit is entirely complaint-driven and a couple residents have said their complaints didn’t get results.
On Monday night, resident Dennis Bost told the council that a neighbor had five dogs that were left outside and barked all day over the span of two years.
In that situation, “You can’t enjoy your property,” he said.
Bost added that, “you almost get tired of calling [police], because it feels like no one’s hearing them and … it seems like their hands are tied.”
Both Wetzel and City Administrator Zack Thorington said the city would look into the issue, indicating that tickets should be issued after warnings.
Powell Police Chief Jim Rhea did some research and told the Tribune that his department hadn’t received a complaint about the residence mentioned at the meeting since 2020.
During the planning and zoning meetings, it was mentioned that residents can be reluctant to report their neighbors to police, as it can create conflict. But Chief Rhea said the department relies on community members to reach out if they see something amiss, so that officers can do their jobs.
“If you don’t contact us and you don’t call us, we can’t help,” he said Wednesday.
Rhea also encouraged residents to reach out if they have a concern with the department.
The chief said his department initially emphasizes education and awareness when there’s a complaint and that situations aren’t always black and white. However, he said officers try to ensure repeat offenses are handled with enforcement actions.
Powell Municipal Court records show that, since mid-2020, police have cited six people for having more than two household pets. One of those tickets was later dismissed and the other five resulted in $30 worth of fines and fees.
At Monday’s meeting, resident John Sinskie suggested the council consider requiring animal owners to put some controls in place — such as using shock or noise collar — if they’re cited or are the subject of a complaint.
As the council directed the city attorney to draft their proposed changes to the pet rules, Councilman Zane Logan noted they’ll need to consider the revised ordinances at least three more times. That, he said, will give councilors multiple opportunities to consider anything they haven’t already discussed or thought about.