Serving Gogebic, Iron and Ontonagon Counties
Serving Gogebic, Iron and Ontonagon Counties
By CHARITY SMITH
Wakefield — After months of back and forth conversation, the Wakefield Planning Commission voted to advance an ordinance putting stricter regulations on dogs and other pets in the city, but not limiting on the number of dogs and other pets that a resident can own.
City manager Robert Brown presented the commission with four options during the commission’s regular meeting on Tuesday night. They could either leave the ordinance as is, implement stricter regulations regarding leashing and other issues, limit the number of dogs or other animals to four along with the stricter rules or limit the number of dogs/animals to four along with the stricter rules with a grandfather clause for those who already have more than four.
Commission members have heard of tension between neighbors, with some residents strongly opposing a limit on dogs, while others pushed for a limited citing noise issues.
“I have neighbors that have been having five to 20 dogs for I don’t know how many years now, and they’re a noise problem all the time,” said resident Art Noren during the public comment portion of the meeting. “It’s ridiculous to have that many dogs.”
His neighbors, Pam Pease and Don Wright were at the meeting as well and spoke up about their dogs saying that they were all immunized and were not out after 10 p.m. Wright said he had put up a fence to contain his six dogs, and would be purchasing bark collars for them.
“It’s a very tough call because people could have four, five or six dogs. It’s going to be very difficult because you’re asking them to choose which one they want to get rid of. So I was always in favor of the grandfathering in,” said mayor Dale White. “Just make sure that the rules we have in place controls these animals so they’re not being a nuisance to neighbors and as the dogs end up being given away or die or whatever, as you get to that four then you maintain that four.”
The commission started looking into the issue after a dog mauled another dog last summer, and there were not black and white ordinances about how to handle dog-related problems within the city. “We want to make sure the rules that we have are clear enough, are stringent enough so when the sheriff’s department goes out, they have the tools to take care of this because, as we have found out going through this a lot of times, we have rules in effect that are very sketchy, very gray areas, and the sheriff’s department is like, ‘I’m not going to tackle it because you don’t have any rules in effect concerning it,’” said White. “So let’s make sure the rules we have in effect cover this so when the sheriff’s department goes out, they’re not going to have any question about how to deal with it and it’s very black and white to them.”
Tara Hamilton, commission chair, said they should just implement the stricter rules on dog owners and not implement a limit on dogs. “No limit on the animals, which we don’t have now, but with the extra rules in place, the fencing, the barking, etc. You would have to call and they would get a ticket,” said Hamilton.
“It’s still enforceable,” said commissioner Robert Lane.
White asked if there was a limit on how many times the sheriff’s department could be called to a home before the resident receives a ticket. Brown said that the sheriff’s department could theoretically ticket on the first time out, but it was up to the deputy’s discretion.
“I like the stricter rules,” said commissioner Marco Movrich.
The commission voted to implement the ordinance amendment with stricter rules and no limit on the number of animals with a vote of 4-2, with Movrich and Brown voting against it. The ordinance amendment has to be read twice before it can take effect. It is not anticipated to take effect until April, according to Brown.
“The public should be aware that if they have a problem they should call the sheriff’s department and not the city,” said White.
