Dayton updates animal ordinance

Home|News|Local News|Dayton updates animal ordinance

SHERIDAN — A recent court case in Dayton was thrown out because of an awkward sentence in the town code.

The case was centered on a resident who allegedly had a noisy dog.

The town code makes residents responsible for animals in their care, and in this case presents how an animal should be dealt with when disturbing the peace.

However, the ordinance had a weird example that made the citation beatable in court.

“We had issues with an appearance in court but could not (prosecute) because of the way the ordinance was written, so it was dismissed,” Mayor Norm Anderson said. “So this kind of puts teeth into the ordinance, cleans up the verbiage a little bit.”

The example, now removed, read “The term ‘noisy dog’ includes any dog which habitually, constantly, or frequently disturbs the sleep, peace or quiet of any neighborhood or person either during the day or night i.e., twelve o’clock (12:00) a.m. to twelve o’clock (12:00) p.m.”

Because there was that bizarre example and the incident happened in the morning, which was outside of its parameters, the court dismissed the case.

The council unanimously approved the change, but Councilwoman Joey Sheeley said there is more that the ordinance needs.

“I’ve been looking through the ordinance and it’s sadly outdated,” she said. “Some of the things that I’m really concerned about is the fact that there’s an imbalance of what’s important.”

Sheeley said there are some parts that go into great detail, while other parts just skim the surface.

“We’ve got two lines dedicated to animal cruelty as opposed to two pages to dog licensing,” Sheeley said. “I think that whole section needs some serious work, but for now I don’t have any issue with just amending this.”

In other business:

• The Dayton Snow Plow Ordinance is now in effect. From 4-9 a.m. daily all town roads have to be cleared so that plows can clean the streets. The only street that doesn’t need to be cleared of vehicles is Main Street because it is a highway and therefore does not fall under influence of the ordinance. There is a fine of up to $750 for violators of this ordinance, which is decided at the discretion of the court.

• Gallery on Main had its satellite winery permit approved by the council. Councilman Craig Reichert abstained from voting or discussing the permit, citing a conflict of interest based on his business association with the Gallery. Jackson Hole Winery will supply the wine.

By |November 3rd, 2015|

About the Author:

READER COMMENTS