Price officials decide to review ordinances governing animals
Discussion about the treatment and rules governing animals started the regular Price City Council meeting.
"I'd like the city to review the rules it has for animal care," pointed out Trudy Markosek during the meeting's public comment period. "I think we need to look at harder penalties for people who abuse their animals."
Price city resident Linda Mellinger voiced concerns about response on animal problems.
"We also need to know about the response we can get from agencies as well," stressed Mellinger. "In my neighborhood, someone left a dog in the attic for two days during the hot weather this summer. I watched him almost jump out of the window of the second floor to get out. We called the police and animal control, but no one ever responded. We need ordinances so the job can be done and we need officials who will respond to requests from citizens."
The council discussed the existing ordinances.
"The problem is that very strong proof of abuse and neglect is needed to go to court," explained Nick Sampinos Price city attorney.
Maybe some new laws need to be enacted if that is the case, said Mellinger.
"I know that most people will not turn in someone who is doing something to an animal," added Mellinger. "I think that people that have been turned in twice for abuse should not be able to own animals again."
Councilman Richard Tatton suggested that residents interested in animal welfare should start working with the humane society toward developing solutions to the related problems.
Price resident Clarence Ranney asked about the city's position on dogs that bite.
"How many times should a dog be able to bite people and still not be destroyed?" asked Ranney. "There's a dog that bit a policeman in Helper, then the people moved and that same dog bit my daughter. After that, it bit a little boy. I was told three bites and you're out, but the dog is still around."
Civil law could be a way to solve similar problem in a neighborhood, pointed out Mayor Joe Piccolo.
"You actually can sue someone over just one dog bite," stated the mayor.
The discussion ended with the council agreeing to review the existing ordinances involving animals. City officials will also supply copies of the laws to interested parties and accept input from residents on how to make the guidelines more effective.
Acting on an unrelated agenda matter, the council studied and passed the majority of the recommendations from the city's planning commission. But the officials turned down one item after debating the matter.
The council members:
Approved a lot line adjustment for the Freedom Christian Fellowship Church.
Agreed to allow a coffee shop open in a computer store to create a type of Internet cafe in downtown Price.
Approved a single lot subdivision at 1762 East and 500 South.
Granted preliminary and final approval for plans to build a new restaurant at 353 South Highway 55.
Authorized Notre Dame to use a-frame signs for the parish Octoberfest celebration.
The one project that was turned down as presented was the Krompel Subdivision phase one at 1500 East Sagewood Road.
The developer has proposed nine lots in the area, but requested that the road remains private, therefore not having to meet the specifications that regular city streets must meet.
Due to the fact that private roads are sometimes turned over to the city, the council felt that the possibility of having many people using a private road that does not meet the city's standards could cause problems.
In addition, the officials indicated that the city could not approve a road with a 40 foot width.
The item was sent back to the planning commission for reevaluation and the matter will come back to the council at a future date.
In another agenda item that concerned roads, the council decided not to reopen a road near the old Westridge Middle School. Recently Carbon School District requested that the road be reopened to allow access to the building which has now been converted to the district office.
However, public works manager Gary Sonntag offered a report to the council in which city staff that had studied the idea. The report recommended that the road at 300 North and 300 West should not be reopened.
Sonntag listed several reasons for keeping the road closed, but reconstruction costs of more than $9,000 represented one of the primary obstacles.
Residents attending the city council meeting made no remarks in support of reopening the street.