HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-03-15 Animal Control Appeals Committee Minutes RECEIVED
TOWN CLERK
Minutes 4ADING. MASS.
Town of Reading - Animal Control Appeals Committee e
March 15, 2012 1012 APR•
-2 P 2: 50
The meeting of the Animal Control Appeals Committee (ACAC) was convened at was convened at
7:30 PM in the Conference Room, Town Hall, 16 Lowell Street, Reading MA. •
Present were:
Town of Reading: ACAC Chairman Tina Ohlson, ACAC members Susan Giacalone and John Miles,
Town Counsel Gary Brackett, Town Manager Peter Hechenbleikner, ACO Ron Burns, Police
Lieutenant/Executive Officer Richard Robbins, Town Clerk Laura Gemme;
Representing the animal owner: Attorney Jonathan Rankin representing the animal owner; Lisa
Swanson, Amanda Swanson, Stephen Swanson and Alexandria Swanson.
Interested parties: Catherine Moore, Michele Benson, Tina Mathieu, Joseph Senn, Karen Higgins,
Kathy Goyott. •
The Secretary read the notice of the hearing regarding the Vicious Dog Complaint Against Lisa
Swanson of 433 Pearl St., Reading, Massachusetts. The dog is named Atticus.
The Reading Animal Control Appeals Committee (ACAC) first held a public hearing on March 1,
2012, with a continuation at the request of the dog owner and her counsel to March 15, 2012,
regarding the February 22, 2012 Vicious Dog Complaint filed by Ron Burns, the Reading Animal
Control Officer (ACO), against Lisa Swanson, of 433 Pearl St., owner of the dog named Atticus, the
subject of the complaint.
On February 22, 2012 the ACO filed a declaration under § 5.6.6 of the Reading's Dog Control Laws
with the ACAC requesting a hearing to determine whether the dog named Atticus, owned by Lisa
Swanson of 433 Pearl St. was a vicious dog. On February 23, 2012, Peter Hechenbleikner, the
Reading Town Manager, published notice that the ACAC would hold a public hearing on March 1,
2012, to determine whether the dog was vicious. On February 27, 2012, Ms. Swanson wrote to the
Town Manager to indicate that she would not be able to attend the hearing on March 1, 2012, and
requested that the hearing be rescheduled for March 8, 2012 or March 15, 2012.
On March 1, 2012, the ACAC held the initially scheduled public hearing to discuss the complaint as
the ACO had indicated that the quarantine period following the attack had expired. The ACAC,
concerned with how Atticus would be restrained in the time between the original hearing and the
requested continuance of the hearing, continued the hearing to March 15, 2012 with the following
restrictions placed on Atticus until then:
1. If Atticus was in the fenced backyard, he must be monitored by an adult; and
2. Any other time Atticus was outside, he must be leashed and muzzled.
Upon motion, the March 1, 2012 hearing was then adjourned and continued and new notice in the
newspaper and to abutters was made for March, 15, 2012.
On March 15, 2012 the ACAC reconvened to continue the initial March 1, 2012 Vicious Dog Hearing.
Witnesses were sworn in by Attorney Brackett.
Testimony was given by:
Animal Control Appeals Committee Minutes— March 15, 2012 —page 2
1. ACO Ron Burns regarding the incident and the complaint
2. Michele Benson, who was the victim, and who testified about the specifics of the incident and
the nature of her injuries which included photographs of the dog bite
3. Amanda Swanson who is the daughter of the dog owner who testified as to the incident and as
to the training that Atticus was receiving from K9 performance in Reading
On motion by Miles, seconded by Giacalone, the ACAC voted to close the Public hearing at
8:30 PM by a vote of 3-0-0.
Issue #1 — Is Atticus a Vicious Dog?
Vicious Dog Hearings are held in accordance with section 5.6.6 of the Reading Dog Control Laws
(General Bylaws 5.6). Under section 5.6.6.2, the ACAC must hold a public hearing upon receiving a
complaint from the ACO. The purpose of the hearing is to determine whether the dog is vicious and,
if so, determine the appropriate remedy. Under section 5.6.6.1, the ACAC may declare any dog
vicious if it "without provocation, bites a human being or kills or maims a domestic animal...". The
Vicious Dog provisions do not apply, where (1) the victim's skin was not broken, (2) the victim was
willfully trespassing, (3) the dog was being teased/abused, or (4) that the dog was protecting or
defending a human from attack/assault.
Facts Presented
At this hearing the ACAC considered the official complaint letter filed by the ACO in which the ACO
declared Atticus vicious based on the following undisputed facts made in his complaint:
1. On February 10, 2012 Atticus escaped from the property at 433 Pearl St. and attacked
Michelle Benson who was walking on the other side of the street, knocking her into a stone
wall and biting her in the chest area;
2. After releasing Ms. Benson, Atticus ran back across the street, but then turned around and
attacked Ms. Benson a second, time biting her on the abdomen and arm;
3. Atticus continued the second attack until someone from 433 Pearl St. took physical control of
the dog.
Both Michelle Benson and Ron Burns testified in support of the above facts.
In response and defense, Ms. Swanson and her family gave oral testimony regarding Atticus'
temperament and importance as a family member. Ms. Swanson, through her counsel presented two
documents prepared by dog experts who were acquainted with Atticus, each outlining their
experiences with Atticus and recommending safeguards to prevent another attack from happening.
The documents are outlined as follows:
1. A letter from Steve Roberts, a dog trainer and owner of K-9 Top Performance, a Reading
business, which involves dog training, day care, grooming, and boarding. In this letter, Mr.
Roberts indicated that he works with Atticus on his dog aggression and behavior modification.
Mr. Roberts made the following suggestions regarding public safety measures that should be
taken concerning Atticus.
a. Atticus should be muzzled at all times when outside of the house, except in the backyard
which should be enclosed by an eight foot fence. It was Mr. Roberts' opinion that, due to
Atticus' age and athletic ability, he would not be able to jump the fence.
2
Animal Control Appeals Committee Minutes—March 15, 2012— page 3
b. The Swansons should install a door mechanism on the front door so that it automatically
shuts whenever it is opened. In the case that it fails, Mr. Roberts suggests installing an
electric fence in the front yard.
c. Atticus should continue behavior and obedience training specifically with regards as to
where he is allowed in the household and yard.
2. A letter from Kathryn M. Wrubel, Ph.D., an Animal Behavior Specialist for IVG Hospitals, Inc.
Dr. Wrubel saw Atticus for behavior assessments on March 7, 2012 and Mar 9, 2012, at the
Massachusetts Veterinary Referral Hospital in Woburn from which she concluded that Atticus
has Territorial Fear Aggression. Dr. Wrubel made the following public safety measure
suggestions:
a. Installing a mechanism on the front door so that it automatically shuts
b. Installing "Beware of Dog" signs on the Swanson's' gate and front door
c. Making Atticus wear a basket muzzle at all times outside of the house
d. Never allowing Atticus off-leash
e. Behavior modification training with herself, including training with a Gentle Leader head
collar in addition to a basket muzzle.
f. A trial of mood-stabilizing medication, which may help reduce Atticus' reactivity and which
has some anti-aggressive properties.
Decision #1
On motion by Miles, seconded by Giacalone, the ACAC by a vote of 3-0-0 found that Atticus
was a Vicious Dog due to the extent of the attack and the fact that Atticus retreated and then
advanced to attack a second time. This finding is based on the fact that the attack on Michelle
Benson on February 10, 2012, resulted in multiple bites where Ms. Benson's skin was broken.
Issue #2 - Remedy
Section 5.6.6.4 of the Town Dog Control Laws provides that there are three remedies available to the
ACAC if a dog is found to be vicious, (1) a permanent restraint order, (2) banishment from the town,
or (3) destruction of the dog in accordance with MGL c. 140 § 151A.
Decision #2
Due to the severity of the attack, the ACAC considered banishment, which is defined in section
5.6.6.4.2 as "an order that a vicious dog may no longer reside or visit in the Town of Reading."
However, upon petition by Ms. Swanson and her family, the ACAC indicated that it would be willing to
entertain the possibility of permanent restraint if the Swanson family was willing to implement not only
the provisions required for Permanent Restraint in section 5.6.6.4.1, but also all recommendations
outlined in the letters submitted by Mr. Roberts and Dr. Wrubel.
Ms. Swanson and her family, with the advice of counsel, indicated its assent to the following
proposed conditions for permanent restraint and a willingness to waive any right of appeal from the
ACAC decision in order to avoid banishment. As such, the ACAC, hereby orders that Atticus shall be
allowed to remain in the Town of Reading so long as the requirements of permanent restraint in
section 5.6.6.4.1 and all recommendations outlined in the letters submitted by Mr. Roberts and Dr.
Wrubel are met. Specifically the Swansons would be required to:
3
Animal Control Appeals Committee Minutes—March 15, 2012 —page 4
1. Abide by the requirements of section 5.6.6.4.1 of Reading's Dog Control Laws. Specifically
this includes:
a. Keeping Atticus within a "secure enclosure" or within the house at 433 Pearl St at all times.
A "secure enclosure" means an enclosure that is:
i. A minimum of five feet wide, 10 feet long, and five .feet in height, with a horizontal top
covering the entire enclosure;
ii. Constructed of not less than 9 gauge chain link fencing;
iii. Constructed with a floor not less than three inches of poured concrete with the bottom
edge of the fencing embedded in the concrete;
iv. Posted with a clearly visible warning sign including a warning symbol; and
v. Compliant with all applicable building codes and with the Zoning By-Laws of the Town
of Reading.
b. Providing annual proof to the Town Clerk of a liability insurance policy of at least $100,000
for the benefit of the public safety; and
c. Using a basket muzzle and keeping Atticus restrained on a lead no longer than six feet or
in an escape-proof enclosure anytime Atticus leaves the property.
2. Implement all recommendations made by Steve Roberts, including:
a. Muzzling Atticus at all time when he is outside of the house;
b. Installing a mechanism on the front door such that it shuts automatically; and
c. Continuing behavior and obedience training with the aim of teaching him where he is and is
not allowed in the household and yard.
3. Implement all recommendations made by Dr. Katheryn W. Wrubel, including:
a. Installing a mechanism on the front door such that it shuts automatically; and
b. Install "Beware of Dog" signs on the front gate and door;
c. Muzzling Atticus with a basket muzzle at all time when he is outside of the house;
d. Never allowing Atticus off leash;
e. Having Atticus attend behavior modification training with Dr.Wrubel;
f. Putting Atticus on Dr. Wrubel's suggested trial of mood-stabilizing medication.
If Lisa Swanson and her family fail to meet these requirements, the ACAC would consider all
alternative remedies within the bylaw, including banishment and the possibility of destruction. Where
an appeal may be made pursuant to MGL c. 140 § 157 within 10 days of this decision to the
appropriate district court, Lisa Swanson and her family have agreed to waive her right of appeal as
consideration for this decision of the ACAC.
On motion by Miles, seconded by Giacalone, the ACAC ordered that Atticus be permanently
restrained in accordance with the Town of Reading General Bylaw Section5.6.6.4 (1), and
Town Counsel will draft an order for the ACAC to vote on at a meeting on March 28, 2012 at
7:30 PM.
4
Animal Control Appeals Committee Minutes—March 15, 2012 —page 5
On motion by Miles seconded by Giacalone the ACAC adjourned their meeting at 9:10 PM on a •
vote of 3-0-0.
Respectfully Submitted
YAL 1CL-
Secretary
5