Dog-related legislation
From BayTeam
Members of the Bay Team and other local community members might want to keep up on what dog-related legislation is pending and how they can get involved.
| For any info posted here, please first try to neutrally describe the legislation or issue, and then identify whether any further information is for or against. |
Contents |
[edit] Mailing list
The Bay Team has a club-members-only legislation mailing list to which you can subscribe or unsubscribe.
[edit] Compulsory Sterilization News
[edit] AB1634 Passes Senate Local Government Committee
- With a a minor amendment from "shall cite" to "may cite" the Senate Local Government Committee passed the bill on a 3-2 vote and referred it back to the Committee on Appropriations. As a reminder this bill is entirely different from what we saw last July. This version requires desexing upon receiving a third "complaint." In the committee hearing the bill's author asserted "If an animal control officer determines animal is not spayed or neutered they can cite for that as well." Concerns about lack of due process were confirmed when the author also testified before the committee that the bill has no requirement that the initial complaint be true or proven. You can watch the Committee proceedings here. The bill as it was before the committee appears on the bill's current status page. The minor change was not published as of 26 June. For easier reading see a highlighted version of the revisions and some commentary on the provisions.
- You should write your local legislators as well as the committee members. The Appropriations Committee is interested in cost issues - how much it will cost, what it will or won't save the government.
Committee Contact Information:
- Committee Staff Director
- Bob Franzoia
- State Capitol, Room 2206
- Sacramento, CA 95814
- (916) 651-4101
- This committee does not give their fax number out. They want everything via mail.
- Committee Members:
Appropriations
- Tom Torklakson, Chairman (D)
- State Capitol, Room 5050
- Sacramento, CA 95814
- Phone:(916) 651-4007
- FAX: (916) 445-2527
- Dave Cox - Vice Chair (R)
- State Capitol, Room 3060
- Sacramento, CA 95814
- Phone: (916) 651-4018
- Fax: (916) 322-3304
- Sam Aanestad
- State Capitol, Room 3060
- Sacramento, CA 95814
- Phone: (916) 651-4018
- Fax: (916) 322-3304
- Roy Ashburn (R)
- State Capitol, Room 3060
- Sacramento, CA 95814
- Phone: (916) 651-4018
- Fax: (916) 322-3304
- Gilbert Cedillo (D)
- State Capitol, Room 5100
- Sacramento, CA 95814
- Phone: (916) 651-4022
- Fax: (916) 337-8817
- Ellen Corbett (D)
- State Capitol, Room 3092
- Sacramento, CA 95814
- Phone: (916) 651-4010
- Fax: (916) 337-2433
- Robert Dutton (R)
- State Capitol, Room 5094
- Sacramento, CA 95814
- Phone: (916) 651-4031
- Fax: (916) 327-2272
- Dean Flores (D)
- State Capitol, Room 5061
- Sacramento, CA 95814
- Phone: (916) 651-4016
- Fax: (916) 327-5989
- Shiela Kuehl (D)
- State Capitol, Room 5108
- Sacramento, CA 95814
- Phone: (916) 651-4023
- Fax: (916) 324-4823
- Jenny Oropeza (D)
- State Capitol, Room 4074
- Sacramento, CA 95814
- Phone: (916) 651-4028
- Fax: (916) 323-6056
- Mark Ridley-Thomas
- State Capitol, Room 4061
- Sacramento, CA 95814
- Phone: (916) 651-4026
- Fax: (916) 445-8899
- George Runner (R)
- State Capitol, Room 5097
- Sacramento, CA 95814
- Phone: (916) 651-4017
- Fax: (916) 445-4662
- Joe Simitian (D)
- State Capitol, Room 2080
- Sacramento, CA 95814
- Phone: (916) 651-4011
- Fax: (916) 323-4529
- Mark Wyland (R)
- State Capitol, Room 2080
- Sacramento, CA 95814
- Phone: (916) 651-4011
- Fax: (916) 323-4529
- Leeland Yee (D)
- State Capitol, Room 4048
- Sacramento, CA 95814
- Phone: (916) 651-4008
- Fax: (916) 327-2186
- The Animal Council has published their letter evaluating the consequences of the new provisions. The NAIA Trust letter that may be helpful in writing communications. CDOC provides sample communications for those who feel they don't have the necessary words. The PetPAC web site provides additional information.
[edit] Santa Clara County Supports AB1634
- On June 3 the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors voted 3-2 to endorse AB 1634. Supervisor Liz Kniss and Supervisor Ken Yeager of the Legislative Committee for the Board recommended passage of the Resolution. The Animal Advisory Committee was not invited to contribute to the decision making process. Supporters and opponents were about equally represented at the meeting.
[edit] Santa Barbara Sets Aside MSN Proposal
- Santa Barbara residents, CDOC,PetPAC, POWER and CFDC appeared before the Santa Barbara Board of Supervisors in a hearing of a mandatory spay and neuter proposed ordinance. The Supervisors decided not to go forward with the proposed ordinance but instead to form an 11 person commission, including proponents and opponents, to work toward a solution. Get more information from the Concerned Dog Owners of California website on issues in Santa Barbara. Also see the article in the Santa Ynex Valley News.
[edit] Legal Action Against MSN
[edit] Litigation by Concerned Dog Owners of California Moves Forward
- Attorneys for CDOC et al have started the discovery process in the lawsuit against the City of Los Angeles challenging the recently passed Los Angeles Mandatory Spay and Neuter Ordinanace. Donations to support the lawsuit can be made at CDOC ACTIONCDOC-ACTION, a 501(c)4 organization.
[edit] Compulsory Sterilization Passes in Los Angeles
- Los Angeles County passed their spay and neuter ordinance. It is modeled after the initial introduced version of AB 1634 with similar vary narrow exemptions. Those who seek exemptions must agree to unannounced visits from animal control. Los Angeles Department of Animal Services General Manager Ed Boks reports being flooded with information requests by other local agencies eager to enact similar legislation.
[edit] Support for Voluntary Pet Sterilization News
[edit] AB 1938 Tax credits
- This bill would authorize a credit against income tax for each taxable year beginning on or after January 1, 2008, in an amount equal to 25% of the aggregate amount paid or incurred by a taxpayer for qualified costs, as defined, to spay or neuter a cat or dog. See the Bill History Page for Current Status and language.
[edit] AB 2291 Contributions on Tax returns
- This bill would allow taxpayers to designate on their tax returns, that a specified amount in excess of their tax liability be transferred to the Low Cost/Free Spay-Neuter Fund, which would be created by this bill. On Wednesday, April 30th, AB2291 was heard in the Appropriations Committee and passed that Committee. The next stop is the Assembly Floor. See the Bill History Page for Current Status and language.
[edit] Resources
The best way to stay informed of legislation and its consequences is to (a) visit relevant web sites regularly and (b) subscribe to mailing lists. There is nothing wrong with subscribing to, listening to, and asking questions in lists representing various views.
[edit] Sites generally against pet control legislation
- Save Our Dogs Strongly opposed to most dog and cat control legislation with a focus on concerns regarding working dogs and working dog breeds in various capacities.
- PetPAC A political action committee formed to work against most pet control legislation. PetPAC is raising funds for advertising and educational efforts to counter compulsory sterilization legislation.
- National Animal Interest Alliance Generally in opposition to pet control legislation.
- Concerned Dog Owners of California has an email based newsletter to keep up to date on legislative issues.
- California Anti Pet Legislation Awareness Moderate volume discussion list covering the politics and personalities driving activism on both sides in addition to the actual pet related legislation. Your choice to participate via email or web site.
- American Kennel Club - Canine Legislation Monitors and reports on legislation affecting its members, participants and supporters. Generally good at providing concise information.
[edit] Sites generally in favor of pet control legislation
- AB 1634 Official Site - California Healthy Pets Act The founding site for mandatory spay and neuter legislation in California.
- Animal Shelter Reform A high traffic discussion list seeking nationwide legislative efforts primarily focused on shelter populations, including mandatory spay and neuter laws. Your choice to participate via email or web site.
- PETA Advocates compulsory sterilization toward creating a "No Birth Nation."
[edit] Background Issues
[edit] Shelter Practices
- Regardless of which side you are on with regard to laws mandating pet sterilization it helps to have some background on what is going on in shelters. The No Kill Advocacy Center filed suit against Los Angeles County Shelters alleging unlawful and abusive treatment of animals. Essentially the County has claimed there was insufficient basis for the lawsuit to proceed and the judge disagreed. So it will proceed to the proof portion.
- While shelters express concern about the number of animals killed allegations of their policies and practices can cast doubt on the sincerity of those concerns. Consider, for example, this description of an attempt to adopt a dog, and this description of the practices of Kern county shelters. The comments to the follow up are important in suggesting that problem discussed in the original article is not unusual.
[edit] When and Whether Sterilization is the Right Health Choice
- One issue in mandatory sterilization legislation is the pet owner's ability to evaluate and determine when and whether sterilization is a sound choice for their particular circumstance. An article by By Margaret Root-Kustritz, DVM, PhD, reviews a variety of studies and literature to evaluate the spay / neuter decision. This discussion sets aside the issue of population control to look at the health issues involved. The article Determining The Best Age At Which To Spay Or Neuter provides charts and academic resources. See also Determining the optimal age for gonadectomy of dogs and cats which is essentially the same article for an academic audience.
[edit] Enforcement Practices
- Those who feel that they need not worry about pet legislation because they plan to just ignore it may find themselves in a difficult position. Enforcement efforts will put such people to the choice of between important pet health care or evading official notice. For example, if you take your pet for rabies vaccines the local jurisdiction may require the veterinarian to report that transaction to local animal control for matching against their records. (see article by Daniel Weintraub) Enforcement mechanisms include putting a lien on your home. Some ordinances make refusal to comply a criminal offense.
- Enforcing agencies are demanding club membership rosters or show catalogs as evidence that a dog meets exemption criteria. These agencies then use the rosters to locate individuals who have not registered their dogs or applied for exemptions. Failure to obtain an exemption before enforcement may waive the ability to get an exemption from mandatory sterilization provisions.
[edit] News of Interest
[edit] SF/SPCA Announces Closure of Hearing Dog Program
- On April 21, 2008 the San Francisco SPCA announced the end of its Hearing Dog Program. Supporters of the program posted an on-line petition to reverse the decision.
[edit] Business Tax Seminar
- In California selling more than two dogs in a fiscal year requires a seller's permit and payment of sales tax. On Tuesday, July 15, State Controller John Chiang will be hosting a Business Tax Seminar covering Basic Sales and Use Tax Issues. The seminar will be held in Los Angeles County at National Polytechnic College.
[edit] Class Action Lawsuit Alleges Misleading Advertising by Pet Food Makers
- On April 8 Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga refused to dismiss a class action lawsuit filed against the largest pet food manufacturers. In the suit Plaintiff's alledge that defendant's made false and misleading marketing statements regarding the contents of their pet food. Defendant's promote their pet products as made from choice cuts of prime beef, chunks of chicken, fish, fresh wholesome vegetables and whole grains. Plaintiff's claim the food is actually made from slaughterhouse waste products including hooves, hair, and blood. They further allege that the food contains rendering plant product such as road kill, zoo animals, rancid restaurant grease, diseased meat and even residual phenobarbital from euthanized animals. For additional details see Plaintiff's counsel's website.
[edit] Commentary
[edit] A little shy about speaking up?
- Whether it is that you are just shy, or feeling overwhelmed, or believe you don't have time to speak up, now is the time to reconsider. Your voice does count. If your view does not prevail will you be able to say that at least you tried? What bad thing will happen if you try?
