Fremont Municipal Code Art. I Seizure and Classification

It is unlawful for any dog owner or person with a right to control the dog to permit the dog to engage in potentially dangerous dog and vicious dog behavior as specified in Section 6.05.010. (Ord. 16-2018 § 1, 6-5-18.)

Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, an animal control officer or peace officer may seize and impound a dog where the officer has reasonable grounds to believe that the dog:

(a) Has demonstrated one or more of the characteristics or behaviors of a potentially dangerous dog or of a vicious dog; or

(b) Has a potentially dangerous dog permit, and:

(1) Has engaged in one or more of the behaviors of a vicious dog or a potentially dangerous dog; or

(2) Has not been kept or maintained in accordance with the applicable provisions of this chapter; or

(c) Is subject to a potentially dangerous dog permit but:

(1) Neither the owner nor the person with a right to control the dog has applied for the permit;

(2) Neither the owner nor the person with a right to control the dog has completed the permit process; or

(3) The dog poses an immediate or substantial threat to the public health and safety or property. (Ord. 16-2018 § 1, 6-5-18.)

(a) The animal control officer must post a notice of impoundment on the front door or other appropriate place at the residence of the dog owner or person with a right to control the dog if he or she is not present at the time the dog is seized and impounded, which notice must state:

(1) That the dog has been impounded;

(2) The alleged Fremont Municipal Code violation;

(3) Where the dog is being held;

(4) The name, address, and telephone number of the agency or person to be contacted regarding release of the dog; and

(5) The consequences of not requesting a hearing within the holding period of the dog’s seizure as specified in Section 6.60.060.

(b) If the dog owner or person with a right to control the dog is present at the time of the seizure, such person must be given a written notice with the same information specified in subsection (a) of this section. (Ord. 16-2018 § 1, 6-5-18.)

(a) The city manager may establish administrative regulations for the classification of potentially dangerous dogs and vicious dogs.

(b) The animal services manager shall determine when any dog has engaged in behaviors or exhibited any of the characteristics of a potentially dangerous dog or vicious dog.

(c) When the animal services manager has reason to believe that a dog is potentially dangerous or vicious, the animal services manager shall conduct an investigation to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to support classifying the dog as a potentially dangerous dog or a vicious dog. The evidence shall include observations and testimony by animal control officers or other witnesses who personally observed the animal’s behavior. The evidence may include testimony about the dog’s upbringing and control of the dog by the owner or person with the right to control the dog.

(d) If the animal services manager determines sufficient evidence exists to classify a dog as a potentially dangerous dog or a vicious dog, he or she must consider the existence of any mitigating circumstances described in Section 6.60.050 or in an administrative regulation promulgated by the city manager before reaching a determination; however, the existence of mitigating circumstances shall not require the animal services manager to refrain from classifying a dog as a potentially dangerous dog or a vicious dog.

(e) When a potentially dangerous dog or vicious dog classification determination is based solely on the uncorroborated testimony of the victim or a witness other than a law enforcement officer, the testimony must be contained in a written statement signed under penalty of perjury.

(f) Once the animal services manager determines that a dog should be classified as a potentially dangerous dog or a vicious dog, he or she must serve the owner or person with the right to control the dog with a notice of classification. (Ord. 16-2018 § 1, 6-5-18.)

Before classifying a dog as a potentially dangerous dog or vicious dog, the following mitigating circumstances, if shown to exist by a preponderance of the evidence, shall be considered. The existence of mitigating circumstances, however, shall not require the animal services manager to refrain from classifying a dog as a potentially dangerous dog or a vicious dog. This section does not require an animal control officer, any other city employee, or hearing officer to conduct an independent investigation for the purpose of determining whether any mitigating circumstances exist. Mitigating circumstances include the following:

(a) The injury or damage was sustained by a person who, at the time the injury or damage was sustained, was:

(1) Committing a tort upon the private property of the dog owner or person with a right to control the dog;

(2) Teasing, tormenting, abusing, assaulting, or other similar act of provocation towards the dog;

(3) Trespassing inside a fully enclosed building or fenced area on private property; or

(4) Committing or attempting to commit a crime.

(b) The injury or damage was sustained by a domestic animal that, at the time the injury or damage was sustained, was teasing, tormenting, abusing, or assaulting the dog that caused the injury or damage, or was trespassing inside a fully enclosed building or fenced area on private property.

(c) The dog that caused the injury or damage was protecting or defending a person within the immediate vicinity of the dog that caused the injury or damage from an unjustified attack or assault.

(d) The injury or damage to a domestic animal was sustained while the dog that caused the injury or damage was working as a hunting dog, herding dog, or predator control dog on the property of, or under the control of, its owner or the person with a right to control the dog, and the damage or injury was to a species or type of domestic animal appropriate to the work of the dog.

(e) The dog that caused the injury or damage was a police dog. (Ord. 16-2018 § 1, 6-5-18.)

(a) If either the dog owner or person with a right to control the dog disputes any action taken under this chapter, he or she must deliver a written request for an administrative appeal hearing within five days of service of notice or else waive any further right to contest the action. The request must be delivered to the city of Fremont’s animal services manager at the animal shelter located at 1950 Stevenson Boulevard. The request must state in detail the factual basis to contest the action and describe in detail any claimed mitigating circumstance.

(b) If a timely request is made by either the dog owner or person with a right to control the dog, the animal services manager shall set the time and place for the administrative appeal hearing, as soon as reasonably possible. (Ord. 16-2018 § 1, 6-5-18.)