National City Municipal Code Ch. 8.16 Dog Regulations

* Prior ordinance history: Ords. 828 §§ 17—25, 1099, 1402 and 1621.

A. The terms "handler," "leash," "run at large" and "unleashed" are as defined in Section 8.04.015.

B. "Biting dog" means any dog that has bitten another animal or human in this or another jurisdiction at least once, without provocation and not in defense of itself or its owner or handler. It shall also include any potentially dangerous or vicious dog, as defined by the Food and Agricultural Code.

C. The terms "potentially dangerous or vicious dog" are as defined in Food and Agricultural Code Sections 31602 and 31603.

(Ord. 2258 § 2 (part), 2005: Ord. 2245 § 5 (part), 2004: Ord. 2171 § 5 (part), 2000)

It is unlawful for an owner or handler of a dog to fail to provide that dog with adequate food, water and shelter. Female dogs in the oestrual period must be confined or segregated in such a manner as to eliminate the congregating of male dogs in the immediate vicinity of and prevent access to the female.

(Ord. 2171 § 5 (part), 2000)

A. It is unlawful for an owner or handler of a dog to allow that dog to run at large within the city limits. A dog is not at large if confined within a motor vehicle.

B. It is unlawful for an owner or handler of any dog required by this title to be licensed to suffer, allow or permit such dog to be within the city limits without the license tag issued for that dog, or without a collar or harness around its neck to which is attached the license tag issued pursuant to Section 8.12.030, except when the dog is securely contained in a motor vehicle or upon the owner's or handler's property.

C. It shall be rebuttably presumed that a person acting as a handler and weighing less than the weight of the dog being restrained lacks the physical capacity to restrain the dog and thereby prevent it from running at large.

D. "Handler" means any person in possession of an animal, or who is charged with or is exercising the care, control and custody of the animal. It includes the person who owns the animal when that person is exercising the care, custody and control of the animal.

E. "Owner" means a person or entity that has legal title to or the right to dispose of or euthanize an animal. The term may include any person who exercises apparent control or dominion over an animal to the exclusion of the rights or interest of others, even if there is no documentation establishing a legally protected or protectible property right of that person in that animal.

(Ord. 2245 § 5 (part), 2004; Ord. 2196 § 3 (part); Ord. 2171 § 5 (part), 2000)

A. It is unlawful for an owner or handler of a dog to suffer, allow or permit such dog to enter or remain upon any public or private property within the corporate limits without the consent of the city manager for public property or the owner or lessee of private property. This prohibition applies whether the dog is on a leash or not.

B. It is unlawful for any person in the actual or apparent control of a dog to allow that dog to defecate upon the streets, sidewalks and other public property or on another's private property without thereafter immediately cleaning up and disposing of the deposited feces in a trash receptacle or other suitable receptacle. If the offending dog is at large and no person claims ownership or control, the dog shall be impounded.

C. It is unlawful for an owner or handler of a dog to fail or refuse to immediately clean up and dispose of feces deposited by that dog upon any street, sidewalk or public or private property upon notification to the owner or handler by the owner or person in charge of the property upon which the dog defecated.

(Ord. 2245 § 5 (part), 2004; Ord. 2171 § 5 (part), 2000)

It is unlawful to harbor or keep any lost or strayed dog for a longer period than twenty-four hours without notification to the animal control officer. Any person finding a dog which appears to be lost or strayed shall notify the animal control officer within twenty-four hours and surrender the dog to him or her upon demand.

(Ord. 2171 § 5 (part), 2000)

A. It is unlawful for any person to allow any dog to howl, bark or make other sounds characteristic of that species to create a noise disturbance across a residential or commercial real property line or within a noise sensitive zone between the hours of ten pm and seven am daily for more than three minutes, or at other times for more than ten consecutive minutes or for more than a total of fifteen minutes within any sixty minute period. Any such noise disturbance also constitutes a public nuisance.

B. A police officer or animal control officer shall not be required to act upon an anonymous complaint or upon any other barking dog complaint unless the complainant first certifies under a written declaration executed under penalty of perjury that satisfies the scope of subsection D of this section. The police chief may require the complainant to first make such written declaration before investigating.

C. Unless the animal control officer or a police officer actually observes the dog barking as specified in subsection A of this section, no criminal citation shall be issued by that officer unless a complainant shall first make a written declaration and initiate a citizen arrest of the responsible person, following which the police or animal control officer shall accept custody of the responsible offender and then issue the citation or take the arrestee before a magistrate. The officer may issue an administrative citation pursuant to Chapter 1.44 without prior notification should the complainant decline to effect a citizen arrest but has made a written declaration.

D. In order for a violation to be processed under either subsection B or C of this section, the following requirements are established:

1. That the complainant has made at least one reasonable verbal or written request to the owner or the person responsible for the custody and possession of the dog to either stop the dog from barking or to eliminate the cause for the dog's disturbances. (This requirement may be waived for good cause where it may appear that there is a potential and credible threat to the physical well-being of the complainant);

2. That the dog can be heard audibly from an adjoining public right-of-way or at the exterior of any building on any immediately contiguous property adjacent to the property on which the dog is kept;

3. That the dog: (a) was not acting in defense of its property against a trespasser; and (b) was not being provoked by any person other than the owner of the property upon which the dog was situated or the person responsible for the dog. A person who is merely a lawful passerby on a public street or sidewalk shall not be considered a source of provocation;

4. That the barking constituted a public nuisance as defined in Section 8.16.050(A);

5. The identity of other witnesses or complainants.

E. At the time of a first complaint, the complainant shall be instructed to maintain a log to establish the following:

1. Date and time of barking episodes;

2. Duration of barking;

3. Address of violation;

4. Any factors, or the non-existence of factors, which may have contributed to the barking, howling or yelping by the dog.

F. It shall not be a defense to violation of subsection A of this section that there was no one at the premises at the time the dog was barking if the dog was left outdoors.

G. A first violation of this section shall be an infraction, and any second and subsequent violations shall be misdemeanors.

(Ord. 2245 § 5 (part), 2004; Ord. 2196 § 3 (part); Ord. 2171 § 5 (part), 2000)

A. A dog that meets the criteria for a barking dog established in Section 8.16.050A is a public nuisance and is subject to abatement under the following terms and conditions:

1. The complainant must be a person other than the animal control officer or a police officer.

2. The complainant must execute a written declaration under penalty of perjury establishing facts that bring the dog within the scope of Section 8.16.050 and request that proceedings to abate the barking dog be initiated. A fee of one hundred dollars shall be deposited with the city to defray the city's reasonable costs of processing the abatement.

3. The city manager or delegate shall serve written notice upon both the complainant and the owner or handler of the dog, sent by both first class mail and certified mail, setting a hearing at which the owner or handler may show cause why the dog should not be abated as a public nuisance. The hearing shall be no sooner than five days, nor more than ten days from the date of mailing. The hearing shall be informal and the rules of evidence shall not apply.

4. If a hearing examiner appointed by the city manager determines that the dog is a public nuisance within the definition of Section 8.16.050A, the following shall be ordered:

a. The owner shall keep the dog indoors, within the residence, except for periods when the dog is supervised outdoors by a handler; and

b. The owner shall provide, attach and maintain an activated anti-barking collar device to be worn by the dog at all times.

c. Alternatively, the owner may elect to construct and maintain a sound proofed enclosure; or to surgically alter the dog's vocal cords to eliminate the intensity of the bark, using a licensed veterinarian to perform the procedure; or to place the dog for adoption with the animal control officer.

B. During such time as the owner complies with the terms of the abatement conditions in subsection (A)(4) of this section, no further criminal or administrative citations shall be issued. If the above measures are ineffective, the owner shall be issued a second written notice and be given a period not to exceed fifteen days to correct the animal's behavior, after which further administrative or criminal citations may then be issued upon the occurrence of a subsequent act in violation of Section 8.16.050A.

C. In severe cases in which the dog's removal and impound is necessary, civil injunctive relief by a complaint pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 527.6 or administrative abatement in accordance with Chapter 1.48 may be instituted. An inspection warrant shall be first obtained where the property owner's consent to enter and impound the dog is withheld.

D. Conviction for a violation of Section 8.16-.050A shall be prima facie evidence that the dog is a public nuisance, and is subject to abatement under this section without further proof of facts. The terms of abatement under subsection (A)(4) of this section may be administratively ordered in addition to any terms imposed by a court for the conviction.

(Ord. 2171 § 5 (part), 2000)

It is unlawful for any owner or handler of any dog other than an assistance dog to suffer, allow or permit it to enter any restaurant, grocery store, milk depot, fruit or vegetable market, meat market or any other place of business in the city where food or foodstuffs of any character used for human consumption is manufactured, sold, served or handled. This prohibition shall not apply at an outdoor eating establishment or seating area.

(Ord. 2245 § 5 (part), 2004; Ord. 2171 § 5 (part), 2000)

An assistance dog may accompany a disabled person or trainer into any public establishment or place of public accommodation within the city limits.

(Ord. 2171 § 5 (part), 2000)

A. This section supplements the definitions, procedures and penalties governing dangerous and vicious dogs contained in Food and Agricultural Code sections 31601 through 31683 and Penal Code Section 399.5. The animal control officer is authorized to initiate proceedings under those sections to declare a dog to be potentially dangerous or vicious. The animal control officer shall immediately impound any dog that, by its actions in biting or menacing a human being or other animals, meets the definition of a potentially dangerous or vicious dog.

B. It is unlawful and a misdemeanor for any person to maintain a dog within the city limits after it has been adjudicated a potentially dangerous or vicious dog pursuant to proceedings conducted under Food and Agricultural Code sections 31621 through 31626 or this section.

C. It is unlawful and a misdemeanor for any person who has owned a dog finally adjudicated to be vicious to thereafter own, possess or maintain any other dog upon property which he or she owns, leases or controls within the city limits for a period of three years from the date of final adjudication. Any dog found in violation of this condition shall be impounded and processed in accordance with Chapter 8.04.

D. Pursuant to the authority of Food and Agricultural Code Section 31621, as an alternative abatement proceeding for a potentially dangerous or vicious dog, the animal control officer may post a notice on the property from which the dog was impounded advising the owner, or its handler when the owner cannot be ascertained, that the dog will be declared a vicious dog and be euthanized five business days after its impound or as soon thereafter as is practicable, unless the owner or handler, during the interim, requests an administrative hearing to contest the determination. A duplicate copy of the notice shall be mailed to the owner, or the handler if the owner cannot be ascertained, by certified mail and first class mail with return address. The request for the hearing may be verbal, written or both. The animal control officer or the head of the department shall immediately cause a hearing to be held following the procedures of Penal Code Section 597.1. Any city officer or official, other than the animal control officer ordering the impound, may conduct the hearing. The hearing shall be informal in nature and the formal rules of evidence shall not apply. The hearing shall be limited to the question of whether the dog is potentially dangerous or vicious, and whether or not the dog should be euthanized or some alternative method for its care and custody be provided. The notice of decision shall be served personally on the owner, or by mail, certified and first class with return address; receipt of either shall constitute service of notice. Failure to receive the notice shall not affect the validity of service or the proceedings. Failure to request the hearing within the time allowed shall constitute a waiver of the right to contest the determination or the euthanasia of the dog. The owner or handler shall be liable for all costs and fees pursuant to Section 8.04.030.

E. The animal control officer shall order the euthanasia of any dog determined to be potentially dangerous or vicious pursuant to this section. Euthanasia may occur immediately only upon the waiver of the hearing; otherwise, it may occur only after five business days following the date of the service of the notice of decision under subsection D of this section if no appeal has been filed with the Superior Court. If an appeal is filed, the dog shall remain in impound pending the decision on the appeal.

F. The city attorney is authorized to file a civil action to abate a potentially dangerous or vicious dog, when appropriate.

(Ord. 2245 § 5 (part), 2004; Ord. 2196 § 3 (part); Ord. 2171 § 5 (part), 2000)

A. It is unlawful for any person knowingly to keep any dog afflicted with mange, ringworm, distemper or any other zoonotic, contagious or parasitic disease within the city, unless such dog is under the control and treatment of a licensed veterinarian.

B. It shall be the duty of the animal control officer to immediately take possession of any dog not so controlled and treated, and, after confirmation of disease by a licensed veterinarian, immediately dispose of the dog in accordance with Section 8.04.020(D) unless the owner immediately places such animal in isolation under the physical control and treatment of a licensed veterinarian.

(Ord. 2171 § 5 (part), 2000)

A. It is unlawful and a misdemeanor to own, possess or control any dog over the age of four months unless the dog has been vaccinated with a current rabies vaccine approved by the California Department of Health Services. Proof of current vaccination shall be demonstrated by a vaccination certificate issued by a licensed veterinarian that identifies the dog, the type of vaccine, and the duration of the immunization period.

B. The requirements of subsection A of this section shall not apply during any period when a licensed veterinarian has certified that inoculation would seriously injure the dog. During the interim, the dog shall be kept confined to and isolated on the property of the owner within a securely enclosed yard, kennel or pen.

C. The animal control officer shall impound any dog that does not bear evidence of current vaccination, or for which proof of vaccination cannot be produced, or for which reasonable cause exists to believe that the dog is infected with rabies. Disposition or return of the dog shall be in accordance with Section 8.04.020, except that a dog which has bitten a human may be impounded and kept under observation for ten (10) calendar days at the expense of the owner pending verification of the existence or nonexistence of rabies.

(Ord. 2196 § 3 (part); Ord. 2171 § 5 (part), 2000)

It shall be the duty of the animal control officer to impound any dog not in compliance with this title which is found within the corporate limits of the city or the streets immediately contiguous to those limits; provided, however, that any dog which is owned and accompanied by any person living outside the city shall not be impounded and there shall be no violation of this title if, upon demand of the animal control officer or any police officer, such person shall immediately tie or restrain such dog by a leash and remove it from the jurisdiction. However, if the owner or handler fails to restrain the dog and remove it after the demand of the animal control officer or police officer, the dog shall then be impounded.

(Ord. 2171 § 5 (part), 2000)

A. It is unlawful to allow a dog to run loose in any yard in the city unless the yard in which the dog is maintained is fully enclosed with fences and/or enclosures of sufficient height, strength and method of construction to restrain and contain the animal within the yard or enclosure and prevent the animal from escaping therefrom. Subject to the height limits prescribed in Chapter 18.50, a fence shall be considered insufficient to contain a dog unless it is at least the greater of four feet in height or the height of the dog to be contained measured at its shoulders plus twelve inches.

B. An animal control officer is authorized to impound any dog previously observed running at large that had returned to its owner or handler's property while the officer was in pursuit or when the officer had observed or received credible information that the dog's behavior constituted a public nuisance or a clear and present danger to human or animal safety, and the dog cannot be kept safely secured within the yard, a house or an enclosure or pen on that property, or the owner or custodian refuses to properly secure the dog on the property.

C. Violations of subsection A of this section shall be assessed a minimum fine of one hundred dollars, if the violation is not corrected within ten calendar days from the date of citation.

D. Notwithstanding compliance with the height requirements for fencing of subsection A, no person shall maintain a dog on property where the height of the fence is actually insufficient to prevent the dog from jumping or leaning over the fence so as to be able to menace pedestrians who are using a public sidewalk or right-of-way.

(Ord. 2245 § 5 (part), 2004; Ord. 2196 § 3 (part); Ord. 2171 § 5 (part), 2000)

In general, the regulations of this title as they may relate to assistance dogs and assistance dogs in training, shall be interpreted and administered in a way as to afford maximum compliance with the spirit and intent of the Americans With Disabilities Act.

(Ord. 2245 § 5 (part), 2004; Ord. 2196 § 3 (part); Ord. 2171 § 5 (part), 2000)

This section implements the provisions of the Dog Act of 1969, as amended, Health and Safety Code Sections 121875 through 121945, regulating attack, guard and sentry dogs. Definitions within the Dog Act of 1969, as amended, govern the interpretation and effect of this section.

A. The provisions, requirements and prohibitions contained in the Dog Act of 1969 and in particular the provisions of Health and Safety Code Section 121918 are hereby adopted as an ordinance of the city of National City. It is unlawful and a misdemeanor for an operator of a sentry dog company, or any handler employed by that operator, to fail to observe any of the mandatory provisions or prohibitions contained in Health and Safety Code Section 121918 as adopted by this section, or any of the requirements of this title as it applies to dogs. Those provisions of state law which are separately punishable as a violation of state law shall not be deemed adopted by ordinance as a city misdemeanor to avoid state preemption issues and shall be administered by the animal control officer for regulatory purposes under this title. The chief of police, through the animal control officer as designee, is responsible for implementing the provisions of state law and this code regulating attack, guard and sentry dogs.

B. In addition to a business license, any person who owns or operates a sentry dog company shall apply for and obtain a separate sentry dog operator permit to operate within the city of National City and shall pay the permit fees established in the National City fee schedule prior to posting any dog for assignment within the city limits. This licensing requirement does not apply to the owner or operator of a business or premise who owns and maintains an attack, guard or sentry dog on that specific premise.

C. An application for a sentry dog operator permit may be denied for good cause. Good cause shall include the making of a materially false application, the demonstrated failure of the applicant to observe animal control regulations or the state humane laws in this or other jurisdictions, or the conviction of or violation of probation for animal control regulations or the state humane laws in this or other jurisdictions within the state of California. If denied, no application may be resubmitted for one year, or the successful completion of probation, whichever shall be longer. Appeals from denial of application shall be handled under subsection E of this section.

D. A sentry dog operator shall notify both the chief of police and the fire chief of each address within the city of assignment of each attack, guard or sentry dog at least fifteen days prior to the posting of the dog at that address. This notification requirement shall also apply to any owner or operator of a business or industrial or commercial premise which owns and maintains an attack, guard or sentry dog on that specific premise.

E. Permits issued under this section may be revoked, suspended or conditions of probation be imposed by the animal control officer for violations of the Dog Act of 1969 or this title. The denial of an application of the revocation or suspension of a permit by the animal control officer may be appealed by an applicant or operator in writing to the chief of police within ten calendar days from the date of denial, revocation or suspension of a license or application. The chief of police shall appoint an examiner to conduct an informal administrative hearing and make recommendations to the chief concerning the denial, revocation or suspension of a license or application. Conditions of probation imposed by the animal control officer that are consistent with the Dog Act of 1969 or this title shall not be appealable, unless revocation or suspension results from violation of those conditions of probation. Unless appealed, the action of the animal control officer shall be administratively final. If appealed, the decision of the chief of police shall constitute the exhaustion of administrative remedy and shall be administratively final.

F. Any notices required for administration or enforcement of this section shall be sent in accordance with Section 1.42.030.

(Ord. 2245 § 5 (part), 2004; Ord. 2196 § 3 (part); Ord. 2171 § 5 (part), 2000)

A. Any biting dog that is not processed under Section 8.16.070 shall be microchipped with an identifying tag at the owner's expense. The owner shall also be required to maintain comprehensive liability insurance in a minimum amount of one hundred thousand dollars combined single limit, as a condition of keeping the animal within the city limits, except when removal is required pursuant to Section 8.16.070(B). Proof of compliance with this subsection shall be furnished to the animal control officer by the owner within fourteen calendar days after notification.

B. It is unlawful for an owner to maintain a biting dog within the city limits in violation of subsection A of this section.

(Ord. 2258 § 2 (part), 2005)