Council directs staff to draft separate ordinances for estrays and nuisance animals

Councilmembers discussed a package of animal‑control ordinances and agreed the town should start with a narrowly focused ordinance addressing estrays (unbranded or stray livestock) and a separate, simpler approach for nuisance loose dogs and feral cats.

Councilmember Anne Lapponen said state law requires a local ordinance when the town takes custody of animals, so the town needs a formal process for notice, storage, fees and disposition. “We really need to have an ordinance that addresses this because under state law, when you round up an animal, you need to have an ordinance,” Lapponen said.

Lapponen proposed asking the town attorney to prepare a short, basic draft ordinance that would allow the town to contract with county deputies for pickup and handling and to set notice and reclamation procedures. Several councilmembers supported separating ordinances so residents can quickly find rules for horses, cattle and swine (estrays) distinct from domestic pet rules.

Councilmembers said feral cats and loose dogs that pose a nuisance or public‑safety risk should be covered in an enforcement‑oriented nuisance ordinance, while licensing for owned dogs and cats is a separate policy question. Some members said they opposed mandatory licensing because of staff workload and low compliance among the same owners who let animals run loose; others said a searchable licensing registry could help reunite lost pets with owners.

Town staff will ask the town attorney to draft a concise estray ordinance and provide short draft language for feral/loose animal enforcement and dangerous‑dog provisions for council review. Staff also said they will try to get input from the sheriff’s office on enforcement logistics and preferred processes before presenting final drafts.