Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Riverton council adopts tighter animal-control code, debate centers on lethal-force language
Summary
Riverton City Council on April 1 adopted Ordinance 25-10, revising animal-control procedures to broaden seizure authority, rely on search warrants for evidence seizures and to clarify that radio/electronic collars do not count as lawful restraint.
Riverton City Council on April 1 adopted Ordinance 25-10, which revises the city's animal-control code to give animal control officers broader seizure authority, shorten procedural ambiguity by relying on search warrants, and explicitly state that electronic/radio collars do not qualify as restraint.
The ordinance revises how officers may take custody of animals alleged to have attacked people or other animals: officers may seize animals shown to be attacking, and if an owner refuses to cooperate they are authorized to seek a search warrant. The staff report said online warrant systems in Salt Lake County have made obtaining after-hours warrants faster and more reliable.
Why it matters: the changes are intended to streamline evidence preservation in serious attack cases and reduce repeated court fights over procedural technicalities, while clarifying public- and officer-safety expectations.
Staff described the main policy changes as: clearer authority for animal-control officers to seize animals that have attacked without relying on slow or inconsistent local court processes; a definition of "animal under restraint" that excludes radio/electronic collars; and a codified link to criminal-process tools (search warrants) to secure evidence. The draft retains discretion for officers to decide whether seizures are necessary in lower-severity incidents.
"We think that the radio collar should not be relied on to restrain an animal," staff said during the meeting, citing failed collars and the difficulty for officers and bystanders to verify functionality. That change removes language that previously allowed owners to claim a radio collar as lawful restraint.
Public comment and council debate focused most heavily on subsection 6.05.0.08, which addresses when a person may kill a dog. Two residents urged the council to narrow or remove the provision, warning it could be interpreted to allow lethal action for less-serious behaviors. One commenter stated, "The person standing there becomes judge, jury, and executioner," arguing the language risked depriving owners of due process. Another resident asked for longer impound-hold periods for lost animals and for explicit microchip-check procedures before disposal.
Council members asked clarifying questions and proposed narrowing the lethal-force language to make clear it applies to imminent threats to life or severe bodily injury, not to nuisance barking alone. Council member James McDougall, who moved adoption, said the change was intended to "afford added protections to victims in dog-bite cases" while preserving prosecutorial discretion for misuse.
The council adopted the ordinance after roll-call vote. Mover: Council member James McDougall. Second: Council member Mark Hayman. Recorded votes included: Council member Trevor Perucci (No); Council member James McDougall (Yes); Council member Brooker (Yes); Council member Mark Hayman (Yes). The motion carried and the ordinance was adopted.
Other technical points in the ordinance and meeting: - Evidence-seizure process: staff said search warrants are now routinely available through an online system and rotating judge schedule in Salt Lake County, which streamlines after-hours warrants. - Impound and disposition: existing code requires minimum impound holds for stray animals; staff noted the code still contains a three-calendar-day minimum for general impounds. Several council members and residents urged the city to consider five days for stray-hold periods; staff said they could review that provision. - Facility update: staff reported the new municipal animal-control facility construction is nearing completion (walls up, plumbing drawings received, trusses delivered) and animals are temporarily housed at Herriman's shelter.
The council directed staff to finalize the ordinance language and proceed; the city recorder was authorized to fix typographical errors in the final adopted text.
Ending: The ordinance takes effect per the city's standard adoption procedures; council members said they would monitor implementation and follow up on impound timelines and microchip procedures as part of operational rollout.
