Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement Nuisance Animals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press Cleveland council over recurring nuisance dogs; council directs steps on enforcement letters
Summary
Residents described repeated incidents of roaming dogs chasing livestock and harassing neighbors; councilors reviewed nuisance ordinance language and discussed issuing enforcement letters and attorney involvement but did not adopt a new penalty at the meeting.
Lowell Gardner, a Cleveland resident, told the council he had repeatedly observed dogs from a neighboring property running into yards and chasing livestock and pedestrians and asked what the town’s procedure is “for following up on noncompliance.”
Gardner said he had video of dogs running through a pasture and that neighbors had been harassed. “I’ve got a video of them tonight. 2 dogs out chasing Liddell in his pasture while he’s trying to change water,” Gardner said during public comment.
The council and staff reviewed the town’s nuisance-animal language and enforcement steps. A staff member who identified themself as the temporary animal control person described prior contact with the Jensen family and said a certified attorney letter had been sent in December 2023 and that the town had held a hearing and adopted findings denying an appeal. That staff member said the town has on-file a prior attorney letter that gave the property owner until Feb. 29, 2024, to abate violations and warned the town could arrange compliance and assess costs against the property.
Council members and staff discussed how complaints are processed and what evidence is needed to issue a nuisance citation. A council member said the nuisance ordinance allows a $75 citation for some chasing incidents and advised complainants to supply photo or video evidence. “If you have a video, we have proof. So, yeah, that’s a nuisance charge,” the council member said.
Council members instructed staff to pursue the following steps: (1) accept written complaints and any video evidence by email to the town office, (2) confirm whether certified notices previously sent were received, and (3) place specific unresolved noncompliance cases on the next council agenda for possible formal letters or attorney engagement. The council discussed asking the town attorney (or an attorney colleague referenced in prior work on the case) to send a targeted follow-up letter to the property owner and the estate of Frank L. Jensen; councilors said that certified service and green-card documentation would be used to verify receipt.
The meeting included multiple reminders about the procedural limits: staff said sheriff deputies typically respond only when an ongoing public-safety incident is occurring, and that the town’s authority is to cite under the nuisance ordinance or pursue civil remedies via an attorney. The council did not vote on hiring outside counsel during the meeting but directed the mayor and staff to contact the attorney who previously handled the Jensen matter to explore sending a follow-up attorney letter and confirm whether the town may abate the violation and recover costs if the property is not brought into compliance.
The council emphasized that formal enforcement would follow the town’s ordinance process, and staff said citizens should provide documentation (photos, video, witness contact information) to build a case before citations are issued.
Ending: Staff said they will collect submitted evidence, check certified-mail receipts for prior notices, and place unresolved cases on the September agenda for possible action.
