Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission asks staff to refine options for animal‑control enforcement after rising caseloads
Summary
After a rise in animal‑control citations and time‑consuming prosecutions, county counsel and public health staff presented seven options — including code changes, returning to state ORS enforcement, administrative hearings, and outside counsel — and commissioners asked staff to refine recommendations and bring them back for decision.
County counsel on Wednesday told the Crook County Commission that the county has prosecuted a growing number of animal‑control citations and is evaluating seven options to make enforcement more efficient and proportionate.
Counsel said most citations concern dogs wandering at large, trespass and harm to domestic animals rather than barking complaints, and that prosecutions have consumed substantial staff and deputy time — even though the county has prevailed in several cases. The maximum fine available under the county ordinance was discussed and compared with state ORS options. Public health staff reported a substantial increase in dog‑bite responses handled as communicable‑disease investigations, which also consumes staff time with no revenue offset.
Options discussed included: (1) retaining the current ordinance but tightening language to focus on harm or trespass rather than mere wandering at large; (2) reverting to state ORS enforcement procedures (citation/citation trial processes that resemble traffic citations); (3) engaging outside legal counsel for prosecution (with uncertain ability to recoup fees); (4) creating an administrative hearings process with hearing officers to reduce circuit‑court reliance; and (5) adopting a strikes/point system for low‑harm violations such as a barking dog or an initial wandering offense.
Commissioners expressed differing views on scope — several favored keeping wandering at large as an offense because of public‑safety risks while others argued judges are reluctant to impose penalties for low‑harm cases and that the county should narrow offenses and use a less resource‑intensive administrative process. The commission directed staff to send the seven options to County Counsel Mitch for review, to solicit input from enforcement personnel, and to return refined recommendations and draft code language for future agendas.
