Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Yamhill County begins overhaul of dog-control code, targets fee review and clearer kennel rules
Summary
At a Dec. 19 work session, county staff walked commissioners through proposed amendments to align the dog-control ordinance with state law, add enforcement options and modernize licensing (including multi-year discounts); board directed staff to refine definitions and bring updates back for a January follow-up and a possible emergency adoption by Feb. 1.
Get email alerts on the Animal Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County staff presented a package of updates to Yamhill County's dog-control ordinance at a Dec. 19 work session, saying the code dated from about 2005 and needs to be aligned with state law and current court practices.
The overview came from staff member Jody, who told commissioners the revisions would "line our code up with what's in statute," move violation classifications into a structure the courts can use, restore several impoundment and enforcement grounds (for example, bites and unlawful tethering) and add options for multi-year licenses at discounted rates. Jody also said the county removed language about a dog-control advisory committee that is no longer active.
Sheriff Sam Elliott told the board he supported the update and said changes aim to increase licensing compliance and make it easier to reunite dogs with owners. "The entire goal is to ensure compliance," Elliott said, adding that more robust licensing and reminders have already produced higher renewal rates in recent months. The sheriff suggested removing references to cats from the dog-control code because the county's program focuses on dogs.
Commissioners discussed the fee schedule, a planned amnesty period being run with contracted partner Homeward Bound (no late fees through Feb. 1) and whether to implement any fee increases before that date. Commissioners asked staff to add language requiring an annual board review of the fee schedule so the board can revisit rates during budget discussions rather than leaving increases unaddressed for long periods.
Board members also probed definitions in the draft ordinance, asking whether grooming-only businesses should be regulated as commercial kennels. Jody said a commercial-kennel definition currently references boarding, grooming and training for profit; staff proposed clarifying commercial vs. noncommercial kennels and adding a separate category for nonprofit rescues so grooming shops that do not house animals overnight would not be captured.
Next steps: staff will update the draft to remove cat references, refine kennel and rescue definitions, add language for annual review of the fee schedule and return the ordinance for further consideration. Commissioners discussed the possibility of adopting the changes as an emergency so they would take effect by Feb. 1 (the end of the amnesty period), but staff said the standard two-reading ordinance process remains an option if the board prefers more deliberation.
The work-session discussion produced no formal vote; staff committed to deliver a revised draft for the board's review in early January.

