Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council narrowly grants Green Bay resident—s appeal to keep four dogs
Summary
After public testimony and a humane officer—s explanation of management and nuisance concerns, the council voted 7—5 to grant Raven Wallene—s appeal of a denied excess-dog permit, allowing her to keep the animals while noting ongoing enforcement attention at the apartment complex.
The Green Bay City Council voted 7 to 5 on Dec. 16 to grant an appeal from resident Raven Wallene that reverses a humane officer—s denial of an excess-dog permit.
Wallene, who identified herself and the apartment unit where she lives, told the council she had taken in the animals after a family death and that she had followed the complex—s emotional-support-animal rules. "I have followed every rule to the letter," Wallene said, asking alderpersons to consider the ages and bond of the animals before requiring rehoming.
Officer Mavis, a nationally certified humane officer with 18 years of city service, explained why she recommended denial: the Broadway Lofts and surrounding properties have had repeated animal-control complaints, including aggressive-dog incidents, loose animals and failure to secure management cooperation. She said prior management had approved a variance improperly and that the denials were rooted in the number of animals in a shared rental building rather than the behavior of Wallene—s pets. "It has nothing to do with the animal's behavior... Unfortunately, it's just too many animals for the dwelling unit," the officer said.
Several neighbors and a supporter who spoke at the podium described how the dogs are cared for and urged the council to allow Wallene to keep them, citing their age and the hardship of rehoming senior animals. Alders debated whether the issue is primarily a landlord-management problem and whether the council should use discretion in individual cases. Alder Johnson, who moved to grant the appeal, framed it as an instance where council discretion can address a human circumstance even while acknowledging broader building-management issues.
Council then requested a board vote after debate; the motion to grant the appeal passed 7—5. The council also discussed use of chronic-nuisance abatement tools against property management and emphasized enforcement where necessary. No changes to the city—s animal-limit ordinance were made at the meeting.
