Resident asks council to review legality of city's pet-licensing ordinance, cites Indiana code

Nathan Randolph told the council he believes the city's pet-licensing program lacks legal authority under Indiana law and urged the council to review the ordinance.

Randolph cited Indiana Code 6-9-39 and argued that, after the state abolished a statewide dog tax in 2006, a county must adopt a county-option dog tax before a municipality may lawfully adopt a licensing system. "It literally states that you have to have the county option dog tax to implement it," he said, and told the council his public-records request returned no responsive records showing the county had done so.

"I'm not saying it's not a bad thing to have a dog tax or a licensing fee," Randolph added, "I'm just asking for you guys to follow the laws like you guys are enforcing upon us."

Council members acknowledged the presentation and said the city attorney, Mr. Harvey, would examine the legal question and report back; the council did not take immediate action during the meeting.

Why it matters: Randolph's argument, if upheld, could require the city to change how it assesses or collects pet-licensing fees or to seek county-level action or clarify the ordinance's legal basis.

What happens next: The council asked the city attorney to look into the claim and provide guidance; no ordinance change or vote occurred during the meeting.

Provenance: resident testimony citing Indiana Code 6-9-39 and the city attorney's prior explanations.