Temple City council introduces ordinance to adopt county rules for potentially dangerous and vicious dogs

Temple City’s City Council voted July 7 to introduce for first reading Ordinance No. 26-1089, which would revise the city municipal code to adopt, by reference, Los Angeles County Title 10 provisions governing animal control, including Chapter 10.37 on potentially dangerous and vicious dogs, and to clarify administrative citation authority. The council set a public hearing on the ordinance for July 21.

City staff told the council the change fills a gap in local code and aligns Temple City with neighboring jurisdictions and the county. "What this does now is codify that," said Scott, a city staff presenter, explaining the proposed adoption by reference and the administrative hearing process. Staff said the proposal preserves due process by allowing administrative hearings before a neutral third-party hearing officer and Superior Court appeals.

Under the county provisions staff described, a dog may be deemed "potentially dangerous" if it unprovoked bites a person, causes a person to take defensive action to avoid injury, or attacks a domestic animal under certain conditions. A "vicious" finding can follow severe injury or death, repeated dangerous behavior, or owner noncompliance with hearing orders. Scott listed conditions a hearing officer may impose if a dog is found dangerous or vicious: fencing and construction requirements, warning signs, insurance, leashing and muzzling requirements, mandatory training and other mitigations. He said euthanasia remains a statutory option but is used only when the animal cannot be rendered safe by conditions.

The ordinance was introduced for first reading by council motion and second, and the council recorded a roll-call vote to introduce the measure by title only. The clerk read the ordinance title into the record. The council did not adopt final passage; the July 21 public hearing will be the next formal step.

Votes at a glance

- Consent calendar: approved in a single motion (unanimous roll-call approval) during the meeting. - Ordinance No. 26-1089: introduced for first reading and a public hearing set for July 21 (unanimous roll-call vote to introduce by title).

What happens next

Staff recommended the public hearing on July 21 as the next step; at that hearing the council may receive public comment and consider final adoption. Appeals from an administrative hearing would proceed to the Superior Court, not to city council.

Sources and context

The staff presentation said the city has been following county procedures in practice where the local code lacked clarity and that adopting the county code by reference provides a consistent legal framework across contract and full-service cities in the region.