ORDINANCE NO. __ Bill No. 2050
A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A NEW ARTICLE 16,
CHAPTER 22, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, RELATING TO EXCESSIVELY
BARKING DOGS
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI, STATE OF
HAWAII:
SECTION 1. Chapter 22, Kauai County Code 1987, is hereby amended
by adding a new Article 16 as follows:
"ARTICLE 16. EXCESSIVELY BARKING DOG ORDINANCE
Section 22-16.1
Section 22-16.2
Section 22-16.3
Section 22-16.4
Section 22-16.5
Section 22-16.6
Section 22-16.7
Section 22-16.8
Section 22-16.9
Section 22-16.10
Section 22-16.11
Purpose
Definitions
Excessively Barking Dog-Prohibited
General Requirements
Complaint forms for private citizens
Summons or Citation
Failure to Obey Summons or Citation
Issuance of Complaint
Violation - Penalty
Rules
Severability
Section-22-16.1 Purpose
The purpose of this article is to prohibit the excessive barking of dogs and
establish an owner's responsibility for the keeping of dogs in a manner which will
not endanger or unreasonably interfere with the public health, welfare, safety,
peace, or comfortable enjoyment of life and property.
Section 22-16.2 Definitions.
When used in this article the following words or phrases shall have the
meaning given in this section unless it shall be apparent from the context that a
different meaning is intended:
"County animal control service" means the animal control services provider
contracted by the county to keep stray or unlicensed dogs.
"Excessively barking dog" means a dog which barks, whines, howls, cries or
makes any other unreasonable noise continuously and/or incessantly for a period
of 10 minutes, or intermittently for 30 minutes or more, to the disturbance of any
person at any time of day or night and regardless of whether the dog is physically
situated in or upon private property.
"Enclosure" means any kennel, fenced yard, cage, or other structure used
to care for, breed, house, or keep dogs.
"Owner" means any person owning, harboring or keeping a dog; provided
that if the owner is a minor under the age of 18 yrs. of age, the parents, guardian
or other person having the care, custody or control of the minor shall be
rebuttably presumed to be the owner. The person to whom a license was issued
pursuant to HRS Section 143-2 shall rebuttably be presumed to be the owner of
the dog for purposes of this section.
"Person" means and includes corporations, estates, associations,
partnerships and trusts, as well as one or more individual human beings.
Section 22-16.4 General Requirements
Section 22-16.3 Excessively Barking Dog - Prohibited
It is unlawful to be the owner of an excessively barking dog as defined in
Section 22-16.2; unless it is determined that the dog's excessive barking was/is
due to a person who is trespassing or threatening to trespass upon the owner's
private property, or there is legitimate cause to believe the dog was being teased
or provoked.
tt,Fq
(a) This article shall apply only to dogs in the Residential District as depicted on
the official zoning maps for the County of Kauai.
(b) Enclosures for dogs shall conform to all applicable State and County
requirements for structures and other applicable sanitation requirements.
Section 22-16.5 Complaint forms for private citizens
The county animal control service, in consultation with the Kauai police
department, shall develop a sworn affidavit complaint form with respect to
excessively barking dogs. The form may be obtained by private citizens from
the county animal control service or the Kauai police department.
Section 22-16.6 Summons or Citation
(a) Any authorized police officer, or any officer of the county animal control
service who has been deputized by the chief of police as a special officer for
the purpose of enforcing the provisions of this article, may issue a summons
or citation to an alleged violator of the provisions of this article after having
witnessed a violation of this ordinance and/or after having received two (2)
sworn affidavits of complaint signed by two (2) unrelated neighbors
living in separate dwellings in the close vicinity of the alleged violation.
The affidavit shall specify the address or location of the alleged violation, the
nature, time and date(s) of the act, the name and address of the owner or
custodian, if known, and a description of the dog, if known.
(b) Procedures with respect to the design, form, content, numbering and
disposition of copies of said summons or citation may be in all respects
the same as those specified in Section 22-2.8 relating to summons or
citation in connection with stray dogs or Section 22-14.2 relating to noise
control.
Section 22-16.7 Failure to Obey Summons or Citation
It is unlawful for any person to fail to appear at the place and within the time
specified in the summons issued to such person by an officer for any violation,
regardless of the disposition of the charge for which such person was originally
cited.
Section 22-16.8 Issuance of Complaint
In the event any person fails to comply with a summons given such person
as required and within the time permitted, the violations bureau shall forthwith
have a complaint entered against such person and secure the issuance of a
warrant for such person's arrest.
Section 22-16.9 Violation· Penalty
(a) If there have been no other complainUaffidavits filed against this owner
for excessively barking dog(s) in the past two years, the enforcing officer
may, in the officer's discretion, issue a warning letter rather than a citation.
(b) Any owner who keeps or permits a dog to remain on the owner's premises
in violation of this article shall be deemed to commit an offense under this
article.
(c) If the enforcing officer chooses to issue a citation, meaning the owner
must appear in court on a specified date, fines for conviction for offenses
under the same provision within a two-year period shall be imposed without
the possibility of suspension as follows:
1. First Offense: $50
2. Second Offense: $200
3. Third Offense: $200-500
In hardship cases, in lieu of a fine, the court may order 25 hours of community
service for a first offense, 50 hours for a second offense, and 100 hours for a
third offense.
As part of the sentence for any offense, the court also may order the owner to
attend a training program conducted or designated by the county animal
control service or train a dog in a manner recommended by the county animal
control service to stop the excessively barking dog which caused the offense.
The cost of attending any training program shall be paid for by the owner.
(d) For the purpose of this section:
(1) "Provision" means a means a prohibition or requirement under Section
22-16.3.
(2) An offense shall be deemed to have occurred on the date of the
summons or citation identifying the offense; and
(3) A person who commits an offense within two years of the occurrence
of a previous offense involving the same provision shall be subject to the
escalating penalty of subsection (c), even if the dog(s) involved
in the offenses differed.
Section 22-16.10 Rules.
The Police Department may adopt rules pursuant to chapter 91, HRS
necessary for the purposes of this article.
Section 22-16.11 Severability.
If any provision of this article is held for any reason invalid by a court of
competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
provisions of this article.
SECTION 2. This ordinance shall take effect on _
GARY1. HOOSER
(By Request)
DATE OF INTRODUCTION:
August 22, 2002
Lihue, Kauai, Hawaii
CERTIFICATE OF THE COUNTY CLERK
I hereby certify that heretofore attached is a true and correct copy of Bill
No. 2050, which was passed on first reading and ordered to print by the Council of the
County of Kauai at its meeting held on August 22, 2002, by the following vote:
FOR PASSAGE: Asing, Baptiste, Hooser, Kaneshiro, Tokioka,
Valenciano, Kouchi
AGAINST PASSAGE: None
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None
TOTAL -7,
TOTAL-O,
TOTAL-O.
Lihue, Hawaii
August 23, 2002 ~-A.V\~
Peter A. Nakamura
County Clerk, County of Kauai
/7,_ o
MID-MONTH MEETING
AUGUST 22, 2002
The Mid-Month Meeting of the Council of the County of Kauai was called to
order by the Council Chair at the Council Chambers, Historic County
Building, 4396 Rice Street, Room 201, Lihue, Kauai, on Thursday,
August 22,2002, at 1:05 p.m., after which the following members answered
the call of the roll:
Honorable Bill "Kaipo" Asing
Honorable Bryan J. Baptiste
Honorable Gary L. Hooser
Honorable Daryl W. Kaneshiro
Honorable James Kunane Tokioka
Honorable Randal Valenciano, Vice Chair
Honorable Ron Kouchi, Council Chair
Mr. Asing moved for approval of the Agenda, seconded by Mr.· Tokioka, and
unanimously carried.
MINU1ES of the following meetings of the Council:
Regular Meeting of July II, 2002
Mid-Month Meeting of July 25, 2002
Public Hearing of July II, 2002, re: Resolution No. 2002-27
Public Hearing of July 25, 2002, re: Resolution No. 2002-30
Resolution No. 2002-31
Resolution No. 2002-33
Bill No. 2042
Bill No. 2046
Executive Meeting of August 8, 2002
Public Hearing of August 8, 2002, re: Bill No. 2048
Mr. Asing moved for approval of the minutes as circulated, seconded by
Mr. Tokioka and unanimously carried.
COMMUNICATIONS:
C 2002-278 Communication (08/08/2002) from the Deputy County
Engineer, transmitting for Council approval, a resolution requesting Council
authorization to apply for an additional $624,600 from the State Water
Pollution Control Revolving Fund Loan for the Waimea WWTP Backup Injection
Well: Mr. Tokioka moved to receive C 2002-278 for the record, seconded by
Mr. Asing and unanimously carried.
C 2002-279 Communication (08/05/2002) from the Director of Finance,
transmitting for Council review and approval, an ordinance amending Chapter
16, Article 12 of the Kauai County Code 1987, Relating to Parking for Disabled
Persons; Mr. Tokioka moved to receive C 2002-279 for the record, seconded by
Mr. Asing and unanimously carried.
C 2002-280 Communication (07/24/2002) from the Mayor, transmitting
for Council approval, two (2) draft bills relating to excessive barking dogs and
dangerous dogs: Mr. Tokioka moved to receive C 2002-280 for the record,
seconded by Mr. Asing and unanimously carried.
COUNCIL MEETING 39 August 22, 2002
The motion as amended was then put and carried by the following vote:
FOR PASSAGE: Asing, Baptiste, Hooser, Kaneshiro,
Tokioka, Valenciano, Kouchi
AGAINST PASSAGE: None
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None
TOTAL-7,
TOTAL- 0,
TOTAL- O.
Chair Kouchi: On Bills Nos. 2050 and 2051, which are going to be
relating to barking dogs and dangerous dogs, the public hearing is going to be
scheduled for the evening at the Convention Hall. So, just when we have the
motion on each one (1) of those items Mr. Clerk that it be clear that the public
hearing is set for 7:00 p.m.
Proposed Draft Bill No. 2050 - A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO
ESTABLISH A NEW ARrICLE 16, CHAPTER 22, KAUAI COUNIY CODE 1987,
RELATING TO EXCESSIVELY BARKING DOGS: Mr. Baptiste moved for
passage of the bill on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a public
hearing thereon be scheduled for September 12, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. or soon
thereafter at the Kauai War Memorial Convention Hall, Kauai Ballroom, and
that it thereafter be referred to the Energy & Public Safety Committee,
seconded by Mr. Hooser.
Chair Kouchi: And that hearing will be on September 12th at 7:00
p.m. at the Convention Hall. Discussion?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Mr. Stauber: About Bill No. 2050, the last page number three (3),
there says about some fines. The first offense $50.00, second (inaudible), third
offense $200 to $500, then comes up hardship cases, 25 hours of community
service. Please consider the minimum wage, I mean 25 hours multiply
minimum wage in the first offense, does the number match? So, this is that
what come up on that page.
In page number 2, Section 22, 16.4, general requirements, says here,
this article shall apply only to dogs in residential districts. What we do in this
non-residential districts? Do we let the dogs bark till they drop dead? This is
the question. It's open. Page number, the first page down there in the
definitions, excessively barking dog means a dog, if it could bring in the word
canine would be nice, because maybe somebody defines it...
Chair Kouchi: Doesn't understand what a dog is?
Mr. Stauber: No, defines me as a dog here on that chair. You go for
it, I'm going to go and tell you. Ron, I'm sorry. Barking dogs sitting here in
this chair. Thank you.
Chair Kouchi: It's only something you said (inaudible).
Mr. Stauber: So use the term canine so you don't fall in this trap.
Thanks. But I think we all will (inaudible) this public hearing if you cannot
make it. This needs a little bit more thought but in general, it seems to be a
good thing. But we have to work on the fine printing side there.
Chair Kouchi: Thank you. Any questions for Richard? If not, Bruce.
Mr. Pleas: Bruce Pleas for the record. Under owner, the person
to whom a license was issued shall rebuttedly be presumably to be, presumed
to be the owner of the dog for purposes of this section. What about unlicensed
dog? Is this going to be like unlicensed grading? Is it going to fall into that
COUNCIL MEETING 40 August 22, 2002
thing, where if you don't have your dog licensed, this won't take effect? So you
may want to look into that.
Mr. VaIenciano: You got to look at the first portion of that. It's
misleading what you are saying, looking at the second portion.
Mr. Pleas: Okay. I'll read it then. Owner means any person
owning, harboring, or keeping a dog providing that if the owner is a minor
under the age of 18 years of age, the parent, guardian, or other persons having
the care, custody or control of the minor shall be rebuttedly be presumed to be
the owner. Okay, so that will cover all of it. In legal opinion.
Mr. Valenciano: The first part covers the unlicensed.
Mr. Pleas: Okay. I mean, I'm just putting these out because I
probably won't be at the public hearing.
Section 22-16.4, general requirements. Section a, this article shall apply
only to dogs in the residential district as depicted on the official zoning maps
for the County of KauaL My thing is why only residential districts?
Commercial areas with guard dogs that bark all night that are next to housing
and ag subdivisions that are actually residential subdivisions. Would these ag
subdivisions be exempt? So we have to look into that.
Section b, I mean Section 22-16.4, Section b. Enclosures for dogs shall
conform to all applicable state, and county requirements for structures and
other applicable sanitation requirements. Fenced yards? So my yard is going
to have to go to the state and county requirements and applicable sanitation
requirements? We go pick it up every day because we don't want to walk in it,
but you're getting kind of real specific here for fenced yards are different from a
kennel. This maybe should be for a kennel area.
And on that that's all on that one (1). And thank you for introducing this
because I've had plenty of times where dogs have barked in my neighborhood
forever, and I call the police and nothing gets done. It'll be nice to at least keep
them semi-quiet. Thank you.
Chair Kouchi: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak?
The meeting was called back order and proceeded as follows:
Chair Kouchi: Motion was to approve on first reading, and I'd note
that on both Bill 2050 and Bill 2051, Dr. Becky Rhodes was here earlier, and
we informed her that this was for first reading and comments would be more
appropriate at the public hearing, so we told her we'll see her on the 12th of
September, but it was a committee created by the Humane Society that put the
work into the draft legislation, and so if anyone has some comments that they'd
like to get before the hearing on the 12th , perhaps Dr. Rhodes at the Humane
Society is another resource person, as she would have the background as to
how they came to the language that is contained in the bill.
The motion was then put and carried by the following vote:
FOR PASSAGE: Asing, Baptiste, Hooser, Kaneshiro,
Tokioka, Valenciano, Kouchi
AGAINST PASSAGE: None
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None
TOTAL- 7,
TOTAL - 0,
TOTAL- O.
PUBLIC HEARING
SEPTEMBER 12, 2002
A public hearing of the Council of the County of Kauai was called to order by
Gary L. Hooser, Chair, Energy & Public Safety Committee, on Thursday,
September 12, 2002, at 7:05 p.m. at the Council Chambers, Historic County
Building, ·4396 Rice Street, Lihue, Kauai, and the presence of the following
was noted:
Honorable Ron Kouchi, Council Chair (present at 7:35 p.m.)
Honorable Bill Kaipo Asing
Honorable Bryan J. Baptiste
Honorable Gary L. Hooser
Honorable Daryl W. Kaneshiro
Honorable James Kunane Tokioka
Honorable Randal Valenciano
The Clerk read the notice of the public hearing on the following:
1. BILL NO. 2050 - AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A NEW
ARTICLE 16, CHAPTER 22, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, RELATING
TO EXCESSIVELY BARKING DOGS,
2. BILL NO. 2051 - AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A NEW
ARTICLE 17, CHAPTER 22, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, RELATING
TO DANGEROUS DOGS,
which were passed on first reading and ordered to print by the Council of the
County of Kauai on August 22, 2002, and published in The Garden Island
newspaper on August 30, 2002.
The following communications were received for the record:
1. Rebecca H. Rhoades, D.V.M., Executive Director, Kauai Humane
Society, dated 9/11/02.
2. Anne Barnes, Member of the Board, Kauai Humane Society, dated
9/12/02.
3. Laurie Bolton, dated 8/20/02.
4. Judy Brennan, dated 9/12/02.
5. Joyce Coit, Sharon Snyder, Chris Gillespie, and Nick Gillespie dated
9/4/02.
6. Diane Daniells, dated 9/12/02.
7. Nancy Bresnik Davis and Patrick Davis (undated).
8. Linda Greenhow, dated 9/10/02.
9. John Hunt, dated 4/29/1999
10. Barbara Jarvis (undated).
11. Jacqueline Jung, dated 9/3/02.
12. Georgia Mossman, dated 9/9/02.
13. Craig Nishimoto, D.V.M., dated 9/11/02.
14. Blake & Sandy Salmers, dated 8/18/02.
15. Helen Savadge, dated 9/12/02.
16. Naomi Yamane and Dayle Kurokawa, dated 9/12/02.
17. Suzanne W. Vance, DOM, dated 8/30/02 (re: dangerous dog ordinance).
18. Suzanne W. Vance, DOM, dated 8/30/02 (re: excessive barking dogs).
19. Suzanne W. Vance cassette recording transcription dated 9/12/02.
20. Laura Wiley, dated 9/11/02.
21. Form letters dated 9/12/02 (Tisha N. Aguano, Richard B. Cuatto, Scott
Cuatto, Michelle Cuatto, Tricia Deforge, Craig s. Carney, Debra
Carney, Ryan E. Jimenez, James W. Lull, Elaine Schaefer,
Theresia A. Wilmes, and 3 unreadable)
1
22. Petition Requesting a Dangerous Dog Ordinance for Kauai
23. Dr. Becky Rhoades information on Liko Task Force Members dated
9/13/02.
The hearing proceeded as follows:
Mr. Hooser: Before we start our public testimony, I just want to point out to
the audience that we'll be addressing both ordinances together. So if you have
comments on the barking dog side or the dangerous dog side, feel free to discuss
both of them. There will be numerous opportunities to comment on this in the
future. The next time will be on October 3rd, which will be the next committee
meeting that this issue will be heard at 4:30 in the afternoon. This is a public
hearing. We're here as a Council committee to listen to what you have to say, so
we're not here to debate or really discuss. We want to hear your testimony. There
are copies of the ordinances around. I would encourage everyone to look at them. If
you have specific testimony on specific parts of the ordinance, that is helpful to us.
We're here to listen. The format will be our standard public hearing format. Every
speaker and all speakers will be treated equally with 3 minutes. At the end of that
time period, when everybody has had the opportunity for 3 minutes, if you so desire,
you'll have another opportunity of 3 minutes. Then once we go through that round,
if you still want to talk more, there will be another opportunity to speak also.
Again, on October 3rd there will be an opportunity for public input, then there'll be
at least one other opportunity after that, probably two weeks after that. I do ask for
everyone to be respectful of each other and try to keep your testimony focused on
the ordinances before us. The timer will give you the one-minute warning, and then
there'll be a 3 minute. It's helpful when you hear the three minute if you can close
up, otherwise I'll have to interrupt you. There's a lot of people here and we want to
give everybody the opportunity to give public testimony. Thank you very much. If
you have questions about the bills, specific questions, you can state those questions
and staff will be taking down those questions. We'll be compiling answers and
presenting those answers on October 3rd .
The hearing proceeded as follows:
DR. REBECCA RHOADES: Good evening all. Thank you very much for
the opportunity to testify in support of both of these bills. Let me tell you a little bit
about how these came about to be introduced. A little over a year ago, as you know,
there was a horse killed up on the North Shore by some loose dogs. This was very
alarming to me. Being fairly new to the community, but been in the business for a
long time, alarming that we had some dogs in the community that would actually
attack a horse with a rider on board. Those are some dangerous dogs. Dogs will not
normally go after livestock. They can in a pack situation, but it's very rare for them
to go after a horse with a rider aboard. So when I first heard about this, I was a bit
alarmed. Then a group of citizens approached me about looking at dog-related
issues on the island. We found that we didn't have a dangerous dog ordinance in
the County. We're the only county in the State that doesn't, and we feel that it's
very important that when we identify a dog that is dangerous, that we're able to
take some type of action to protect the public and other animals.
We've been addressing animal-related problems in Humane Society, animal
welfare agencies, for a long time. I've been in the business over 20 years. Any time
that you try and address an animal-related problem, you get passion and
polarization of the people involved in the issue. It's important for us in trying to,
resolve these community issues to look at the community as a whole and not just
individuals. You have the guy that owns the dog, and you have the guy that lives
next door to the dog. Whether the dog is a barker, whether the dog is a biter, you
have to look at the whole community and what our community represents.
This group of people that we got together last summer to look at dog issues
really studied Kauai. One of the first things we did was contract for a professional,
2
independent survey to try and get the facts of what is going on on Kauai. For years
I heard that the average number of dogs per household on Kauai was 27. The
reality is, two out of five households have a dog; one dog at least. The average
number of dogs per household is two. Only one point five percent (1.5%) of our
households have more than 10 dogs. Only seven percent (7%) of our community
uses dogs to hunt. Sixty percent (60%) of our community don't have any problems
with dogs. The top problems are property damage, waste, barking, and fighting
with other animals. We need to address those.
The barking dog law is a very fair law. It's one that will be approached with
education first, which usually resolves the problem. On Oahu it resolved over 70%
of the cases. People want to be good neighbors. They want to resolve their
problems. Dangerous dogs are needing to be controlled and managed if we identify
that we have a dangerous dog. That doesn't mean the dog is going to be put down.
There's some fear about this. It just means that we have to take action. Thank you
very much for allowing me to testify.
LARRY SAITO: Good evening, Councilmembers. I have lived here all my
life. I represent myself, and also the silent majority who are against the barking
dog ordinance. Here on Kauai, we live in the melting pot culture and have
identified each other's ethnic upbringing, which enable us as the people, to tolerate
and understand each other. This is what Hawaii is all about. I'm opposed to the
barking dog ordinance because as a responsible dog owner, I feel that the dogs are
not the only animal that make noise. Chickens crow at night or when the sun rises
when there's a quarter moon from 12 midnight. Peacocks make noise during a full
moon. Last but not least, cows call their calves. All of the above is Kauai, and this
is what the country living is all about. At present we have a leash law. At any
given day there are dogs running on our beaches and no one enforces it. So why are
we introducing a new bill? I knew that the barking dog law would show up sooner
or later when Oahu passed its barking dog law, and that the Humane Society here
would push for it. The Humane Society gets $500,000 every year from our
taxpayers, not to mention other donation and fees from other services rendered.
The people of Kauai's tax dollar is already supporting the Humane Society. Now
the Humane Society is pushing this barking dog law. If I am correct, the Humane
Society charges an adoption fee of $75 per dog. Who can afford that? If that
perfectly healthy animal can't be placed in a home, guess what, it's put to sleep. Is
that humane? The next is, why are the residents of Kauai required to purchase a
dog license? I can see that at one time when the dogs were able to run at-large and
on public property and a dog tag would identify them and their owners. But when
the leash law came, our dogs were kept on our property. So why are we taking
money from the people and when are you going to revise the dog license
requirement? In a letter to the editor, Georgia Mossman is suggesting we award
the Humane Society the citing power for the barking dog law. I'm opposed to this.
If this law can't be handled by local government officials because it's an additional
burden, we shouldn't be here tonight.
There are more serious problems on our island than barking dogs. We have
at present a very serious drug problem that is growing and increasing. However, I
don't see anyone making suggestions to address or correct it. To end my testimony,
to you who support this dog barking ordinance, before you buy a home, check what
your neighbors are raising, what the land is zoned for, and by all means, if your
neighbor's dog is barking, maybe it's your cat, your birds, etc. on your property that
is causing the dog to bark, or maybe it's you that's irritating this dog. Barking is a.
natural function for a dog when something or someone makes it bark. It doesn't
bark for nothing. I'll save the rest of my testimony for this ordinance.
SUZY VANCE: Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I'm originally
from a hunting community and I have friends who have as many as 40 dogs. I am a
resident here. One of my children was born here. I would just like to say that I live
next door to someone who has a lot of dogs. They don't just have hunting dogs, they
3
have rottweiler. There are neighbors around us who have lots of barking dogs. I
am woken up nightly, 2, 3 in the morning, 5 a.m. on a regular basis, not just to
howling, but to excessive barking. I did submit some written testimony to you
earlier, and also a tape that you have. I transcribed it so you can listen for yourself
to what I listen to. I'm a working woman, and it's very hard to sleep. I respect my
neighbors very much. I'm just a very nice person. I think that some solutions can
be offered for this. I've seen this in Wal-Mart. Perhaps there are other ways for
people to deal with this. I see a lot of dogs that do bark excessively are in cages.
They do get triggered by things, but it's just too excessive. In fact I decided that if
the noise were actually measured as compared to a person yelling, then the person
would require some kind of evaluation. It does deny us all a right to peace and
tranquility. Even myself being from a hunting community originally, I know that in
villages people don't like to live around that constantly. There's got to be some good
solutions here. I also think that this issue has become escalated to a critical mass
because there has been no ordinance in effect all these years. I also think that the
increased population here has accounted for just more tension in terms of the dogs
barking. I'd also think that a lot of people who aren't represented here tonight are
people who already have covenant restrictions in their neighborhood, so they don't
have any need to speak for this. Mayor Kusaka called me about my letter that I
wrote a couple weeks ago. There was consistent loud barking in the background
at 9 and 10 in the morning the entire time that I was talking to her on the phone,
and she acknowledged that as well. So I would just ask you to please help the dog
owners to get some peace and quiet for us. Thank you.
RICHARD STAUBER: You guys know me probably as the barking dog
Richard, or sometimes as dangerous Richard, or sometimes both. We are here for
the dangerous dogs and the barking dogs. The definitions on both of them, I would
like to have .. .it would be nice to see the definition if we talk about dogs, the term
canine in there, which I mentioned before in another Council Meeting. I don't want
to see this law applied to human beings. It's just been renamed as the barking
dogs. The other question is, in some of the dirty details, we restrict ourselves to
residential. What we going to go with the people who live in agricultural
subdivisions? Are they considered residential or let me drop the dogs down there to
let the marking? The other problem I see is on the enforcement part, which says an
authorized police officer or the Humane Society. Why does a police officer have to
be authorized to notice a barking dog if everybody else can recognize a barking dog?
Then we open the door again, which who's in charge? Who do I have to call? Is it
the police department if I have a barking dog, or do I have to call the Humane
Society? There should be clear definitions who to call in the cases. The part of the
dangerous dog, it would be nice if we can change it to dangerous animals, not only
dogs included. Let me close with that part, which some people of you know. It says,
how much is that doggy in the window? How much responsibility and how much
trouble is it really? It's our animals, and if we don't have the time to make the
entertainment for them, you may should consider not to have them in the first
place. This is my testimony. Thank you.
LAURA WILEY: Aloha ahiahi. Thank you for allowing me to testify in
support of both ofthese bills this evening. I'm the President ofthe Kauai Humane
Society. Many families on Kauai have a dog, and having a dog can be both very
rewarding and very challenging at the same time. The goal of the Kauai Humane
Society is to keep families and their dogs together, to enhance the rewarding times,
and to assist in the challenging times. As our population grows, we are forced to
live closer together. The excessive barking dog ordinance is a tool for dog owners,
and non-owners to live harmoniously in residentially zoned neighborhoods. As we
all know, the ordinance does not apply to agriculturally zoned areas. I really want
to emphasize, at the Kauai Humane Society, our intent is to not go on a citation
rampage. We can and we will help families who don't know how to control their
dog's excessive barking. We're great problem solvers at the Kauai Humane Society.
We have a lot of experience. By evaluating each case on a case-by-case basis, we
can help create many solutions that will not only increase harmony, but will also
4
~-----
protect the family's pet. Uncontrolled aggressive dogs are a serious threat to
themselves and to other people and pets. The dangerous dog ordinance allows
families to keep their aggressive dogs. The ordinance simply requires strict
management of that dog to prevent future attacks. I understand that many people
may be afraid of these proposed ordinances. I hope that these people may see the
ordinances as a tool to keep people and dogs together, not to keep them apart.
Thank you for your help and support.
BILLY DECOSTA: Good evening, County Council and the rest of you
Kauaians, you fellow people who come from the mainland and be here to live with
us, call yourselves Kauaians, welcome. I'd like to come off, I can be a powerful
speaker, so I don't want to sound too aggressive here tonight, but I have a lot of
issues to talk about. My first one, I'd like to repeat, the lovely gal here said this
doesn't apply to ag lots. Gentlemen look me in the eye and tell me, anyone of you
can afford for live on five acres in Kalihiwai? You tell me the average tax-paying
citizen can go buy one ag lot. We no can afford. Where we live is on that 10,000
square feet subdivision lot that you guys had create for us in Hanapepe or Kalaheo
or Kapaa. We raise our tomatoes in the backyard. We raise our three chickens, and
yeah, we raise our 7 or 10 hunting dogs. That's right, maybe only 7% of us hunt.
But you know when you go to one local party and you enjoy the pupus on the table,
you think we bought all that food from Kaneshiro Pig Farm? We had hunt for the
meat. It's a way oflife, gentlemen. We had play god with history. We had stop the
American Indian from hunting his buffalo for he go make flour and corn tortillas
and raise lima beans to live on. No stop us from our heritage. My great, great
grandfather came from Portugal in 1859 and he was hunting. My dogs bark, not
excessively. But if someone call up, Mr. Hooser, and complain about my dogs and
you send your representative out there to hear my dog barking, he pull up in my
driveway, my dogs going bark at one strange car. So from the time you get there,
you going turn your tape recorder on? Once my dogs had save my wife's house from
being robbed. She sleep during the day and someone in Kalaheo, you remember
that boy who had light the house on fire in Kalaheo last year? That Japanese boy or
whatever. He was in my neighborhood, and my dogs had bark, and he had run
through my yard. Now if my dogs no could bark with their collar, what would have
happened to my lovely wife sleeping in my house? Would you like to absorb the
responsibility, you told us to buy that collar? It's inhumane. That dog
shocking collar.
Now one more thing I like touch on - the Humane Society. You had spend 50
grand for save one dog on one boat, but you like me put by dog in the Humane
Society because he bark too much? What you going do with my dog? If Sambo is
barking a little bit too much and I cannot keep him because I cannot afford the fine,
because three times a week my neighbor down the street, who does not like me for
other reasons, keep calling up you guys. So I put my dog down the pound. Ma'm,
where you stay? Where Doc? I like address her personally. What you going do with
my dog?
Mr. Hooser: If you can address that to the Council.
Mr. DeCosta: No, I'm addressing her right now, Mr. Hooser. Are you
going to ... I'm asking her a question. As a concerned owner, I would like to know ...
Mr. Hooser: We're going to go to recess.
I'll call the meeting back to order. I appreciate if everybody addresses their
testimony to the Committee up here. We got lots of people, and we want to be
respectful of everyone. We have a long meeting to get through, and I certainly
respect every speaker that's coming up here. All I ask is the same respect in return
and for everybody else.
5
DEBORAH DUDA: Councilmembers and Chairman. I'd like to speak
just very briefly in favor of these two ordinances. I think it's very important. I
should add first, I'm a 22-year resident of Kauai and a dog owner, a dog lover. I feel
like we need to protect our residents here, that we all have a right to peace and
quiet, we have a right not be afraid that we're going to be bitten or that our children
will be bitten or attacked by a dog who's fierce. I think these laws are very fair.
There are warnings, there are possibilities for re-training, it's not talk about
immediately putting a dog to sleep. I think that we have domesticated animals, and
therefore we have a responsibility for them. If we make excessive noise in our
neighborhoods, we are legally responsible. If we commit an act of violence against
another human being, we are responsible. If we do commit an act that happens
with our cars, we're responsible for our cars as well. I think the least that can be
expected of us is to take responsibility for our animals. So I think these are fair
laws. I think they're not excessive, that great thought has been given to the people
who do have large groups of dogs for hunting, and that we can work this out
together that it works for everybody. So thank you verymuch for your time.
KURT SOUZA:
That's all.
Only what I like say is I oppose of the dog barking bill.
TERRY SOUZA: Good evening. I am a mother of 10 - 10 hunting dogs.
These are our babies, both my husband and I. Now when we are out and get home,
they greet us with a howl or a cry. They also have warned us of robbers in our
neighborhood. Our babies, which are my dogs, need to do what they are born to
do - bark a few times, just like a child who cries and sportsmen who yell and cheer
at games. Now to all you high-class people who have nothing else better to do than
to think of these silly rules and regulations and propose them to the County
Council, I personally oppose to this dog barking law. Thank you.
DENNIS FREITAS: I'm against this dog barking bill.
NIKKI LINGATON: I oppose to the dog barking law. I've lived on Kauai
my whole life, and I don't see any reason why our dogs cannot bark, like how
everyone else talks loud, like Terry said, yeah, people yell when they have games.
There's chickens crowing all the time. There's people driving past the houses with
loud music. I don't see why there's a reason that you guys think that dogs cannot
bark. Like Terry said, we are owners of 10 dogs, and they're our kids and we love
them very much. I do not see why the dogs need to bark ... not have to ...be able to
bark. Thank you.
JON FARIAS:
this dog barking law.
I'm a owner of 10 dogs. All I have to say is I oppose to
MELVIN AKI JR.: I don't usually speak that often, so... But anyway, you
say you want to stop the dogs from barking. Most of us have dogs for protection.
What good is a non-barking dog against a prowler, a murderer, or somebody just ... a
robber, etc. There are neighbors around my house with newborn babies that cry all
night. Are you guys going to put shocking collars on them? Okay, the Humane
Society, they do a lot of good for dogs and want people to adopt dogs. I recently
went over to adopt a dog. The only way I could get the dog was ifit was neutered or
spayed. Is that humane? I went back to see how the dog was. The dog was put to
sleep. I don't think that's a good idea. I just wanted to say I oppose the bill.
SHIRLEY PARRAGA: I oppose the barking law because we've lived here
all our lives and we haven't had no complaints of dogs barking. Now that mainland
come to live to Kauai, they have a lot of complaints about dogs barking. If you have
the right to speak, I guess the dogs have the right to bark. Thank you.
SUZANNE WOODRUFF: I'm an attorney that litigates on behalf of the
Animal Care Foundation. This is an organization that litigates for animal rights. I
6
would like to discuss the nuisance dog law, and furs going to fly here a little bit,
pardon the pun. Let's talk about animal control law in general. Gone are the days
when the courts just rubberstamp animal control law as part of the police powers.
Dog laws are now being subject to rigorous Constitutional scrutiny under the equal
protection clause of the Constitution.
Dog laws are upheld on one of two grounds. First of all, dealing with public
safety arid health. Obviously the dangerous dog law more than applies. Other
things that have been upheld on this ground include pooper-scooper laws. The
other things are laws that protect animals. This has even included leash laws,
which have been upheld. Now this particular law is of no benefit to dogs, in fact it
results in inhumane results. Some people use shock collars, or even more
horrifying, some people use surgical removal of the larynx. Now the Humane
Society has attempted to boot strap the logic of animal protection by claiming this is
going to protect dogs from poisoners. First of all, the criminal law already
addresses this thoroughly. Second of all, Becky Rhoades seems to think that this
island is populated by numerous beings who wish to go around harming animals.
That is simply not the case. There are a few nuts, that's all.
I'd like to move on to some of the glaring problems with this specific law.
Perhaps one of the most glaring is that most of these types of regulations call for
two neighborhood complaints. This particular one calls for one. I'll move along
then to some ofthe problems of the legislation, perhaps address them later. I would
suggest that if Humane Society wishes to live up to its name, there are better uses
for their resources. I would like to indicate, if this unjust law should continue, free
legal services might very well be available to victims of this law. We will go to court
and find out how enforceable this is. I will close with the words of the late
Mahatma Gandhi. The measure of a society and its moral worth is determined by
its treatment of animals.
COW BOY MALINA: I'm here to oppose the barking law, just because
that people complain about dogs barking in the neighborhood. I live right up the
street from the police department. I get guard dogs and I have cattle dogs right
now. I gave up my culture of hunting right now, but my gathering rights, I don't
keep too much hunting dogs around. I have guard dogs and cattle dogs. My dogs in
my neighborhood, all the neighbors around, they love my dogs. They bark at night,
but it's either the neighbor's cat walking past the doghouse or people walking too
close to my yard. I hate to see guys get this law passed and stuff, and I going get
penalized for my dogs barking, well other people guys' animals is making my dog
bark, or people passing my house making them bark for nothing. But they don't
bark for nothing, I should say. They always bark for one reason, my dogs. While I
have them out in the ranch working, they bark at the cows. I know where the cows
at, what they're doing. When people jog past my house and they come on the yard,
the dogs bark. But my guard dogs, they're not aggressive like some people think.
They go out there and bite you if you're close to the pen, but if you're out on private
road, they won't attack you, they won't grab you. If I'm there, if I'm home, now, I
can tell them stop, they'll stop there. But if you go into the yard and you get bit
there, that's why I have one sign. Private property. No trespassing. Beware of
biting dogs. That is all because of people trying to sue each other, and these two
things get bringing up seems like it's what you guys hitting. I was brought up in
Waimea, all the way to Lihue. Like I said, my neighborhood, my neighbors, my
next door neighbor, she really like my dogs. So she said, you know what, I'm alone,
my husband died. When people come up the drive, my dogs bark at her house and
she said, I know people around, just by the bark of the dog. But excessive barking
like you guys say, sometimes the dog barks 10-15 minutes. I'm not home to check
them, but that's because my neighbor car right in front of the dog cage harassing
something out of them and they just going off.
So I just trying to put that across so you guys know what's going on around
here. In the Valley, when I used to live in Waimea Valley, we had 30 dogs at one
7
time. All mostly hunting dogs, but they don't bark for nothing. They all there. I
think Kouchi would know that too because he came from up there. Our dogs hardly
even bark. The whole neighborhood, you could tell whose dogs was barking by the
sound. I just trying to stand up here for let you guys know what's happening and
stuff. One of my friends, my good friend in Nawiliwili, his neighbor get parrots.
The parrots make noise from the morning till the dark, he no can sleep. I don't hear
nobody complain about the parrot making noise. That whole valley up there stay
complain 'about the parrot, but nobody do nothing about the parrot. So I cannot see
why these guys kind of hit only on the dogs right now. I really oppose that thing
there, and if you guys need something or other people for tell you guys that, you can
come up my house and check my dogs, you guys like. But this thing about taping
dogs and stuff, like he said, if the dogs don't know you when you come up the drive,
they probably going off. They might bark until somebody come out there and
answer them or tell them quiet. But if nobody's home, that dog going bark for 20
minutes, 30 minutes, 40 minutes. You know what I mean? So how can you guys
say one excessive bark is 10 minutes, when the dog barking for one reason? He not
just barking to bark. I don't get dogs barking to bark. People that get (inaudible)
dogs should train their dogs, but my dogs don't bark to bark. I just don't want to be
penalized or have people that have dogs to protect themselves get penalized by the
barking leash law or whatever you guys getting out there right now.
JAMES SILVA: As far as the barking dogs, I oppose that. But I like to say
something about the first speaker said about that dogs attacking the horse. If I not
mistaken, they never did find the person or persons responsible for that, so how can
she label one hunter right off the bat? They shouldn't open their mouth, her or
anybody else, that saying that one hunter did that, before they get their facts
straight or they can prove it. Thanks.
BEN BREGMAN: I'm a hunter and a dog owner. I'm in favor of this bill
because I feel as a dog owner, it is my responsibility to make sure that I am a good
neighbor and that my dogs are not a nuisance to my neighbor and create any
animosity. This bill has many, many clauses in there that go a long way to making
sure that an owner is given plenty of notice to correct the problem. I know the
Kauai Humane Society has methods in which to help the owner train the dog so
that these dogs can become good neighbors as well as good companions. Thank you
very much.
DAWNE MORNINGSTAR: I recently moved to the island. I've only been
here less than a year. I'm not a hunter, but my husband is. I am a dog owner, and I
agree with the speaker. We need to be responsible for our dogs. The bill, the
ordinance, isn't about stopping the dogs from barking all together, it's from the
excessive barking, the barking all night, the barking that keeps you awake. I work
at the Humane Society. I take these calls every day. These people are calling, I
hear the dogs barking, barking, barking in the background. It's excessive barking.
It's not just the dog barking at someone running through your yard for 10 minutes,
or running through and your dog is barking. That is acceptable, and that is
expected. That's why we have dogs. It's the excessive, all night barking that would
keep you or anyone if you lived next door to a dog like that. It drives you crazy.
That's what it's all about. It is not about the little barking, the barking for 10
minutes, or barking for 5 minutes.
Also, the dangerous dog, I think we all know we need to pass that. It goes
unspoken, I feel, the dangerous dog issues. I get those calls every day too. The laws,
are enforced from the Humane Society. We have four humane officers that go out
every day on calls. They go out to enforce the leash laws. They're out there all day,
every day, seven days a week. We are trying to do something about the dogs that
are running free. Every single call that comes in, we do respond to. We go after
every single call for the leash law. If we can have this, we will try to work
humanely with the people that want to be worked with, the public, with their
animals, try to have some solutions. It can be worked out. It's not you're going to
8
get ticketed. You're not going to get fined right away. We're going to try and work
with you. There's a lot of ways. We have a lot of experience that people can help
and work with the people that have these dogs that are barking constantly. It's not
the little barking dogs that just bark now and then. That's not what we're trying to
go after. Also, I just wanted to say one thing. It's not $75 to adopt a dog at the
Humane Society; it's $50. So it's reasonable. With that $50, you get your animal
spayed and neutered. So there is .. .it is affordable anyways. Thank you for letting
me speak.
ANTHONY WABINGA: I work for a private contractor that we go to houses
every day. I've been attacked by dogs, dogs been barking at me, and I don't oppose
the dog barking laws and the attack dog. It's dangerous on my jobs, and I don't
complain to other people. I just tell them tie them up. Like I say, if you want to
buy a place, you want to rent a place, look around the neighborhood. If you don't
like the neighborhood, don't live there. We've been living here all our lives. Now for
them to come and change the way we live and the way we do things, they should
just stay where they're from. That's all I got to say. I don't oppose the dog barking
law or the attack ...and I've been attacked by dogs, bitten by dogs. It's the upper
class, they don't tie their dogs up. They say, oh the dog don't bite. Yeah, they don't
bite you, but they bite me. So you know, I don't oppose that. Thank you.
TONY SILVA: I oppose about this dog barking law. One thing, if they
had move into the neighborhood, the guys who grumbling about the dogs, if they
had move into the neighborhood and they already had the dogs, the people around
them had already the dog, and if they never like the idea about the dogs barking,
they also can move out. You know what I mean? Because we like our hunting, we
enjoy our hunting, we do that every week. We no need anybody coming into the
neighborhood and telling us for shut that dogs up. Thank you.
ANNE PUNOHU: Aloha, Council. Nice to see a packed room full of
participating Kauai citizens this evening. You have before you another social issue,
not just an issue of dogs barking or dangerous dogs. I agree that there needs to be
some control of a dangerous animal posing a danger to another human's life.
However, I side with the people who see this as yet another way to curb a lifestyle.
Kauai is rural. We have wild chickens. I've heard lots of complaints about wild
chickens before. Dogs that bark across the valley. I'm from Hanalei. You can hear
dogs crossing across the valley. There's a way to abuse this ordinance. One section
of the ordinance says that if a dog barks for more than 10 minutes that's
inappropriate. If you have a problem with your neighbor next door and he doesn't
like you, all he's got to do is sit there with the watch and count for 10 minutes until
he calls up the cops on you.
There is a way to do this to where the people of this island do not feel as if
this is yet another attack on their way of life. There is a way to do this so that the
Humane Society can do their job. So I would suggest tonight, this is a cop-out but
I'm going to suggest it anyway, that there be more meetings on this and there be
more public input. Tonight is not enough time for people to truly think it through,
read the ordinances completely, and come up to you with some suggestions. What
you're seeing is your first line of defense - the gut reaction of the people. You see
the hunters in the back, the local people, they don't like it. You see the Humane
Society people and people who have had problems, they want it. So you need to
have some room for compromise. So my suggestion is to have more meetings, let
people have a more thorough look at the ordinance, and suggest amendments or
suggest a better way to go about it. There are a lot of things in the two ordinances
that I read that I don't agree with. My number one thing is that 10-minute thing. I
think that is not good. Another thing is a list of provocations. What constitutes a
provocation? Most ofthose provocations that would exempt a person from getting in
trouble for a dog attacking another person, I liked what I read there. That was kind
of fair. If a dog is defending its home, it's defending its owner, the dog is being
provoked by the other person. I agreed with that section. For the most part, we
9
need to uphold these people's lifestyle before us, they came first, and our rural
lifestyle. Rural means dogs, chickens, horses, cows, pigs, goats, hunters, hunters'
dogs. I live in Anahola. I am surrounded by dogs. It does not bother me. I would
rather hear dogs barking than traffic, big city noise. I would rather hear the dogs
any day. Thank you.
Dr. Rhoades: Thank you again. Ijust wanted to continue on and clarify
a couple things that I heard people commenting on. Dogs bark; we all know that.
That's why we have them. Most of us have a dog as a companion. We also have
them as an alarm system. They're not effective alarm systems if they bark at
everything and anything. They're not doing their job. That's the dog that this law
is intended for, is the dog that just continuously barks, does not respond to
commands, is barking at anything and everything. If the dog is barking at a
trespasser, somebody that wants to burn down the house, any of those things, that
is not against this law. This law again, goes for dogs that are continuous barkers,
uncontrolled barkers. How do you enforce that? This law has provisions in it so
that it's not one neighbor against another neighbor. It either takes two different
unrelated neighbors living in different houses to file sworn affidavits that the dogs
are causing a nuisance as defined by the law, or a neighbor and an enforcement
officer that witnesses the dog in violation of the law. We're all dog lovers here. I
think that's why we're here. Kauai is a very animal-loving community. This law
truly does protect dogs. It keeps them in our neighborhoods. It keeps them in our
homes. It creates harmony where we can live together. It's really all I wanted to
say. I think we have a lot of support for the dangerous dog. These are very rare
cases, but they're cases that we need some stronger action to prevent it from
recurring. So I thank you again for allowing me to testify again.
Mr. Asing: Dr. Rhoades, the group that you worked with to prepare these
two ordinances, do you have a list of those that were members ofthe group?
Dr. Rhoades: Yes. I can fax you a copy of that tomorrow. The only
other thing I wanted to submit is, we ran a petition last summer or a year ago
summer, for the dangerous dog. I was going to submit that at the desk. It's
about 200 signed names for the dangerous dog law.
Mr. Saito: I kind of forgot my train of thought right now. Councilman
Hooser, I would like to thank you to let the people know that you introduced this
dog ordinance, the barking dog law and the vicious dog law. Thank you very much.
Mr. Hooser: Actually, Mr. Saito, just a brief correction. My committee IS
introducing the bill on behalf of the Administration and the Humane Society. I
have been working with them.
Mr. Saito: Well Councilman Hooser, it says your name and requested by.
Mr. Hooser: Right.
Mr. Saito: Okay, it's correct. Now looking at this dog barking ordinance, on
the second page, it states, that the county animal control service ... are we saying
that we're going to make a new position for this animal control service? Next
question I have is that we have somewhere in here that there's a requirement on
how we should keep our animals. I think that when we look at this, you're telling
us how to raise our animals, not about the dog barking. This barking law is more.
intensive than you think it is. You say that the dog barking 24 hours any time we
can cite them. Right now, the present law states from 8 o'clock in the morning to 10
at night I can play my music how I want to play it, but the dog cannot bark 24
hours? I have people passing my yard on the road howling like dogs and get my
dogs upset. Theyscream at night, they drink, they throw bottles on the road. What
about the chicken owners? What about the guys who got parrots? You know, we
talk about controlling our dogs, the majority of you here cannot even control your
10
kids. Now when you talk about this article shall apply only to dogs in residential
districts as depicted on the official zoning maps of the County of Kauai, 75% of us
live in a residential district. So before we start going and making these laws,
ordinances, and proposal, what a lot of times I don't see, I don't see the local people
involved in any of this committees to form something like this. I believe in the
vicious dog law, that any dog that bites a human being or attacks someone, we
should have a law like that, but a barking dog ordinance? Next you're going to tell
us how to keep our kids. Maybe we should put shockers on our kids so we can
control them better, so they don't stay out until 2 o'clock in the morning, defacing
public property, taking their drugs, and whatever they're supposed to do. I've been
born and raised here all my life, and I probably will die here. I live for the legacy of
my children, my grandchildren. I want to see them hunt, but because of what is
happening and the outsiders are buying our land because we cannot compete with
outside money, our coastal area is going away, our mountain access is going away,
So when we squeeze in, like Billy said, the buffalo went. The only next thing that's
going to go now is us. We tell you what, the fight is not over. We're going to be
fighting all the way to the end. Thank you.
Ms. Vance: I'd just like to say thank you for the opportunity to speak again.
For me, the barking dog is not an issue about lifestyle. I sent you all some
documentation in the mail. Many of the people that I had for my testimonials are
people who were born and raised here, who are actually my friends who had
complained to me about how bad the barking was by my house. So you all have that
record on file. I'd just like to say that I haven't been on any committees or
anything. I'm just a person who wants a good night's sleep. I do a lot to benefit the
community in many ways I can. I'm sorry to see that this is becoming a polarized
issue, though. I don't think it's about that at all. Everybody comes from
somewhere. That's just the way the World is these days. Thank you.
Mr. Stauber:Just to sum it up, it would be nice if some people from the mail
service would show up here and would have give us some firsthand experience how
they see it. I mean, they're going to all those subdivisions and hear all those dogs
possibly barking or not barking. The other part which I'm a little confused about is
the Humane Society stating we are here seven days a week. Seven days a week
what? Seven days, eight hours? Or Seven days, twenty-four hours, which they're
providing their services to enforce that law? If it's seven days a week, twenty-four
hours a day, I still see the problem, who do I call? What number do I have to call? I
still end up at the police department and they going to go transfer it. It's confusing.
The thing that I want to say, it's not against us against them, or it's not them
against us. Let's find here a solution which serves everybody. Not that we ...how
can I say it? The hunters going to go up there in the mountains with their hunting
dogs. Do you want hunters tell the Humane Society what happened to your dog if
your dog is caught by a mountain pig? What does happen? You going to go
probably shovel the grave up there because you had to pull the trigger because the
mountain pig did kill your dog or bust it up so badly that you had to kill it. It's all
coming in somewhere between. Let's find something which serves everybody in
some consent. This is not us against them, or them against us. Please stay to the
issue. Don't get personal. This is that what I have to say. Thank you.
Mr. DeCosta: Gentlemen, especially you Mr. Hooser, sorry I got the
gavel. You very authoritative. I like that. Maybe you ought to run for mayor,
maybe next time. But I want to apologize to Doc. I didn't mean to go against you
that strongly, Doc. Ijust wanted to know that ifmy dog, like maybe my son's puppy
was barking too much and I had get cited too many times that I couldn't pay for the
bill, I just wanted to know if my puppy would go to the Humane Society, or my big
dog, what would happen to that dog. That was the only question I was asking. I
didn't know that I did it in a way that I would get gaveled, but I'm sorry again,
Mr. Hooser. Second of all, we talked a lot about dog shocking collars, but it doesn't
take Einstein to figure out, how about earmuffs? You guys ever thought about
telling our people to buy some earmuffs? Mr. Kouchi, you know construction.
11
Jackhammer, we put earmuffs. We not going cut our vocal cords or pull the plug on
the jackhammer. County Councilmen here tonight, most respected gentlemen ofthe
Kauai community, we, look at me right here, the average tax paying citizen, from
mommy and daddy from the plantation days, we represent Kauai. These people
come live with us in harmony. They want to be like us, they want to live like us.
But when we ask them to adopt our culture, they do not want to. We no live in San
Francisco, L.A., where we can move out to Dixon in the country of Sacramento and
buy five acres. Our houselot, 10,000 square feet, is where we live. We no more the
funds to live in the country. Gentlemen, you know for yourself that ag lots, it's up
to you guys to change the zoning. If more houses come into the agricultural area,
you can change it to residential. I was living on half-acre ag lot. Eight years ago
was changed to residential. So who's to say John Peter live in one ag lot, but his
next door neighbor on the boundary is actually residential? You guys can change
and make him residential. Please, gentlemen, think in the best interest of the
Kauai style ofliving. Thank you very much.
Ms. Duda: Just a very brief comment. When I hear division between
people, between people who've come more recently to the island and those who were
born and raised here, I think that's a way we don't need to live our lives. I'm a new
resident of 20 years only. I absolutely adore my dog, and I'm sure that all of you
adore your dogs as well. I would suggest that some of the people who feel, who are
very concerned about their style of life being eroded away, which I totally
understand, that perhaps they get together with some of the people who were part
of this committee in writing up this ordinance and put in their suggestions. I'm
sure that there's love everywhere. There's a way to find a solution that works for
everyone and protects the lifestyles of those who were born and raised here and
takes into consideration people that have to get up and work the next day and need
to get a good night sleep. Thank you very much.
Mr. Ak.i: I just have one thing to say. We are here about the complaints
and petition of people of the dogs barking constantly. But are these going out to see
why the dogs are barking? I think not. Most of them are barking 2,3 o'clock in the
morning. It's easier to grab a phone and call 911 or Becky Rhoades and say oh
these dogs are barking all night long. My neighbor has a lot of cats. I work two jobs
just to support me and my family. I'm never home during the day. My dogs are
barking because of the cat, for 30 minutes or 10 minutes. What's to say they're not
going to call and I get a fine because of it? How can I control my dog because their
eat's in my yard when I'm not at home? His cats are always in my yard. It's just an
example, a true example. His cats climb on my car, scratch the paint, I complained
one time and they didn't do anything. So I just wanted to say that we need to think
about this bill and maybe work together on trying to find a better way of doing this.
Thank you.
Ms. Woodruff: I would like to address some of the pretty glaring faults
with this particular drafting of this particular law. Now we've been told many
times that this isn't about the average dog, it's about the continuously barking dog.
If that's the case, why doesn't the law say so, it's about continuous barking. In fact,
the definition of inappropriate barking, whatever inappropriate barking is, is
incredibly vague. It could be intermittent for 30 minutes. That could be two barks.
Another one that's kind of interesting is when the exceptions were being drafted, I
proposed the hypothetical to Becky Rhoades about a cat intruder or animal intruder
in your yard and your dog barking. Her response was to the effect of, keep cats out
of your yard. She didn't tell me how to do that. Perhaps you gentlemen would like
to have all cats can climb to the home. It also would be an interesting law. It's
simply not realistic. Another matter is, and this has been touched upon, most of
these laws require two neighborhood complaints. When you have one neighborhood
complaint, you open the door to someone who has unrealistic standards or just
merely the neighborhood claim. Also, I'm not sure if this is in the present law that
was originally drafted, there was matters that the fine could not be suspended by
the courts. This is incredibly arrogant towards the judicial system. The purpose of
12
the judicial system is to determine the particular punishment and fines and
essentially, this is being usurped by (inaudible) to draft this law. Essentially back
to my initial remarks, this is a public faith law. Now people say let's compromise,
let's work together, whatever. This is not public safety, it is not animal welfare.
Animal welfare is simply a no compromise issue unless there is a major overriding
public safety. There simply isn't ... animal rights is not subject to compromise.
Mr. Malina: I was just thinking in the back and seeing what everybody else
saying, and stuff about the dog barking and stuff, and excessive barking and how
they going decide what is excessive barking, what is good barking, what is not good
barking. That's the only thing that going through my mind right now back there
when I'm thinking about it is that you guys know who going make the call of what
is one real excessive barking, like she was saying some people at work and stuff. If
everybody know who work, I work. I work 3, 4 jobs and I just sleep in between jobs,
or whenever I get the chance. Like I say, my dogs bark only when they got to bark.
Other people, from what I hearing people talking and stuff, people's dogs on the
road barking but people complain that it's their dogs barking. How people going
justify whose dog is barking? Anyway, this guy said his dogs at his place not
barking, but down the street somebody else's dogs barking, but they send the guys
to his house about the dogs barking. You know what I mean? That's all I wanted to
let you guys know.
Mr. Hooser: Is there anyone who hasn't spoken that would like to speak? If
not, thank you. We're going to close the public hearing, but before I do so, I just
want to thank everybody for coming down and sharing with us your testimony.
We'll be working on the various aspects of both these ordinances, and it will be
scheduled for the Committee on October 3rd ... there'll be additional times to testify.
There being no further testimony on this matter, the public hearing
adjourned at 8:13 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
~V\S----
PETER A. NAKAMURA
County Clerk
13
ENERGY & PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
September 19, 2002
A meeting of the Energy & Public Safety Committee of the Council of the
County of Kauai, State of Hawaii, was called to order by Councilmember Gary L.
Hooser, Chair, at the Historic County Building, Room 201, Lihue, Kauai, on
Thursday, September 19,2002, at 10: 11 a.m., after which the following members
answered the call of the roll:
Honorable Gary L. Hooser
Honorable Bill "Kaipo" Asing
Honorable Bryan J. Baptiste
Honorable Daryl W. Kaneshiro
Honorable James Kunane Tokioka
Minutes of the August 14, 2002 Energy & Public Safety Committee Meeting.
Upon motion duly made by Councilmember Baptiste, seconded by
Councilmember Asing, and unanimously carried, Minutes of the
August 14,2002 Energy & Public Safety Committee was approved.
The Committee proceeded on its agenda items as shown in the following:
Bill No. 2050 A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A NEW ARTICLE
16, CHAPTER 22, KAUA!COUNTY CODE 1987, RELATING TO
EXCESSIVELY BARKING DOGS
[This item was deferred pending the Humane Society's
meeting.]
COMMITTEE CHAIRGARY1. HOOSER: Is there anyone in the audience who
wanted to testify on this?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
RICHARD STAUBER: Are we going with 2050 and separate 2051?
Mr. Hooser: Yes, we will do them separate.
Mr. Stauber: Richard Stauber for the record. Bill No. 2050, the barking dog
law .. .like I said before on the definition parts, I want the word canine in there. I
don't want to have it passed onto human being because we cannot shut up any
human beings so we use the barking dog law. On page 2, Section 22-16.6(a): any
authorized police officer, or any officer of the county animal control service ...we
open here a door which goes down to the question, who is in charge? We should
look into that. The third page, the punishment, section (c)... First offense: $50,
second offense: $200 and third offense: $200-$500 and then the hardship
cases ...when you look into that, you may have something there that you punish the
poor more than the people with the money. Equal rights for everybody and the poor
and rich should be treated equally in that case. Actually, I would like to have a little
bit more public input on the whole thing. In general, I am not affected, my'
neighbors don't have any dogs so we usually go along pretty well. It just works out
there but in some neighborhoods they probably get .. .I understand that some
neighbors have noisy dogs and they do not talk to each other. I know there is
another hearing coming up on October 3rd or so ...
Mr. Hooser: We will be discussing that at the end of the public testimony.
Thank you. Anyone else wanting to speak on this item?
GLENN MICKENS: Just a word. I think it is good to put a law like this
because there has never been a law. I think you had to call the Humane Society
and they didn't really have any teeth to be able to do anything. I had a dog barking
next door and they said that they can send a formal letter to somebody. Now, I
think the police do but again you get down to ... are the police going to have
time ... reaIistically, it is not going to happen. I think it is good ... put the thing on the
books but again if it is going to clutter something up and make it something that
is just not enforceable then I think we are wasting our time. For me, I think it is
good to have a barking dog law. I think having some recourse that somebody can
go to, I think it is good. Again, if it is going to encumber the Police Department,
maybe the police shouldn't even have a hand on this thing. Maybe it should
be ... give the Humane Society or somebody else the jurisdiction to be able to do this.
I think it is a common sense thing and I think for me, it is something good to have
something like this on the books. Thank you.
Mr. Hooser: Thank you. Next speaker please?
CAMELLIACROSBY: My name is Camellia Crosby and you can cali me Cami
and the reason I am here is because of the excessive barking of dogs. In my
neighborhood, we were the first ones there and it was very peaceful. Eventually, we
started having new homeowners and I don't have anything against dogs. I was bom
and raised here and my family has dogs, hunting dogs and all kinds of dogs. I
became disabled two (2) years ago and I had new neighbors who have dogs and I
don't know why they bark but they bark and bark and bark. I called the neighbors
and they said that is just the way the dogs are, they bark. I called the doctors, the
vets and the new vet said the same thing. It is the habit of the dogs. I was told to
call the mediation board from KEO to try to get something done but because of my
disability I cannot tolerate stress and part of the problem I tried to explain to them
was that I cannot sleep. Whether it is day time or night time and I mean the dogs
bark anytime and they bark a long time. I really don't appreciate that and when my
husband comes home from work and tries to go to bed at night, they are on the side
where we go to bed, they bark. I don't think it is my responsibility to go out and see
if they are barking at dogs, at cats, at people or whatever. I think it is the
responsibility of the owner to go find the dog and stop the dog. I am saying that I
am in agreement that we should have this and find a way .. .I haven't had the chance
to look at what all the rules are about what is coming into effect. I want to do that
if there is going to be more time. This is the first time that I have attended this
meeting because I was afraid to come here but I think I have so much time at home,
I watch and I think it is okay for me to come and later on I will come back and talk
about the dangerous dogs but I am "for" the excessive law for this barking thing.
And it is not because I don't like my neighbors and I am not the kind to go poison
their dogs either but we need to do something that. We need peace and quiet. We
have enough noise.
Mr. Hooser: Thank you. Any questions from the members? Thank you very
much for your testimony. Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to
testify on this issue? I think one of the speakers earlier mentioned .. .I think
Mr. Stauber ...we needed more public input and at the last public hearing there was
a lot of testimony which indicated that we do need more dialogue and more
education. I think there is some misinformation about the ordinance. Number 1,
it is excessively barking is what it is intended to deal with not just dogs that bark..
It is intended to deal with the chronic problem of night after night after night. Not
just everybody's dog. I have a dog and I think most of us do and I love my dog too
so I think there is a need for more public education and more dialogue and I've
asked the Humane Society if they wouldn't mind taking that responsibility on and
working with the Hunters Association on Kauai and working with the various
elements to the community. Just a little bit more to educate and learn about the
issue and then come back to us and we will put it back on our Committee Agenda.
I had originally intended to schedule this for the next Committee meeting but
2
instead my recommendation is going to be to send it to the Humane Society and ask
them to create that dialogue and then put it back on our agenda later. I will be
asking staff to contact the people who attended the public hearing because at that
point I had indicated to them that we were going to have it on the October 3r d
agenda. I believe we will be notifying the people ... the recommendation assuming
it is passed. Before I ask for the motion to defer to allow the Humane Society to
work with the hunters and other groups, is there any further discussion from the
members?
KAIPOASING: I have, Gary. I guess the motion would not then be defer but
it will be deferred pending a report by the Humane Society to you as Chair rather
than just defer. If the motion is to defer then it will come back on the agenda at the
next Committee meeting and I don't think we want that. We want the groups to
work together and try to come up with some good solutions. I believe that is your
intent.
Mr. Hooser: That is correct.
Mr. Asing: I agree with that so I will be supporting that. Thank you.
Mr. Hooser: Further discussion?
JAMES TOKIOKA: Yes, Mr. Hooser, I will support the deferral as well for
more information and if we can also note to the Humane Society and the groups
that are meeting ... the testimony that we received at the Convention Hall and other
people that have written in to me or talked to me throughout the years on this
Council, if they can come up with some type of feeling on a cat leash law and a lot
of it was .. .it sounded funny to me at first but when these hunters came and said,
what am I supposed to do when the neighbors cat is in my yard and I can't get the
cat out of the yard? I think that some of that dialogue needs to be part of that
discussion as well so if we can add that to the information Mr. Hooser, I appreciate
that. Thank you.
Mr. Hooser: I do want to say too that the intent is not to push this off into the
darkness. I think we have to deal with it as a community but we do need more
dialogue. I am going to request that the Humane Society keep me informed of the
meeting that they scheduled so I can participate as Chairman of the committee also.
May I have a motion to defer pending the Humane Society's meeting?
The meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows:
Upon motion duly made by Councilmember Asing; seconded by
Councilmember Tokioka, and unanimously carried, Bill No. 2050 was
deferred pending the Humane Society's meeting.
Sunday, August 22, 2010
Links & Things
There is SO much information on the web, we ALL need to be as informed as possible.
When you have the time, please check out the below sites.
There IS a barking ordinance in the Hawaii Legislature, Dated 1/20/2010...THAT'S RIGHT...
Here is the link:
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/
Written by Scott Nishimoto, here is his bio.
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/
Everyone please email him to find out where this bill is & how we can help get this through!
repnishimoto@Capitol.hawaii.gov
http://www.barkingdogs.net/
This website is geared to correcting the problem, as well as to addressing the larger issue of noise in general, and how it destroys the health and erodes the well-being of those who suffer with it being forcibly projected into their homes over time.
http://sites.google.com/site/barkingdogspasadena/home
When you have the time, please check out the below sites.
There IS a barking ordinance in the Hawaii Legislature, Dated 1/20/2010...THAT'S RIGHT...
Here is the link:
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/
Written by Scott Nishimoto, here is his bio.
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/
Everyone please email him to find out where this bill is & how we can help get this through!
repnishimoto@Capitol.hawaii.gov
http://www.barkingdogs.net/
This website is geared to correcting the problem, as well as to addressing the larger issue of noise in general, and how it destroys the health and erodes the well-being of those who suffer with it being forcibly projected into their homes over time.
This is an amazing site with so much info it will make your head spin.
http://sites.google.com/site/barkingdogspasadena/home
Sat. Aug 14 Meeting
Aloha All,
I want to Thank everyone for showing up at the meeting!
We had 30+ people, which is awesome.
Becky Rhoades was NOT there, but Jerry Rich - Director of Operations & Jessica Venneman -
Fields Services Manager were there & we Thank them for coming and for their expertise.
Joann Yukimura & the Mayor's secretary - Beth Tokioka joined us as well.
Beth sent us an email the next day:
" I’ve been in government for 15 years and I’m not sure you realize what a feat it is to get 35-40 people into a room on a Saturday afternoon to discuss an issue like this. You had several very articulate people present who, as a core group, could really help you move your initiative forward."
Thank You Beth!!
My thoughts about the meeting:
The first thing I felt with Joann was NO empathy.
Unlike Beth, who stated, after listening to us, that she didn't know how bad this issue was & couldn't imagine living with barking dogs on a daily basis & felt lucky that she's never had this problem.
I didn't feel that Joann is behind us, as she stated that in 1984 she wrote a 'barking ordinance' bill that she wound up voting against.
She didn't give us a reason why, in retrospect we probably should have asked.
I will email her & see if I can get a response.
I am also not sure why she would admit this to us, especially us, as she could have said it didn't pass.
(BTW - by the way - I retrieved those 'minutes' from the County last week)
Maybe I am the only one, but I felt she was promoting herself on what she has done for Kauai, certain bills she has seen through, yadda yadda, that had nothing to do with us. Then she proceeded to tell us how long it might take.. 5 yrs.. and that we better do our homework.
I watched the faces in our group go from edge of their seat interested & excited to deflated.
Well thanks for that vote of confidence.
No offer to help us, or if she would be a comrade in arms if elected.
On a positive note... she suggested we call the Outer Island's Humane Societies or whom ever is enforcing the 'barking law' & talk to them about what is working for them & what is not.
Obviously a great idea, one that needs volunteers...I will happy to do one, but I need help folks!
FYI - Tim Bynum definitely supports us.
Kaipo Asing holds the gavel & backs the 'hunters'... I know, I know, this isn't about hunting...but that is his take on the barking dog issue.
I am going to meet with Derek soon, as I spoke to him at the Children's Justice Center Fundraiser a few weeks ago & he agreed to chat about this issue.
Nadine is supportive.
That is all the info I have right now on the County Council. Will keep you posted.
OK...Back to the meeting.
My first thought was that we should come from an 'Health Issue' stand point, as clearly, most of us are suffering. I asked for letters from everyone, which I still want PLEASE, that includes all of you that have emailed us!
ie: A scaled down version of your story, where you live, how tried to deal with your situation, how it has affected you & your family. If it has effected you work performance- letters from your employer. Your health: letters from you Doctor, including medications you are currently taking.
Signed/dated.
Even if we don't come from this angle, we still need this letters for the packets that will be given out to all new County Council Members, Mayor & the Director of the Health Dept. - Dr. Dileep Bal.
It was suggested, I think by the Humane Society, that we try to add on to the existing Noise Ordinance.
I am not sure if this is the way to go, we need to discuss this further.
As far as writing a bill, that won't be the hard part. We can look at the Outer Island and Mainland ordinances, cut & paste. The hard part is figuring out WHO is going to enforce it.
KPD? HUMANE SOCIETY? BOTH?
Where will the funds come from?
***********************************************************************************
Letter from Michael Mann:
Perhaps you can forward this message on to the other attendees, as a way to get us thinking about how to stay on track here. There was something that struck me about the meeting. Two "locals" (sorry for the quotes, but I honestly don't even like using this word) spoke up about the hunting issue. One related that as a local, hunting was a very personal and somewhat emotional thing for them, as they had family who hunt. The other, also having a rich hunting history in their family, could not understand why hunters needed more than one hunting dog. What this said to me was that locals are not some monolithic group all sharing the same opinions, thus, we can't allow this issue to become mired in "local vs. malihini." That is an obfuscation tactic that we can be assured will be used by the detractors, and we have to RESOLVE right now that we will not allow it. Hunting must be completely removed from this discussion. I'd honestly rather not hear any more talk of hunting or hunters other than making sure that the law has explicit language in it to drive home the point that this ISN'T about hunting. Irresponsible dog owners are the issue here. Issues of "cultural practices and expectations" must be downplayed at every instance they try to rear their ugly heads. If we don't commit to doing this, we are going to reach a deadlock before we get anywhere.
Jeff asked at the very beginning what we were trying to accomplish. I think the consensus is that we want some kind of law in place to give us relief when "rational discourse" or the attempt at such fails, as it already has on multiple occasions. Laws exist to protect us from those that don't care about or don't think about the personal rights of others--under no circumstances should we question whether or not it is appropriate for this bill to exist. I want to go one step further and say that we want to focus on creating a law that deals with ONE issue--noise produced by barking dogs regardless of the type. I personally believe we have to leave roosters or other animals out of this for right now...the law can be amended if needed at a later date to deal with such issues. For the purposes of getting anywhere on this bill, we absolutely have to leave behind any discussion about whether or not the offending dogs are used for hunting, how many dogs a person has on their property, or the conditions those dogs are kept in. While those issues may be valid, they only complicate the issue that REALLY concerns us, and should be dealt with elsewhere. We need to keep this very simple--it will be easier for us to deal with the task if we do so, and we will minimize unnecessary disagreements within our ranks. I also think it will be easier for the rest of the public to grasp the merits of any bill that comes out of this if we keep it simple. As a result, I would prefer that we not try to piggyback on a general noise ordinance. As JoAnn indicated yesterday, this is just a can of worms. The two issues are certainly related, but why make our efforts more difficult by tying our issue to that one, which doesn't seem to be going anywhere at the moment? Let a clear, enforceable dog barking ordinance by the catalyst to getting a more appropriate general noise ordinance in place. Narrow scope, surgical precision.
Finally, I'm going to try getting in touch with the friends I have in various parts of the country to find out what laws exist in their area, to start this background investigation.
Sorry for the tone, but I'd like to see this effort get off on the right foot.
P.S. Could we also resolve not to use the word "haole" in any of our deliberations?
*********************************************************************************
Thank you Michael for a your letter. We appreciate your effort towards our goal.
FYI - I get an average of FOUR new emails a WEEK regarding barking dogs & wanting more information & to join us. That is amazing.
I DO not know how they find us, but they do. Our ranks are growing!!
I DO need to find out what level of commitment you have for seeing this through.
I CAN NOT possibly do this alone. (Thank you Marianne for your suggestion)
Thank you Doug for sending your letter to our wonderful local Government.
With all the above being said, I think we had a successful meeting and Big Mahalo's for
those that joined us for our 1st meeting!
I would like to hear your thoughts, suggestions & comments here on our new site!!
A HUI HO
I want to Thank everyone for showing up at the meeting!
We had 30+ people, which is awesome.
Becky Rhoades was NOT there, but Jerry Rich - Director of Operations & Jessica Venneman -
Fields Services Manager were there & we Thank them for coming and for their expertise.
Joann Yukimura & the Mayor's secretary - Beth Tokioka joined us as well.
Beth sent us an email the next day:
" I’ve been in government for 15 years and I’m not sure you realize what a feat it is to get 35-40 people into a room on a Saturday afternoon to discuss an issue like this. You had several very articulate people present who, as a core group, could really help you move your initiative forward."
Thank You Beth!!
My thoughts about the meeting:
The first thing I felt with Joann was NO empathy.
Unlike Beth, who stated, after listening to us, that she didn't know how bad this issue was & couldn't imagine living with barking dogs on a daily basis & felt lucky that she's never had this problem.
I didn't feel that Joann is behind us, as she stated that in 1984 she wrote a 'barking ordinance' bill that she wound up voting against.
She didn't give us a reason why, in retrospect we probably should have asked.
I will email her & see if I can get a response.
I am also not sure why she would admit this to us, especially us, as she could have said it didn't pass.
(BTW - by the way - I retrieved those 'minutes' from the County last week)
Maybe I am the only one, but I felt she was promoting herself on what she has done for Kauai, certain bills she has seen through, yadda yadda, that had nothing to do with us. Then she proceeded to tell us how long it might take.. 5 yrs.. and that we better do our homework.
I watched the faces in our group go from edge of their seat interested & excited to deflated.
Well thanks for that vote of confidence.
No offer to help us, or if she would be a comrade in arms if elected.
On a positive note... she suggested we call the Outer Island's Humane Societies or whom ever is enforcing the 'barking law' & talk to them about what is working for them & what is not.
Obviously a great idea, one that needs volunteers...I will happy to do one, but I need help folks!
FYI - Tim Bynum definitely supports us.
Kaipo Asing holds the gavel & backs the 'hunters'... I know, I know, this isn't about hunting...but that is his take on the barking dog issue.
I am going to meet with Derek soon, as I spoke to him at the Children's Justice Center Fundraiser a few weeks ago & he agreed to chat about this issue.
Nadine is supportive.
That is all the info I have right now on the County Council. Will keep you posted.
OK...Back to the meeting.
My first thought was that we should come from an 'Health Issue' stand point, as clearly, most of us are suffering. I asked for letters from everyone, which I still want PLEASE, that includes all of you that have emailed us!
ie: A scaled down version of your story, where you live, how tried to deal with your situation, how it has affected you & your family. If it has effected you work performance- letters from your employer. Your health: letters from you Doctor, including medications you are currently taking.
Signed/dated.
Even if we don't come from this angle, we still need this letters for the packets that will be given out to all new County Council Members, Mayor & the Director of the Health Dept. - Dr. Dileep Bal.
It was suggested, I think by the Humane Society, that we try to add on to the existing Noise Ordinance.
I am not sure if this is the way to go, we need to discuss this further.
As far as writing a bill, that won't be the hard part. We can look at the Outer Island and Mainland ordinances, cut & paste. The hard part is figuring out WHO is going to enforce it.
KPD? HUMANE SOCIETY? BOTH?
Where will the funds come from?
***********************************************************************************
Letter from Michael Mann:
Perhaps you can forward this message on to the other attendees, as a way to get us thinking about how to stay on track here. There was something that struck me about the meeting. Two "locals" (sorry for the quotes, but I honestly don't even like using this word) spoke up about the hunting issue. One related that as a local, hunting was a very personal and somewhat emotional thing for them, as they had family who hunt. The other, also having a rich hunting history in their family, could not understand why hunters needed more than one hunting dog. What this said to me was that locals are not some monolithic group all sharing the same opinions, thus, we can't allow this issue to become mired in "local vs. malihini." That is an obfuscation tactic that we can be assured will be used by the detractors, and we have to RESOLVE right now that we will not allow it. Hunting must be completely removed from this discussion. I'd honestly rather not hear any more talk of hunting or hunters other than making sure that the law has explicit language in it to drive home the point that this ISN'T about hunting. Irresponsible dog owners are the issue here. Issues of "cultural practices and expectations" must be downplayed at every instance they try to rear their ugly heads. If we don't commit to doing this, we are going to reach a deadlock before we get anywhere.
Jeff asked at the very beginning what we were trying to accomplish. I think the consensus is that we want some kind of law in place to give us relief when "rational discourse" or the attempt at such fails, as it already has on multiple occasions. Laws exist to protect us from those that don't care about or don't think about the personal rights of others--under no circumstances should we question whether or not it is appropriate for this bill to exist. I want to go one step further and say that we want to focus on creating a law that deals with ONE issue--noise produced by barking dogs regardless of the type. I personally believe we have to leave roosters or other animals out of this for right now...the law can be amended if needed at a later date to deal with such issues. For the purposes of getting anywhere on this bill, we absolutely have to leave behind any discussion about whether or not the offending dogs are used for hunting, how many dogs a person has on their property, or the conditions those dogs are kept in. While those issues may be valid, they only complicate the issue that REALLY concerns us, and should be dealt with elsewhere. We need to keep this very simple--it will be easier for us to deal with the task if we do so, and we will minimize unnecessary disagreements within our ranks. I also think it will be easier for the rest of the public to grasp the merits of any bill that comes out of this if we keep it simple. As a result, I would prefer that we not try to piggyback on a general noise ordinance. As JoAnn indicated yesterday, this is just a can of worms. The two issues are certainly related, but why make our efforts more difficult by tying our issue to that one, which doesn't seem to be going anywhere at the moment? Let a clear, enforceable dog barking ordinance by the catalyst to getting a more appropriate general noise ordinance in place. Narrow scope, surgical precision.
Finally, I'm going to try getting in touch with the friends I have in various parts of the country to find out what laws exist in their area, to start this background investigation.
Sorry for the tone, but I'd like to see this effort get off on the right foot.
P.S. Could we also resolve not to use the word "haole" in any of our deliberations?
*********************************************************************************
Thank you Michael for a your letter. We appreciate your effort towards our goal.
I am trying to get another meeting together for Sat. Sept.11, so far I haven't had
confirmation from Becky Rhoades.
FYI - I get an average of FOUR new emails a WEEK regarding barking dogs & wanting more information & to join us. That is amazing.
I DO not know how they find us, but they do. Our ranks are growing!!
I DO need to find out what level of commitment you have for seeing this through.
I CAN NOT possibly do this alone. (Thank you Marianne for your suggestion)
Thank you Doug for sending your letter to our wonderful local Government.
With all the above being said, I think we had a successful meeting and Big Mahalo's for
those that joined us for our 1st meeting!
I would like to hear your thoughts, suggestions & comments here on our new site!!
A HUI HO
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)