HomeMy WebLinkAboutDogs in Recreation AreasSOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD
PUBLIC HEARING
March 26, 2013
4:32 PM
Present:
Supervisor Scott Russell
Town Justice Louisa Evans
Councilman William Ruland
Councilman Christopher Talbot
Councilwoman Jill Doherty
Councilman James Dinizio
Assistant Town Attomey Jennifer Andaloro
Town Clerk Elizabeth Neville
This hearing was opened at 5:00 PM
COUNCILMAN TALBOT: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, there has been presented
to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, 12th day of
February, 2013, a Local Law entitled "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to
Chapter 83~ Animals~ and Chapter 193~ Parks and Recreation Areas~ in connection
with Control of Dogs or Domestic Animals throughout the Town" and
NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the Town Board of the Town of
Southold will hold a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town
Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, on the 26th day of March, 2013, at 4:32
p.m. at which time all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard.
The proposed Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to
Chapter 83~ Anlmais~ and Chapter 193~ Parks and Recreation Areas~ in connection
with Control of Dogs or Domestic Animals throughout the Town" reads as follows:
LOCAL LAW NO. 2013
A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 83~
Animals~ and Chapter 193~ Parks and Recreation Areas~ in connection with Control
of Dogs or Domestic Animals throughout the Town".
BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows:
Purpose.
The purpose of these Amendments is to protect the health, safety and wellbeing of
Town residents and guests using ...... recreational areas by enacting regulations
Amendments to Chapter 83 and 193 Public Hearing 2
March 26, 2013
pertaining to control of dogs and other domestic animals throughout the Town and
on Town-owned recreational areas, beaches, children's play areas, picnic areas
and athletic fields.
II. Chapter 83 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby mended as follows:
{}83-6. Prohibited activities.
It shall be unlawful for any person owning, harboring, in possession of or in
control of any dog in the Town of Southold to permit or allow such dog to:
A. Run at large elsewhere than upon the premises of the owner or custodian
unless said dog shall be on a leash ........ ~ ~' ......... at ~' 12
....... c ~ . ...... ~ ~,~,~ ..................... ~,, or unless it be upon the
premises of another person with the knowledge and consent of such
person. Yq~4~p~ This prohibition ~ shall not apply to a
dog or dogs hunting in the company with of a hunter or hunters upon any
premises where hunting is permissible. ~
IIL Chapter 193 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows:
§193-3.1. Regulations concerning dogs or domestic animals.
A. Prohibition. No person shall bring a dog or other domestic animal onto:
recreation areas, picnic areas, children's play areas and/or athletic
fields that are posted with signage indicating "No Dogs or
Domestic Animals Allowed" or "Dogs or Domestic Animals
Prohibited";
beaches during such times that a lifeguard is on duty;
an area that is within 50 feet of any recreation area that is posted
for protection of piping plovers and other endangered species.
Dogs or other domestic animals are permitted on all other recreational
areas unless specifically prohibited in §193-3.1(A), if leashed and under
immediate supervision and control of the owner or other responsible
person. For the purposes of this article, the requirement ora leash shall
not apply to a dog or dogs hunting in the company of a hunter or hunters
on recreational areas where hunting is permissible
C. All dog or domestic animal waste shall be removed in accordance with
§83-18(B).
The Superintendent may, in his or her discretion, deem additional
recreational areas subject to prohibition for § 193-3.1 (A) as circumstances
warrant.
§193-9. Behavior and conduct.
Amendments to Chapter 83 and 193 Public Heating 3
March 26, 2013
No person shall:
Be present in any recreational area while under the influence of
intoxicating liquor.
G.B Build or attempt to build a fire except in such areas and under such
regulations as may be designated by the Superintendent.
Fail to produce and exhibit any permit from the Superintendent which he
claims to have upon request of any authorized person who shall desire to
inspect the same for the purpose of enforcing compliance with any law or
rule.
E.D Disturb or interfere unreasonably with any person or party occupying any
area or participating in an activity under the authority of a permit.
Erect any structure, stand or platform or hold any meetings, perform any
ceremony, make a speech or address, exhibit any performance or form any
parade or procession in any recreational area without first obtaining
authorization.
IlL SEVERABILITY
If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by
any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the
validity of this law as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be
unconstitutional or invalid.
IV. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as
provided by law.
I have a notice that it was posted on the Town Clerk's bulletin board on February 19,
2013. It was first published in the Suffolk Times on February 28, 2013 and again on
March 14, 2013. I have a notice from Donald Wilcenski, chairman of the Planning Board
"Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed amendments to the
town code referenced above. The Planning Board has reviewed the proposed
amendments and supports the adoption of this legislation." A letter fi.om Suffolk County,
Amendments to Chapter 83 and 193 Public Hearing 4
March 26, 2013
"Pursuant to the requirements of section A 14-14 to 14-25 of the Suffolk County
Administrative code, the above referenced application which has been submitted to the
Suffolk County Planning Commission is considered to be a matter of local determination
as there is no apparent significant county wide or inter-community impacts. A decision
of local determination shall not be construed as either an approval or a disapproval." We
have got about maybe close to a dozen different letters of support, being for and or
against the hearing. That is it.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Yes, what I am just going to say, you will notice from the
agenda that this is scheduled to be tabled this evening. I want to tell you that the Board
discussed this issue today. I don't believe that the Board will be acting to pass this
legislation in its current form but 1 do want everybody to be heard. People that support
the legislation, people that oppose it because the town does need to do something and we
need to pass something soon. i want to remind everybody that the current code, passed
February 10, 1981 which happened to be about 12 days before my 17th birthday, actually
does not allow dogs on beaches or recreational areas whether they are on a leash or not.
They are not allowed to be there. We do have a growing issue in Southold Town. There
are some myths that are out there, that a man came to the Town Board and we somehow
rushed pell mell to pass legislation to placate him. This is a widespread issue that we are
trying to develop a fair balance to. We are trying to listen to all sides. But it is a problem
throughout the entire community. We have many well used beaches and there are these
growing conflicts and we need to come up with something that is going to be fair to all
sides. With that being said, the first person that would like to comment on this, please
feel free to step forward. Also, please state your name and your hamlet.
BRIAN KELLER: Good afternoon, my name is Brian Keller. I reside in Saltaire Estates
in Mattituck and I have owned a house there for a little over 35 years. I am located about
500 feet from the Long Island Sound and I am in walking distance of Bailie Beach. I am
not a dog hater. I am not a dog lover. I am a dog owner. I understand the concerns of
the people that are proposing changes to the town code. No one should be in fear of
being attacked or threatened by someone else's dog, anywhere in the town. As I have
stated, I lived there for 35 years. I have raised my family there, I have been at the beach
continuously for that time, with my daughters, my wife and more recently my grandkids.
I presently have a 16 month old German shepherd. Last year around this time, I started
taking her down to the Sound beaches including Bailie Beach. I go down there during
daylight hours between 9 AM and 7 PM, depending on my schedule. I go there 2 to 5
days a week. I have in the last year. Often I will take the dog, we will go down to the
Mattituck jetty, we will walk the beach and then from there we will head east. I have
gone to the old Beachcomber with the dog, walking and running. It's about 2 ½ miles
each way, a total of 5 miles. Well, I have done that, 1 have done that probably 6 times
over the spring and the summer last year. In that 2 ½ miles or I should say 5 miles, half
the time I haven't passed one person on the sound beach. The other half, I have passed
one or two people, might be a fisherman, might be a person walking their dog, it might be
someone jogging. In any event, I always carry a leash with me, I understand I have a
German shepherd, there are fears. As soon as I am in near proximity to anyone, another
dog, the dog goes on the leash. It is reasonable. Common sense. Over the past year, I
Amendments to Chapter 83 and 193 Public Heating
March 26, 2013
have met numerous people on the beach, many of them dog owners. I have been very
impressed by how responsible and considerate they are to the other people that are using
the beach that aren't dog owners. It's like I say, it is reasonable, it is common sense.
Any time I approach someone whether they have a dog that is loose or not, they leash
their dog until such time they realize that it is not going to be a problem. I do the same.
If I approach someone on the beach, I just assume they are afraid of dogs. I leash my
dog. In my opinion, town code 83-6 is a fair, it is a reasonable law. It addresses both the
permitted and the prohibited activities of dogs. It protects the tights of the public,
including dog owners. I would just add to the code that, in my opinion, anyone that is in
control of their dog and the dog is not on a leash, must be mandated to carry a leash at all
times. To me, like I say, that is reasonable. There are times and there are places that dogs
should be on leashes. There are times and places where dogs just don't belong there, I
understand that and that is addressed by code 193-9. Now, the last meeting, I believe it
was the 12th of February, there was a resolution that was withdrawn and that was
resolution 2013-122. I have read that resolution and there was apparently a lot of thought
put into that resolution. There was a lot of consideration taken into drafting that
resolution. It addressed the concerns of the public as well as other concerned parties. It
also at one point in that resolution addresses that the dog will, the person that is in control
of that dog, will be in a position to put a leash on that dog. Less than a year ago, there
was apparently an incident at or near Bailie Beach. It got a lot of publicity and basically
that precipitated the action that is being taken toward the resolution that is now on the
table. A complaint was filed in the Southold court and it was my understanding that the
court found in favor of the complainant in this case. What that tells me is that code 83-6
did it's job. It has teeth. There may be some minor changes that might, maybe should be
made but to change it to the extent that this proposed resolution or town code does, is
unreasonable and certainly unfair to dog owners. Thank you very much.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Who else would like to address the Town Board on this
issue?
PETER TERRANOVA: Good afternoon, Peter Terranova from Peconic. In the interests
of full disclosure, I am not a dog owner but I have many friends that are. And just in
answer to the prior person before, I wish all dog owners were like him. He seems to be
very, very responsible in keeping his dog under control at all times and I wish that was
the case throughout the town. The amendment before the Town Board addresses the
tights of citizens that peacefully enjoy our beaches and recreation areas without the
infringement brought on by pets that are not under control of their owners. And I think it
addresses it very well. However, it seems to me that the rights of pet owners to
peacefully enjoy those same rights are not being addressed by this amendment. And let
me explain. If a pet owner, our former speaker, was in compliance, let's say with the
leash law and was also in compliance with all of the stipulations, okay, that are contained
in the amendment such as picking up after their dog, making sure that their dog is not
trespassing on other people's property, why should they be excluded from beaches and
recreation areas at any time? It just seems incongruous to me that here we are trying to
extend the rights of our citizens and visitors to enjoy our beaches and yet, if a person
comes down to the beach with a dog on a leash and there is a lifeguard there, they are
Amendments to Chapter 83 and 193 Public Hearing
March 26, 2013
prohibited from being there. That doesn't make any sense to me. So I think that perhaps
we ought to recognize the rights of our pet owners as well as the rights of our non pet
owners. And if the dog is under control and if the Town Board decides in their wisdom,
that the only way to do that is with a leash and somebody is in compliance with that, they
should be able to bring their pet down to the beach or any other recreation area at any
time. That is the extent of my comment. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Okay, would the next person feel free to come up?
CHRISTINE PIACENTE: Good evening, Christine Piacente, Mill Lane Mattituck. I am
a dog owner, I have had dogs all my life, since I was an infant. Again, I am extremely
responsible pet owner and what I am asking is a beach like Bailie Beach heading west
which in my opinion has not been maintained in any capacity by the town in years,
should be designated as a dog beach. There is no life guards there and as Mr. Keller said,
there is rarely any swimmers there or non-dog owners at any given time of the day. I
would also like to request that Laurel Lake also be allowed to have dogs walking there
off the leash. Again, I am there at least two times a day and there are rarely any people
there. Alright. I appreciate your time and your consideration. Thank you.
COUNCILWOMAN DOHERTY: I just want to clarify that the area that you are
speaking of west of Bailie's Beach is not owned by the town, it is owned by Mattituck
Park District, so therefore the town does not have a right to control the dogs on that
beach.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: What we own is about a 50 foot width there, which would be
the road dedicated to the town, Bailie Beach out to the mean high water mark. The rest is
all Mattituck Park District. Also, so we are all clear, this pertains to beaches and
recreational areas. The nature preserves, such as Laurel Lake, are all governed by their
own management plans that are created by the Land Preservation Committee and those
are done because a lot of that land was purchased with federal money, state money etc.,
so whatever rules that are enforced there are enforced with the cooperation of other
agencies like county, state etc. Who else would like to address the Board?
EUGENE DOHERTY: My name is Eugene Doherty and I live on Mill Lane Mattituck.
I would like to know how many people have been attacked at the beach by a dog?
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I don't know, I don't have the stats on that. Let's just settle
one myth tonight and that is that this Board rushed pell mell to create legislation because
one person stood up at a meeting. Ironically, most of the discussion tonight and at a
previous meeting was about Bailie Beach but the town is having problems at New
Suffolk beach, is probably far greater in instances of confrontation at New Suffolk than
any other beach in town because it is so widely used. What is happening is the public is
calling us and demanding that we enforce the code as drafted. In other words, get that
guy and his dog off the beach. We find that too restrictive. This was an effort to ease the
rules. This was an effort to allow dogs on beaches in certain instances. Again, the other
legislation was criticized as being too lenient, this is being criticized as being too
Amendments to Chapter 83 and 193 Public Heating
March 26, 2013
stringent. Where that happy medium is going to fall, that is what we are listening for.
But this isn't designed to address one instance that was a matter of town board discussion
several months ago that happened up in Mattituck. It was meant to try to get the
communities to stop calling the police to settle their neighborhood disputes.
MR. DOHERTY: Well, I am the person that owned the dog that started all this rolling
and it was in the newspaper that this man was attacked and he had undisclosed wounds. I
had a Newfoundland dog that wanted to lick him, not bite him. I have no bite marks. I
would like him to tell me if he got bite marks. The dog laid down in the sand and he
started all this and this is why we are all here. And I am like the first speaker, 1 go there
at 7 every morning, all year round no matter what the weather, with my big dog so he can
swim and I hardly meet anybody. Hardly meet anybody. I don't understand what the
whole big deal is. Thanks.
DAN CATULLO: He was the attacker, I was the attackee. The dog lying down, wanting
to lick me. Now this, you tell me about propaganda, l am Dan Catullo, Mattituck. I am
a little bit angry right now. I have photographs ....
UNIDENTIFIED: Inaudible comments.
MR. CATULLO: What kind of a person would .....
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: No, no, no. If you would address this Board. Address the
Town Board.
MR. CATULLO: I am livid. I am livid.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I am asking everybody to address the Town Board only.
Please and wait your turn. You will get an opportunity to speak.
MR. CATULLO: Oh, I am sure he will. For about three hours...
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Please address the Town Board.
MR. CATULLO: I am sorry, I am just a little upset at this diatribe just now. I was
attacked by two dogs. One of them was his. I don't know a Newfoundland from
anything else. It was the size of a black bear. I have a photograph with me.
MR. DOHERTY: I have him in the car if you would like to see him.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Okay, I am asking everybody to take their turn and just let
one person at a time speak.
MR. CATULLO: They attacked me, these two dogs. This one was the larger one but it
wasn't the first one to attack. The point is, it was from behind. I was knocked to the
ground, 1 was, my cardiologist has evidence now that I have, I have had two heart attacks,
Amendments to Chapter 83 and 193 Public Hearing 8
March 26, 2013
cardiac decompensation from the time before to the time after. Now a lot of people talk
about what happens with returning wounded. 1 was braised from the knock over, which
wasn't from his dog, it was from the first dog but his dog was the most frightening in
size. And that is the one that picked up the attack right afterwards. And it wasn't only
because there were stones on the beach at that point ....
UNIDENTIFIED: Inaudible
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Please.
MR. CATULLO: The fact that...
UNIDENTIFIED: Inaudible.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Talk to us.
MR. CATULLO: I went down there to throw stones at his dog, this is the kind of
credibility ....
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: We don't want to, to both of you gentlemen, that was an
issue that was before the local court. That issue has been resolved. We are here to talk
about a local law that is being proposed. And I want everyone to keep their comments
with reference to the local law. I don't want to rehash the past. I just want to talk about
this local law, the merits, the lack of merits, thereafter.
MR. CATULLO: Alright, Scott. I didn't bring it up at the last meeting in January, had
no intention of bringing it up now until this display. In fact, I am going to pass right now
because I am a little emotional and I will come back later with some of the comments I
was going to make which had nothing to do with what has been happening.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Sir.
LEWIS TOPPER: Hi. Thank you very much for the time to speak. My name is Lewis
Topper and I live in Mattituck. I moved here from New York City. I moved here for
several reasons. The farmland, the open space, the rural life style, dog ownership. And I
must say that dogs are an integral part of this community. This town. Much more so
than the city where I lived. I think that dog owners, all the ones I met in the five years
that we have been living here are extremely responsible. I do like the resolution that you
folks passed and somehow you withdrew it, 2013-122. I thought that was a very
responsible reaction. I think that dog owners should have leashes with them. And I don't
think a dog should be tethered at all times, that is unnecessary. Most dogs, as you well
know, are very capable of being under the supervision of their owners without being on a
leash in certain areas. And I don't mean just in their own property. I do believe that you
know, a lot of people that live out here, live out here for a reason and that is a lifestyle
reason. And part of the lifestyle out here, a really obvious and very important part is the
part of being able to own an animal, especially a dog. I would think that there are times
Amendments to Chapter 83 and 193 Public Heating
March 26, 2013
9
when Bailie Beach becomes an important place to be able to take your dog without a
leash, there aren't all that many and I understand why perhaps some of the beaches in
some of the areas restrict dogs even on leashes, I am not so sure that is a good idea. But
again, one of the things I do not want to happen is I don't want this place to be a place
where dog owners cannot walk their dogs without having a leash on them. That would be
like living in a major urban area. This is not that. That is why people move out here, that
is why people move out here and that is why this is such a vibrant place. All the dog
owners I have met, to a man, have been responsible and really, really nice people. I have
been on Bailie Beach, I have been in Laurel, 1 have been there with my dog and without
my dog and I have never, not once, been accosted by any animal. Now I could
understand if I had a phobia, a fear about animals. That would be difficult but you are
trying to treat someone with a phobia by removing all the animals. The people that love
them from being able to take them out and that is not the tight resolution for this. So I
really sincerely appreciate the fact that you withdrew your previous or your subsequent
resolution and you gave this thing more time to react responsibly to it.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Okay. Let me just ask and I am going to ask you and
everybody here. If I set up a community meeting and we have everybody come in and
talk about where we can draw these lines but we are going to have to be realistic. I think
the notion that we don't have a leash law at all on town property at all times is
unworkable, unrealistic and it is not going to be able to meet our needs. With an
understanding that the current code doesn't allow you with all due respect, to do what
you are doing. It doesn't allow those of you, it doesn't allow me and my wife and kids to
take our dog that we got from the shelter to the beach, under the current code. We are
trying to move the line to let dog owners to get them access but to balance those needs
with all these people that we are heating from, from New Suffolk beach. It is ironic that
Bailie keeps getting focused on. I get so many phone calls and these aren't people that
just moved out here, despite what one friend of mine recently said. People that were born
and grew up in New Suffolk, who have been here for 50-60 years are saying it is getting
out of hand, we need to do something. And they are demanding that we enforce the code
as drafted and what the town found was that this code was rather draconian, rather anti-
dog, rather anti-dog owner, and we want to move the line to allow everybody that access
but with reasonable measures and restrictions in place so we all understand what the rules
are. And if I set up a community meeting, rather than just come in here and hit at this
legislation like we are legislating a pifiata, come in and be a constructive part of the
discussion. I will do that. I will set this room up, right here, tight now, in this room on
an evening meeting but you need to be here and you need to also understand that there
needs to be compromises in the process from both sides. There needs to be compromise
from those that don't want to see dogs anywhere and there needs to be compromise from
people who say, you know what? Dogs, it is cruel to put them on leashes. Well, there
are certain instances where we don't have a choice. I also have an insurance company I
have to answer for but that is another issue for another day. Is that, will everybody show
the same willingness to do that if we do this? If we set this up as a community meeting?
And will everybody recognize there needs to be compromise? The need to strike a
balance and maybe give a little in this process. Dawn? Dawn, come on up.
Amendments to Chapter 83 and 193 Public Hearing
March 26, 2013
10
DAWN BENNETT: Regarding the beaches, I brought a handout from Southampton.
Southampton has a handout that, rules to bringing your dogs to beaches and parks. Can't
we look at their law and maybe go on what they are doing? I have been here for 18
years. I am unclear of the law. Really. I don't know ifI am supposed to be, I take my
dogs to Pequash park. I have five dogs, I only allow one dog off leash. He loves to
swim. He is a golden retriever. I want to have that option. I don't want to have to go to
Hampton Bays or Southampton to have my dog run and whether the way that I do it is,
my dogs do not go to the beach when the lifeguard is there and when there's people after
9:00, I don't go there, I go there at 7:00, 8:00 in the morning. My dogs go swimming and
then I come home. And then I go there at night after 6:00 and I let my dogs go and they
swim then. I don't have them mn off leash where people are laying sunbathing and I
think if we looked at this, it seems to work for them, why can't it wait for us? So maybe
if somebody could take a look at that and we can talk about that ....
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: That actually is part of the, we are familiar with that. It was
part of the discussion.
DAWN: Okay.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: And another issue that we need to understand, is that the
town is not regulated many of the beaches that this legislation, many of the beaches,
Cedar beach, those are county beaches. None of this law would pertain to any of those
beaches. Many of the beaches are owned by park districts. We can't regulate the use of
the park districts, which incidentally in most instances restrict dogs from them if I am not
mistaken. Most of this legislation only pertains to the beaches that the town owns. Some
are swimmers beaches that have lifeguards, some are just casual beaches that we
happened to take because we took the road in the process. But you know, again, if people
are willing to live with a little bit of give and take on this, we could probably get some
reasonable compromise. Benja?
BENJA SCHWARTZ: Hi, Scott, how are you doing? Town Board. Sounds good, we
are going to talk about it. But in order to talk about something, we all need to be
reasonable people. We have to know what we are talking about. We have got two laws.
In January, the first law of 2013 proposed changing the one law with parks and recreation
areas by adding a new section which was to allow dogs into parks and recreation areas.
But that proposal had a little flaw. It neglected to take out the section that prohibited the
dogs. So you know, maybe nobody else notices these things but, the current proposal
proposes taking out the section prohibiting dogs, adding the section allowing dogs but
now imposing some kind of a leash requirement and also changing the section pertaining
to animals in other areas of the town, all over town, requiring dogs be on a leash, all the
time. Now, I walk my dogs on leashes. But I also like to have the freedom to go down to
the beach and let the dogs off and the original proposal to add the section of law
permitting dogs in the parks was very well worded. The Town Attorney did a good job
on that one. And the proposal was that the dogs be, let me just find it here, on the second
day of January, the hearing was on the 29th day of January and the proposal said that the
dogs should be under the immediate supervision and control of the owner or other
Amendments to Chapter 83 and 193 Public Hearing
March 26, 2013
11
responsible person and the owner or other responsible person should have the ability to
leash the dog or other animal immediately. So in the parks and recreational areas, people
were going to be required to carry leashes which makes some sense. Unfortunately, there
are some other things which don't make sense. Starting with the purpose of the current
proposal, as I mentioned in January, in January the proposal was to serve only the, protect
the health, safety and welfare of residents. And the law, you don't have the power to pass
a law like that. It's in violation of equal protection. It also protects other people. As I
discussed with you, I didn't detail who they are. I notice there was a change made, that it
now, your new proposed law that we are talking about today protects residents and their
guests. The problem is, not everybody in those areas is a resident or a resident's guest.
What about someone from Riverhead? Or a tourist from out of town? It has to include
the public in the protected class of this law. You know, I am all for having a community
discussion and everybody come together and try to make suggestions but I think it does
have to have a proposal to focus on. Unfortunately, the current proposal takes the animal
law, the section of the animal law pertaining to dogs and says, sentences them to life of
being leashed, it says they have to be on a leash. The trouble with that is, it is not going
to protect anyone. It is not going to prevent dangerous, aggressive dogs from attacking
people and it is not going to protect people who are afraid of dogs. Just because the dog
is on a leash. My friend lets her dog run loose on the beach all the time, there is a leash
hanging behind them. There are two, the section pertaining to dogs all over town just
requires a leash. The proposal today in the section pertaining to dogs in recreational
areas says that the dogs need to be leashed and under the control of the owner. They both
should be that way. It is pretty simple. Just to be on a leash, like I say, there could be no
person on the end, in effect you are saying dogs can run at large anywhere in the town as
long as they are on a leash. It is kind of ridiculous. But you know, or people could tie
dogs up to a tree or a fence or whatever and as long as they are on a leash, no, they have
to be under control. So I would like to go back to that idea of having them under control.
Just because they are on the leash does not mean they are under control. And just
because they are off the leash doesn't mean that they are not in control. The original
proposal the owner, they had the ability to leash the dogs at all times, if you have a dog
that is an aggressive dog and have problems, the only way to be sure you can get them on
the leash is to keep them on the leash. But if your dog is a little friendly dog that is not
going to hurt anybody, you can let them run. You know, just the little, if you just read
what the, when you cross out accompanied by a person at least 12 years of age, you end
up with a ridiculous law here that says that the dog can run at large as long as it is on a
leash, I mean, that is what this says. That is the language of this law. It shall be unlawful
to allow dogs to run at large unless the dog is on a leash. I don't know how you let a dog
run at large when it is on a leash. Unless you let go of the leash and the dog hms at large.
I think we need to fix that stuff before we reconsider it. I think there are some other
sections also that need to be looked at in the law on parks and recreational areas. The
section that you are working on is implemented by section 193-11, the superintendent and
recreational area personnel shall diligently enforce the provisions of this article. Now, I
don't understand, I mean, the public works superintendent has control of the parks but I
am not sure he is the right person to be in charge of this. What about, doesn't the town
have a dog control officer? Wouldn't the dog control officer, in addition, you want to
have a community forum and a public forum, fine but we need the people in the town
Amendments to Chapter 83 and 193 Public Hearing
March 26, 2013
12
with the authority not only the people as Jill mentioned in the January meeting and was
reported on in Newsday that she said she had spoken to people on both sides of the
argument, well, I am not on one side of the, I don't see myself as being on one side of the
argument. But I think we need to get people who are, who can see both sides. And
especially people, like the town has a dog control agency actually, not just an officer.
Did you consult them before drafting this law?
COUNCILWOMAN DOHERTY: I spoke to Gillian.
MR. SCHWARTZ: Well, to my knowledge they haven't taken a position on this. I
would like to ....
COUNCILWOMAN DOHERTY: Right.
MR. SCHWARTZ: You know, you wrote to the county, I think maybe you could have
written to the Animal Welfare League.
COUNCILMAN TALBOT: Benja, I just have to comment on the one thing you said.
You said you are not on any side of this but at the last meeting you said that you let your
dogs run down on Pequash down on the beach there and you wouldn't want to have them
leashed, let them mn free. So you have to be on one side or the other.
MR. SCHWARTZ: Umm, I, the original proposal, I would support that, that requires a
dog owner to have a leash with them or the ability to put them on a leash although
honestly, I have a little 12 pound dog. You know, it is not going to attack anyone. If it
goes near anybody, I can pick it up and hold it in my hands.
COUNCILMAN TALBOT: Yes, I have a dog that if I wanted to leash it, sometimes I
can't. That thing runs around and I can't catch it. I can't catch it.
MR. SCHWARTZ: Well, that's the thing. I am glad you mentioned that because there
are many kinds of dogs and many kinds of people and your job making the law is to make
it for everybody.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: That is exactly what this whole thing has been from the
beginning. But we are losing the audience. I want other people to have the opportunity
to speak.
COUNCILMAN TALBOT: We appreciate the discussion back and forth, to hear all
sides of it so let's give somebody else a chance.
MR. SCHWARTZ: I am not a, I don't respond to like public pressure. When I have
something to say, I am going to say it and then I will be done. Alright?
COUNCILMAN TALBOT: Like Mr. Catullo, he gathered his thoughts and sat back
down, you have got a gentleman in the back with his hand up, if you want to ....
Amendments to Chapter 83 and 193 Public Hearing 13
March 26, 2013
MR. SCHWARTZ: Well, if you care about understanding this issue, I think you will
give me two minutes to complete my statement here.
COUNCILMAN TALBOT: If you are ready to wrap it up.
MR. SCHWARTZ: Yes, that is what I am trying to do. You think I want to spend the
whole night or the whole day working on this? In the research that I have done, there is
some new scientific research called dognition on how dogs think and how people relate to
dogs and they have discovered that they are very different. Domestic dogs are not like
wolves. Wolf packs follow the dominant pair. Domestic dogs don't normally live in
packs but sometimes they do and they get loose and they run wild and they are not wild
wild but they are feral, they are domesticated dogs that are not longer in the presence of
people and they form groups. But those groups, instead of following the dominant pair,
they follow the, the dog that has the most friends. So I would hope that you would
realize that companion animals are parts of our family and there is many ways we can
control them. Not only with a leash. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Yes, please.
STEVE FEENEY: My name is Steve Feeney and I just moved here back in December. I
lived in Mattituck for 8 years, moved up island and now we are back. I was asked to
come here by a friend and listen to this. I like dogs but I understand both sides of this
issue. I would assume you have got to have a dog license to have a dog and this is all
going to boil down to someone getting sued, the town getting sued or someone getting
sued. My feeling is, as a dog owner, whether you let the dog mn down the beach or
down the road, you are responsible for your dog. If it gets hit by a car, if it bites
someone, it knocks someone over be it an accident or whatever, I just don't understand, it
is really just kind of your responsibility as a dog owner. That is your dog, whether the
beach is empty or the beach has a bunch of people on it, common sense, the dog runs
knocks someone over, hey listen, I am sorry if someone is hurt. Kind of your
responsibility, not the town's, you are the dog owner. The dog doesn't own you. I hate
to say this, people come first. People come first. A man is walking down the beach, I
have a dog, big moose of a dog, he knocks that man over, man has a heart attack, man
breaks his leg, hey, it is a person. The dog, my dog (inaudible) common sense. I don't
know how much a dog license is but maybe if a dog license is 10 bucks, maybe even 20
bucks, then the town should take that money, put it in the kitty, get an insurance policy
for an issue like this where if someone gets hurt, you know, maybe the town could do the
right thing as far as if it was an accident, figure out you know, pay doctor bills or
something like that for a dog bite or whatever. But common sense, if you are a dog
owner, that is your dog. Whether it is a little dog, I have got a little dog, he can get his
teeth and sometimes he gets funny around people and sometimes he don't. It's a dog.
That is all I have got to say. People come first. And I love dogs and I moved back here
because you know, I like my dog to go swimming and stuff like that but if someone
walks on the beach, you know, you can't control your dog, whose fault really is it?
Amendments to Chapter 83 and 193 Public Hearing
March 26, 2013
14
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I appreciate it. If we go along the lines of what Dawn was
suggesting before I believe there are time issues here, right? There would be times you
could bring a dog and times you can't, something along those lines. Those are the types
of things we would be talking about and again, I will schedule a community meeting and
we will get everything on the table at one time and try to hash this out.
MARIELLA OSTROSKI: My name is Mariella Ostroski, I live in Southold and I was
looking at your agenda earlier and I was enjoying the fact that we are encouraging and
investing in the planning and preservation of Southold Town through the employees,
sending them to courses or events that will improve their knowledge of how to make the
town the best it can be and I love being in Southold Town and I think we have to invest in
private sectors ability to have their own quality of life including the training and sharing
and delight of having dogs. So I am hoping that you can find the restriction ora minority
and still not punish the majority here. So I will take time off work if I have to come to
your next meeting and I thank you for making this an open forum. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I am sorry Mr. Turner, I am going to let people who haven't
spoken yet go first and then we will go around again.
JACK GISMONDI: I am Jack Gismondi, I am a dog owner also, kind of in favor of what
you are doing and I would like to applaud the Town Board for taking a pro-active move,
trying to change something that perhaps was ill-thought out in 1981, allowing some type
of, a little flexibility and I think it is, I applaud the Town Board for moving ahead, I
think the can of worms was opened sometime most recently and I think it was a good
thing because perhaps we can move in a better direction and I applaud you for doing so
and I look forward to the meeting.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Thank you, Jack.
SUSAN CARPENTER: I am not really good at public speaking. My name is Susan
Carpenter, I am from Mattituck. A lot of you guys might know me because we have
Rhumbline Retrievers, I work as a vet. I am not here representing the vet at all, I am here
just for me, my husband. We moved, I don't know, we live here in Southold because of
the quality of life and being able to do things we can't do in other places. I grew up on
Long Island, I moved away, I lived in Texas, Louisiana, Washington state, Singapore and
been all the world and Long Island is the best place to be. It is one of the best places to
be because you can have a meeting like this and talk about things that are important. We
need to talk about what's important for everybody and everybody's quality of life. Not
just mine as a dog owner or somebody that doesn't like dogs or hates dogs. We need to
keep what makes Southold Southold. Okay? I lived in Mattituck and I walk over Laurel
Lake all the time. I cut trails with my husband and our neighbors before it became a
parkland or whatever they call it now and I have been walking there for 17 years, every
morning. An hour and a half, two hours a morning. Probably 5 times a year I see people.
Once that person hated dogs. She scared me and the dog scared her, we all apologized to
each other and we moved on. She was in camo, bird watching, leaning up against a tree
and we walked past her and she popped out and said hi. Understandably, my dogs barked
Amendments to Chapter 83 and 193 Public Hearing 15
March 26, 2013
and were you know, upset. They thought I was being challenged. Nothing came of it, we
apologized, she apologized, we went on our merry way. The fact of the matter is that
well-trained, well socialized, well exercised dogs are better part of our community. Dogs
that don't get enough exercise both mentally and physically end up having behavior
issues. There are barkers, there are diggers, there are biters, there are dogs that attack,
there are dogs that escape. They are dogs that you get complaints about. Your neighbor
hates because it barks, the town hates because they pick it up 22 times for running loose,
Gillian hates it because people don't come out and show up for it. The town has to feed it
until it dies because it is a no kill shelter, which I love. But dogs that aren't trained,
aren't socialized and aren't exercised are a problem. No matter what kind of dog it is, be
it a little toy poodle, it could be your Newfoundland, it could be my Labradors, if they are
not trained and not exercised, there is a problem. Most dogs can not get enough exercise
in their backyard, they might get enough physical exercise but they don't get enough
mental exercise. That leads to bored dogs and dogs that are in trouble. Most of us are
responsible dog owners. Understand, there are people in this town, in this country and
everywhere that hate dogs or don't like dogs or don't want to see dogs, don't want dogs
near them. They don't have a problem with that. Well, what we responsible dog owners
would like is a designation in the town of two or three places that you can go off leash
and be a responsible dog owner. And I am not talking about that little farce of a dog
park. And that doesn't matter. That is a little square fenced in yard that is smaller than
most people's baekyard. That is not a place to exercise your dog, it is not a place to
socialize your dog and it is not a place to train your dog. You need someplace with
varied terrain. We are a water community, we live on the water, we are surrounded by
the water, a lot of us have water breeds. Even if it is a non-traditional water breed, our
dogs like to swim. So most of us dog owners would like a place where they can go to the
beach whether it is certain hours, certain beaches, certain times. That we can go and be
safe and let our dogs off leash and not be persecuted and not, people that are not dog
people can go to that beach at a different time or chose a different beach. I am not saying
that every dog should be allowed on every beach, off leash all the time. Designate a
place they can go, designate a field area or a woods area or a combination area, where
people that are responsible and control their dogs off leash. Two other matters I have that
are of concern, is when they are on the leash, your law says the leash can only be 4 feet
long. I don't know, I am only 5"2' so 4 feet is this big so ifI had a Yorkshire Terrier on
a 4 foot leash, he can get about 6 inches away from me.
COUNCILWOMAN DOHERTY: That is not in the proposal.
MS. CARPENTER: Well, it is in the current law.
COUNCILWOMAN DOHERTY: It is in the current law.
MS. CARPENTER: That is the only where a leash is defined.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Just so you understand, when we change legislation, it
includes the old legislation in it. So we never envisioned creating a leash law that
required a 4 foot leash.
Amendments to Chapter 83 and 193 Public Hearing
March 26, 2013
16
MS. CARPENTER: I mean, in the law it doesn't say anywhere you just say it has to be
on a leash. So now the other question is, is my dog under control on a 6 foot leash or a
10 foot leash or is my dog out of control on a flexi lead? Just because he is on a leash
doesn't mean I have control of that dog. A bad owner is a bad dog owner. So and a good
dog owner is a good dog owner. You can't legislate stupidity, you can't legislate
common sense. So you have to pass laws that help people. My only other comment is
that the law talks about dogs in off leash with a hunter, I hunt, my husband hunts, a lot of
our puppy people hunt. If we don't let those dogs off leash when it is not hunting season,
they won't know how to behave during hunting season. So they have to be able to have a
time and a place they can train off leash so they can learn their job. Also for advanced
obedience and agility training, things that dogs from around here compete on the national
level, they need to be off leash, so we need to help that. And to make people better dog
owners, maybe we should increase the dog license fee like you said and have public dog
training classes that are affordable. If more people went and trained their dogs we
wouldn't have so many complaints that you have. You wouldn't have as many
complaints about the other beaches if there was a place for people to take their dog.
Because they would go to the other place instead of the bad place. That is all I have to
say.
MAUREEN SANDERS: Hi, I am Maureen Sanders, I am resident of Orient. I just want
to point out one thing that hasn't been brought up and that is over 10 years ago, I lived in
New York City and took advantage of the New York City leash laws which allow dogs
off leash at certain hours in the public parks. I want to point out that this is not only for
the dogs, the dog owners become a community in their own right and it is very good for
the community and while I happened to be in Brooklyn, in Prospect Park but it is very
good for that community to have these people getting together, talking about the issues
regarding their dogs and exchanging ideas and becoming part of a community within the
community. It is very good for people as well as dogs. And that is the only point that I
wanted to make tonight. Thank you Mr. Russell, Board.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Who else would like to address the Town Board?
MARCY BURKE: I may be speaking a little out of turn, I am not a resident, I have been
looking to become a resident. I presently live in Nassau County. One of the reasons I
want to move to Southold Town is that I have three golden retrievers and I have no where
in Nassau County that I can take them and I applaud Sue Carpenter for her very common
sense suggestions and I also applaud you because when I came, I thought, what I was told
what I was going to hear was a more restrictive rule and the fact that the Board is open to
understanding the needs of everybody and it is very important that every human being he
cared for, both emotionally, I know the dogs for me are a huge emotional part of my life
but also in terms of their physical well being and I would implore you to take on the task
if you would, of addressing it from a dog under control and I say that as a professional
dog trainer but it can be done, you can teach your dog to come, he doesn't have to run
away but there am ways that you can draft legislation so that it can be under control and
so that nobody can be hurt and I applaud you Sue, for your very common sense
Amendments to Chapter 83 and 193 Public Hearing 17
March 26, 2013
statements and I thank you for listening to a non-resident. My name is Marcy Burke and
I live in Lido Beach, New York.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Just to clarify, first, I appreciate everything you had to say.
Actually the legislation we are proposing is less restrictive than the current. That is why
we tried to set about doing something. It is not very good policy to have code and then
ignore it. So that is why we are trying and we recognize you know, it is a work in
progress. But we have a ways to go. We did talk about the under your control aspect
which was in the first draft of the legislation. The police department raised issues in
terms of the enforceability of that but those are the types of things we can talk about but
again, getting back to what Dawn had mentioned earlier, if we are willing to live with
compromises such as certain times during the day during the summer you can have a dog
but we set the time so that after 7:00 PM, if you are willing to live with those types of
compromises I think we can work something out that everyone can live with. But we all
have to be willing to give a little bit. And I appreciate trying to legislate, I learned 100
times, you can't legislate for stupidity, common sense and all those things but I need to
remind you all that a Town Board tried to do that in 1981 and now we need to address it
somehow.
MS. BURKE: Thank you.
KAREN ROSES: Hi, I am Karen Roses, I live in Mattituck. I just wanted to say two
things. One is that if you are a dog owner you know that your dogs are like your
children. Plain and simple, they have four legs instead of two and a lot more hair but
they are basically like your children and to not be able to let them run anywhere is like
letting your child grow up never letting go of your hand. You have to give them the
opportunity to run and exercise and grow and become strong, although you do have to
have control. And the other thing is leash does not mean control and I know that has
been brought up before but how many times do you see a child holding a great dane by a
leash, a little five year old. Having a dog on a leash doesn't mean it is safe, doesn't mean
it is under control, it just means somebody is holding the other end and they can very
easily if they are strong enough or if the person is holding it is not strong enough they can
very easily take their leash right out of the hand and they are gone. So that was just
something I wanted to say. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I just wanted to clarify, I happen to be a dad and dog owner.
My dog has yet to ask me for an iphone. So, there is a big distinction there. But he
doesn't cost me nearly as much money. Who else would like to comment on this
particular local law? Okay. Dan. Oh, I am sorry. Where you getting up to speak? Can I
let her speak first and then I will call on you.
MARY CURRY: Hi, Mary Curry from Cutchogue. I guess I just would like to ask that
maybe you guys provide a map regarding which locations you are talking about in terms
of, so there isn't any confusion, like at Bailie Beach. Maybe like a highlighted map. And
I will save all my comments for the community meeting.
Amendments to Chapter 83 and 193 Public Hearing 18
March 26, 2013
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Very good idea. Thank you. Dan?
MR. CATULLO: They were say/ng that, I sort of feel like Custer at Little Big Horn here.
I am a little bit over-matched tonight but a couple of points that I did want to say before I
got side-tracked, one of the, this whole idea of control which everyone throws this
around. We have been through this again and again. I wrote down something before in
order to get all the points I could into this and so the people could get their arms around
what this idea of control is. And it's aimed at the legal aspects as well as the common
sense aspects that everyone is thinking. Why can't some people navigate through the
following into a conclusion. Only at the moment a dog breaks away from it's owner to
initiate an assault is it evident that the animal is not under control. But by then, the
health, safety and welfare of the victim has been abrogated and the very reason for the
law made moot. After all, before the incident, the dog does not evince his status by
presenting with a sign reading quote certifted and guaranteed in control dog here unquote.
Only after the victims stress of an anticipated attack or the attack itself and thus a
breakdown in the health and safety provisions, is the dog's tree nature confirmed and by
then it is too late to effect the result that the law is intended to achieve. Which is the
health and safety of the public as he would like to say, instead of the residents. But I
keep thinking that is it because people can't understand this concept or because they
don't want to leave their agenda behind and are unwilling to accept what control is. The
idea now, which is first time I have heard about leashes being inadequate as control as
control means for a dog. Well, if you have a 6 to 8 foot leash, you have a large dog and a
4 or 5 or 6 year old, there is no common sense going on there, I am sorry. Them has to
be common sense at every level here. If you have 6 to 8 foot leash and you have a
particularly large dog, okay, there is always a chance there is going to be a breakaway but
you are at least mitigating the probability there is going to be a major problem. There
have been any number of incidents, the fellow from New York said he has never met a
dog owner I didn't like in, so many words. By gosh, again and again and again, I really
envy him because l, just yesterday I had a confrontation with someone, we didn't get into
the dog droppings business and I never brought it up before, it has been personal safety
that I have been mostly concerned with. But he came at me verbally and with one of his
digits on his hand signaling his displeasure that I confronted him with not cleaning up
after his dog. All these people that seem to be so wondrous, walking on water as it were,
by god, I would like to find some of them. Well, I do know some and there is one right
here that is a responsible, two of them, good dog owners. But I can't, the way it's all
quoted, everyone is a responsible dog owner. There was a dog bite this Thursday in the
center of Mattituck, you probably heard about it in Mattituck, a kid was bitten. There
was that New Jersey incident last week. I mean, there were two or three recent dog bites.
The statistic about the insurances, where I brought this up last time, that more than a third
of all claims are for dog bites. I mean, to listen to the crowd here and admittedly I am
fighting against the current I realize that but I mean, who would, they'll say well it was so
unusual, to find someone who has had a problem with dogs. My god, I have had 5, 6
attacks over a 50 year period. Alright, that is not a lot but one of those is more than
enough in a lifetime believe me. Like being mugged six times. And it is an absolutely
frightening, a frightening prospect to go through. I just, I mean, rare. What's rare? What
kind ora person would, let's say the intellect of a person who is standing under a tall tree
Amendments to Chapter 83 and 193 Public Hearing
March 26, 2013
19
in a severe lightening storm, even if he has never seen that tree struck by lightening or in
fact, even if he has, I mean a little common sense would kick that around here. There is a
lot of common sense that can be used but it simply isn't. Everyone is spreading this
common sense provision around but it doesn't go into effect for a large number of people.
Sure, those of you who are responsible, you say, what is he griping about? My god, I
meet people that aren't and a lot of them are convinced that a dog may very well be
harmless but when they come romping up at you, they are a frightening prospect. I ran
an emergency room, three emergency rooms actually and I have seen these up close, right
close and personal what dogs do. I am not just reading an insurance statistic that says one
third of all, more than one third are claims from dog bites. I was there up to my elbows
in some kids blood or whatnot. Celebrities even were involved in this. This is not just a
fabrication. It is not white tigers manufactured by certain people for point of impact and
such as that fact, it was a lion who killed an animal, it wasn't something on our beach it
was something in California, let me get that clear...
UNIDENTIFIED: Inaudible comments
MR. CATULLO: Alright, alright.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Dan, you need to talk to the Board, please Dan, I have asked
you several times. All of your comments need to be addressed to this Board. Dan, Dan,
we are going to end the meeting if you can't just focus ....
MR. CATULLO: That is another point, we have our legal expert, there is a person who
has legal expertise presumably, who claims that he could have brought up a leash law at
the last meeting but he decided not to because the lady who was with a dog had the leash
in the car but wasn't using it. Now this is a convoluted bit of reasoning I can't come up
with but 1 can't understand but let's go ahead with this. He was going to have a leash law
but he had his dog with him, the dog of the other person came at his dog, he had to kick
it to preserve his dog's integrity. The lady came at him, said but I have a leash in the car.
Now somehow this dissuaded this person from advocating for a leash law. I don't
understand the logic of it but it just about gives us the idea of the mindset of that
particular person. I am not going to go into it any further this has been too emotional a
day for me but I will relax on that. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Would anyone else like to address the Town Board on this
particular local law public hearing?
MR. TERRANOVA: Just one more thing. Peter Terranova from Peconic. As I said, I
am not a dog owner but my son is, the folks that spoke here that have dogs, boy I would
love to have (inaudible), I think you are all great. No, really, and I think that is the point
that probably 90-95 percent of folks that have pets that are very, very responsible. The
problem is we haven't heard from any of the irresponsible dog owners ....
UNIDENTIFIED: And you won't.
Amendments to Chapter 83 and 193 Public Heating
March 26, 2013
20
MR. TERRANOVA: And I know they are not here, okay, and therein lies the problem.
Okay, therein lies the problem. Because the leash as many of you had said, does not
mean control but what it does do is accountability. Somebody is walking along the beach
as my wife and I are sitting there and their dog goes up into the dune to do his business,
they can't say I didn't see it. And I am sure you probably have run into that yourselfi
Okay? Or the dog comes out of the water, a nice couple not 50 feet from us, the dog
comes out of the water and goes, rolls in the sand and then rolls on this couples blanket.
The dog wasn't aggressive but the people were traumatized. They actually picked up and
left. So here we were infringing upon their ability to enjoy the beach. And the particular
person involved, I won't mention her name, doesn't live where I live, comes from the
next hamlet over, go to her and say listen, take your dog up to the dog park. But there is
no beach at the dog park, I mean, that is where we get into the elevation of our pets as
humans. I understand they have to mn but you know, as Scott has mentioned, there has
got to be some compromise here and there has got to be accountability.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Right.
MR. TERRANOVA: Because if the dog is not under control of the leash, okay, then you
(inaudible) hold the owner responsible. That is really what it boils down to. I wish there
was a different way and I wish there was a way that perhaps the irresponsible dog owners
would have to wear a sign. 'I am an irresponsible dog owner', okay. Or the other way 'I
am a responsible dog owner' but that is not practical. So, I think you suggestion Scott, is
a good one. That you have a more open discussion and maybe we can get some of the
irresponsible dog owners to come and express their views because maybe they should be
heard too.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Thank you, Peter.
MS. ROSES: I just wanted to address something, it is not necessarily all about
responsible dog ownership or irresponsible dog ownership. Dogs bite for a lot of
reasons. I know, I have been bitten by a lot of them. And they bite out of fear, they bite
out of being startled, they bite out of all kinds of reasons. But I walk my dogs on leashes
and I have actually been with my dog on a leash, standing, talking to somebody with my
dog sitting between my legs and I have had people come up and just tight for the dogs
face and my dog sat there and did nothing but he could have bitten because he was
startled or somebody was moving towards me. I actually had a 7 year old girl come
charging down the street, don't know where this little girl came from, she saw my dog I
guess sitting down and she came running down the street, no parent with her, ran up to
the dog, grabbed it by the face and kissed it on the nose. Luckily, my dog went, oh great,
a kid to play with. When the mother finally came up I said to her, what is wrong with
you that you would let, oh, well, she loves doggies. So it is not just the, I mean, had my
dog bitten I would have been sued till there is no tomorrow for a dog that was on a leash,
sitting down, minding its own business because this little girl, this parent was not paying
attention, came charging up, grabbed a strange dog by the face and kisses it. and I could
have been liable for that and it was frightening. So it is not just the dogs, sometimes
them is a provocation whether it is meant to be or not by, so it is maybe just an education
Amendments to Chapter 83 and 193 Public Hearing 21
March 26, 2013
of everybody, not just necessarily pro or con dogs but maybe we need to educate the
public in how to behave when there is a dog you don't know. Just that I am looking
forward to, I will definitely be at the meeting.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Okay.
MS. ROSES: Thank you.
SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Would anybody else like to be heard on this particular public
hearing? (No response)
This hearing was closed at 6:09 PM
Southold Town Clerk
Neville, Elizabeth
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Russell, Scott
Tuesday, April 02, 2013 11:19 AM
Doherty, Jill; Dinizio, James; Talbot, Christopher; William Ruland; Louisa Evans
Neville, Elizabeth
FW: [New Sender - ] - Keep dogs off beaches please
FYi
From: Doreen Fausto [mailto:dfausto11@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 10:27 AM
To: Russell, Scott
Subject: [New Sender - ] - Keep dogs off beaches please
I urge you to please keep dogs off beaches and other public properties. Protection of your residents has to be
of paramount importance. Dogs may love thier owners but are often less than friendly to strangers. Larger
breeds are very popular and dangerous. There is also the issue of cleanliness - owners in favor of dogs running
freely are also often in favor of dogs pooping freely.
Designated, fenced in areas, should be the only compromise considered.
Thank you for your consideration of the issue.
Doreen Fausto Mcllvain
Neville, Elizabeth
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Terry, Mark
Tuesday, March 26, 2013 3:04 PM
Andaloro, Jennifer; Neville, Elizabeth
"A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 193, Parks and Recreation Areas, in
connection with Dogs or Domestic Animals on Town Recreational Areas"
Betty/Jen
I reviewed this action already and recommended it as CONSISTENT.
action.
Mark Terry
Principal Planner
LWRP Coordinator
Town of Southold Planning Department
P.O. Box 1179
53095 Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
(631) 765-1938
Mark.Terry~,,town.southold. ny. us
Therefore there is no need to re-review the
RESOLUTION 2013-283
WITHDRAWN
DOC ID: 8699
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2013-283 WAS
WITHDRAWN AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD
ON MARCH 26, 2013:
WHEREAS there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk
County, New York, 12th day of February, 2013, a Local Law entitled "A Local Law in relation
to Amendments to Chapter 83~ Animals~ and Chapter 193~ Parks and Recreation Areas~ in
connection with Control of Dogs or Domestic Animals throughout the Town" and
WHEREAS the Town Board of the Town of Southold held a public hearing on the aforesaid
Local Law at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard, now
therefore, be it
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby ENACTS the proposed
Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 83~ Animals~ and
Chapter 193~ Parks and Recreation Areas~ in connection with Control of Dogs or Domestic
Animals throughout the Town" reads as follows:
LOCAL LAW NO. 2013
A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 83~ Animals~ and
Chapter 193~ Parks and Recreation Areas~ in connection with Control of Dogs or Domestic
Animals throughout the Town".
BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows:
Purpose.
The purpose of these Amendments is to protect the health, safety and wellbeing of Town
residents and guests using Tev..~ recreational areas by enacting regulations pertaining to
control of dogs and other domestic animals throughout the Town and on Town-owned
recreational areas, beaches, children's play areas, picnic areas and athletic fields.
II. Chapter 83 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows:
§83-6. Prohibited activities.
It shall be unlawful for any person owning, harboring, in possession of or in control of
any dog in the Town of Southold to permit or allow such dog to:
A. Run at large elsewhere than upon the premises of the owner or custodian unless
said dog shall be on a leash .........v ....... ~ ,- v ...............~ ...... ~,,,
....... ~ ~,,*~t ..................... 6, or unless It be upon the premises of another
person with the knowledge and consent of such person ........ v~.,v .....Th~s
prohibition ~ shall not apply to a dog or dogs h~ting in the comply
ora hunter or hunters upon any premises where hunting is pe~sstble
Resolution 2013-283 Board Meeting of March 26, 2013
III. Chapter 193 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows:
8193-3.1. Re~,ulations concerning dogs or domestic animals.
A. Prohibition. No person shall bring a dog or other domestic animal onto:
recreation areas, picnic areas, children's play areas and/or athletic fields
that are posted with signage indicating "No Dogs or Domestic Animals
Allowed" or "Dogs or Domestic Animals Prohibited";
beaches during such times that a lifeguard is on duty;
an area that is within 50 feet of any recreation area that is posted for
protection of piping plovers and other endangered species.
Dogs or other domestic animals are permitted on all other recreational areas
unless specifically prohibited in § 193-3.1 (A), if leashed and under immediate
supervision and control of the owner or other responsible person. For the
purposes of this article, the requirement of a leash shall not apply to a dog or dogs
hunting in the company of a hunter or hunters on recreational areas where hunting
is permissible
All dog or domestic animal waste shall be removed in accordance with §83-
18(B).
The Superintendent may, in his or her discretion, deem additional recreational
areas subiect to prohibition for § 193-3.1 (A) as circumstances warrant.
§193-9. Behavior and conduct.
No person shall:
Be present in any recreational area while under the influence of intoxicating
liquor.
G.B_ Build or attempt to build a fire except in such areas and under such regulations as
may be designated by the Superintendent.
Fail to produce and exhibit any permit from the Superintendent which he claims
to have upon request of any authorized person who shall desire to inspect the
same for the purpose of enforcing compliance with any law or rule.
Disturb or interfere unreasonably with any person or party occupying any area or
participating in an activity under the authority of a permit.
Updated: 3/26/2013 3:10 PM by Linda Cooper Page 2
Resolution 2013-283
Board Meeting of March 26, 2013
Erect any structure, stand or platform or hold any meetings, perform any
ceremony, make a speech or address, exhibit any performance or form any parade
or procession in any recreational area without first obtaining authorization.
III. SEVERABILITY
If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any
court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law
as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid.
IV. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as provided
by law.
Elizabeth A. Neville
Southold Town Clerk
RESULT: NO ACTION
Updated: 3/26/2013 3:10 PM by Linda Cooper Page 3
Neville, Elizabeth
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Russell, Scott
Tuesday, March 26, 2013 2:38 PM
Doherty, Jill; Dinizio, James; Talbot, Christopher; William Ruland; Louisa Evans
Neville, Elizabeth
FW: dogs - beaches
FYI
From: Konrad Klauer-Gwen Krasilovsky [mailto:kongwen@optonline.net]
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2013 2:02 PM
To: Russell, Scott
Subject: dogs - beaches
,r watching the dog--beach segments on ch 22 it is apparent that their cannot be any enforcement allowing dogs,
leashed or not, onto any beach within our town. This being the case I say NO to dogs on the beach public or private. If the
town wants to add enforcement personnel, to patrol, then the registered dog owners, in the town, should have to foot the
bill. Exercise at the beach is in the owners mind and not a given right. Most properties in Southold are large enough to
be fenced in and exercise a dog. Uphold the existing law, NO DOGS AT THE BEACH, Dog owners have already proved
they cannot do the right thing at the dog run, why would they do the right thing at a beach?
Konrad Klauer Cutchogue
Neville, Elizabeth
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Russell, Scott
Tuesday, March 26, 2013 2:37 PM
Dinizio, James; Doherty, Jill; Talbot, Christopher; William Ruland; Louisa Evans
Neville, Elizabeth
FW: Dogs and Southold Town.
FYI
..... Original Message .....
From: Michael Rothman [mailto:mrothmancoa@Rmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 8:11 PM
To: Russell, Scott
~bject: Dogs and Southold Town.
Dear Supervisor Russell,
I feel the need to write regarding the Dog Leash debate. Please add my
vote to let the puppies loose, but cage the irresponsible owners.
There should not be any law making it a violation or worse a crime to
take a nice unleashed walk on a deserted beach with your best friend.
It will be a sad day in our town if it becomes officially an
Unfriendly Dog Town. I have had a dog for most of my life here. I have
enjoyed countless walks on the beach at times when no one else is
enjoying the beautiful beaches that makes our town so special. It will
ke me sick to think that I could be violating a code or law for
g my dog run free on the beach when we are enjoy a quiet walk
on the beach. I think with a little thou§ht a compromise can be worked
out so everyone can have time to enjoy the beach with and without
dogs. Special times? Special area's?.. It would also be nice to see,
as in many pet friendly towns and villa§es throughout the country
Disposal bags and receptacles should be placed in obvious easy to
access spots so owners can easily pick up and dispose of the bags.
Possibly a beach permit for your dog could fund such amenity.
Something other then an outright ban on letting dogs run free should
be able to be worked out. I feel to ban dogs from being off leash can
only decrease the property values in the town. What we need is
responsible owners and the irresponsible owners should be held
accountable.
Furthermore In my long walks on the beach I have many times come upon
a mountain of horse waste (for a better word) left behind. It seems
the horse owners don't feel the need to pick up. I think if you are
banning do§s you should ban horses too.
Neville, Eli7;~heth
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Russell, Scott
Tuesday, March 26, 2013 2:24 PM
Dinizio, James; Dohert~/, Jill; Talbot, Christopher; William Ruland; Louisa Evans
Neville, Elizabeth
FW: DOGS
FYI
..... Original Message .....
From: AUDREY WATSON [mailto:northfork~optonline.net]
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 12:14 PM
To: Russell, Scott
Ibject: RE: DOGS
thanks - just wanted to clear up the issue with Dan
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Russell, Scott wrote:
The issue of dogs on beaches has been brewing long before Dan spoke at
a public meeting. The fact is that there have been incidents at New
i~olk 8each that have nearly come to fistfights between people who
g dogs off leash and beach goers. The current code does NOT allow
dogs on beaches whether or not they are on a leash. That has been the
code since the early 1980's. We are trying to provide opportunities
for dog owners to bring dogs to beaches. In the mean time, we have
people throughout the town who are insisting that we enforce the
current code.
Now that would not be good for dogs and their owners, would it?
Scott
..... Original Message .....
From: AUDREY WATSON [mailto:northfork~optonline.netl Sent: Tuesday,
March 26, 2013 9:54 AM
To: Russell, Scott
Subject: DOGS
Dear Supervisor Russell,
I regret I cannot make the meeting today regarding the issue of dogs
I would like to clarify that in June of last year, while training my
dog
· search and rescue, A man leapt out from behind a rock and started
me with stones telling me to "get off his beach". The next day
>1
> found'the same man stalking me around town - this was a guy called
> "DAN'
lives at Bailie Beach. A police report was filed.
> Later I came to find out that he accused dogs of "Mauling him" on the
> beach - If he had indeed been mauled, who do you think would have been
> the first responder to the scene? The only call for a dog bite that I
> have been on was to a veterinarians office - and that is fifteen years
> of service.
> My incident went to court - and "Dan" was talking so much about "the
> dog
>
> on the beach" that the judge finally stated "Perhaps you would like
> the dog euthanized"?
§hould such out of control people, such as "Dan" be allowed to control
> public places and decisions?
> Thanks for your time,
> Audrey Wigley
Neville, Elizabeth
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Russell, Scott
Tuesday, March 26, 203.3 2:30 PM
Dinizio, James; Doherty, Jill; Talbot, Christopher; William Ruland; Louisa Evans
Neville, Elizabeth
FW: Proposed Dog Leash Law
FYI
..... Original Message .....
From: Catherine Hart [mailto:allharts@oPtonline.net]
Sent: Monday, March 25, 20:].3 12:07 PM
To: Russell, Scott
bject: Proposed Dog Leash Law
Unfortunately I am unable to attend the upcoming meeting about the dog leash law but I do want to share my thoughts.
The incident that precipitated this law should not have happened, dog owners need to be responsible and have control
of their dog. Whether that be with verbal commands to return or on a leash. I have several dogs and any time I see that
someone is uncomfortable with my dogs I do remove them from the area even in my home as I do respect not everyone
likes or is comfortable with dogs.
unfortunate that this proposed leash law will restrict our dogs from running, swimming, playing. Now some would
ust take the dog to the dog park. While the dog park provides fenced space for dogs to run it is not a great place
from older dogs as they just want to sniff and walk. Truthfully our dogs are members of our family they go with me to
babysit, walk into town and yes we go to walk on the beaches in the winter.
These laws will be as restrictive as the city, but I believe there are parks and times when dogs in city parks can be off
3sh so this will be more restrictive then NYC. There must be a solution that would keep everyone happy and safe.
As an aside I have a Newfoundland, a water dog when I was looking to do water rescue training I would have to go up to
Bear Mountain as there is no where here to do this. Seems strange surrounded by water, fortunate to have so many
beaches but none that our dogs can go to for a swim.
I don't believe in just complaining about an issue without offering a solution I would be happy to be part of a focus group
to look into addressing this concern, please do not rush to a law change without exploring options.
Regards,
Catherine Hart
"Skipper" certified Therapy Dog, Therapy Dog International
1900 Westphalia Ave.
Mattituck, NY
631 29810009
.net
Audubon
Society,,,
danuary 29, 2013
Scott Russell
Southold Town Supervisor
P.O Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
RECEIVED
FEB 1~ 013
$outhold iown
Dear Mr. Russell and members of the Town Board,
I have been working as a beach nesting bird steward for over 25 years, originally with The Nature Conservancy
~.d currently with The North Fork Audubon Society. Stewards not only monitor the birds nesting process but
also identify and work to abate any threats to nesting success. Threats include pedestrian traffic on beaches,
crows, gulls, cats, foxes, raccoons, ATVs and other vehicles, fireworks, and dogs.
When we talk about threats to these birds we're not just talking about direct contact, crows taking eggs from
nests, cats taking flightless young, or an ATV running over an unprotected nest. We are also talking about
perceived threats.
Piping plovers and least terns perceive the aforementioned examples as threats and will react accordingly.
~acting accordingly is usually leaving the nest or flightless young and trying to get the attention of the
'~edator so that it may lead it away from the nest or young. While it is busy doing this, the eggs or young are at
risk of being taken by another predator or of exposure to extreme temperatures, cold in April and May, hot in
June and July. If the adult plover or tern is offthe nest too often or too long, the eggs may not develop properly
and therefore will not hatch.
OEvery time a person or dog, on leash or off, walks by a nest or flightless young, the adults will leave the nest,
drawing attention away from the eggs or young, often by behaving as if they have a broken wing.
Plover eggs are laid directly on the sand and take nearly a month to hatch. After the eggs hatch, the precocial
young often roam far from the nesting area to find food on their own, since they are not fed by the adults. They
will not be able to fly for nearly a month. During this time they are most at risk of being preyed upon by crows,
gulls, cats and other predators.
Least terns are similar in as far as laying their eggs on the sand but their young are semi-precocial. They are
able to move about the nesting area and wait for the adults to bring back fish for the young to consume. Tern
chicks are also most at risk during this time.
On behalf of the North Fork Audubon Society, 1 strongly recommend that dogs not be allowed on beaches
between April Ist through August 31st, when Piping Plovers and Least Terns are known to be nesting on those
beaches.
Sin.cercly,
Thomas J. Damiani
Plover and Tern Steward
North Fork Audubon Society
Steven Bellone
SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE
Department of
Economic Development and Planning
Joanne Minieri
Deputy County Executive and Commissioner
Division of Planning
and Environment
February 27, 2013
RECEIVED
Town of Southold
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, N.Y. 11935
Am Linda Cooper, Deputy Town Clerk
t~AP, 4 20t3
Applicant:
Zoning Action:
Resolution # 2013-155:
Public Hearing Date:
S.C.P.D. File No.:
Town of Southold
Amendments
Chapter 85 - Animals and
Chapter 193 - Parks & Recreation Areas...
"Dogs and Domestic Animals"
3/26/13
SD-13-LD
Dear Ms. Cooper:
Pursuant to the requirements of Sections A 14-14 to A 14-25 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code,
the above referenced application which has been submitted to the Suffolk County Planning Commission
is considered to be a matter for local determination as there is no apparent significant county-wide or
inter-community impact(s). A decision of local determination should not be construed as either an
approval or disapproval.
Very truly yours,
Sarah Lansdale
Director of Planning
Chief Planner
APF:mc
LEE DENNISON BLDG · 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HWY, 4th FI · P.O, BOX 6t00 · HAUPPAUGE, NY 11788-0099 · (631) 853-6191
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
DONALD J. WILCENSKI
Chair
WILLIAM J. CREMERS
PIERCE RAFFERTY
JAMES H. RICH III
MARTIN H. SIDOR
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
MAILING ADDRESS:
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971
OFFICE LOCATION:
Town Hall Annex
54375 State Route 25
(cot. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.)
Southold, NY
Telephone: 631 765-1938
Fax: 631 765-3136
To:
From:
Date:
Re:
MEMORANDUM
RECEIVED
Elizabeth A. Neville, Town Clerk
Donald J. Wilcenski, Chairman'*j~'¢-~.~
February 26, 2013
Southold Town Cle~ k
Resolution Number 2013-"155 "A Local Law in Relation to
Amendments to Chapter 83, Animals, and Chapter 193, Parks and
Recreation Areas, in connection with Control of Dogs or Domestic
Animals throughout the Town" of the Town of Southold Code.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed
amendments to the Town Code referenced above.
The Planning Board has reviewed the proposed amendments and supports the
adoption of this legislation.
CC:
Scott Russell, Town Supervisor
Members of the Town Board
Town Attorney
#11086
STATE OF NEW YORK)
) SS:
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK)
Karen Kine of Mattituck, in said county, being duly sworn, says that she is
Principal Clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a weekly newspaper, published at
Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, and that
the Notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been regularly published in
said Newspaper once each week for 2 non-consecutive weeks on the following
dates - Februa~ 28, 2013 and March 14, 2013.
Principal Clerk
Sworn to before me this
day of
/~/~/~(~/~._~ 2013.
CHRIqT1NA VOttNSKI
NOTARY PUBti,:'-~,;/J; OF NEW YORK
No, ~',(~b] 05050
Quallfie~ }n Suftot~ County
BE IT EN~ by,he Tovm Board
of tha Town of Smalitold a~ follow. I. Purp~
The purpose of these J~endmeuts is
to protect the health, safety and wellbe-
ing of Town residents and guests using
Tv.. recreational areas by enacting
regulations pertaining to control of dogs
and other domestic ~nlm~kis t[~rOli~hout
the Town and on Town-owned recxe-
ational areas, beaches, children's play
a~eas, picnic areas and athletic fields.
IL Chapter 83 of the Code of the
Town of Southold is bereby amended as
follows:
~3-6. Ptohibiaed achy#les.
A. Run at inr~e el~where than upon
tha premises of tha owner or custodian
~ or unle~ it.be upon ~he ~of
another person with the ~ ~
2. E~w~h~ dm'in~ ~ ~ that a
A. Be present in any recreational area
while under the influence of intoxicating
regulations as may be designated by the
t~ Fail to produce and e~hibit any
permit fxom the Superintendent which
he claims to have upon reque, st Of any
auth? ,r?ed perso, n .who shall dcsh*c t? in-
troy ~ or participating in an activity
undm' the authority of a permit.
P.~ Erect an~' Itmcture, stand or plat-
form or hold al~y.meetings, perform any
ceremony, make a speech or address, ex-
hibit any performance or form any parade
or procession in any recreational area
be adjudged by ~ny court o[ competent
jurisdiction to ha invalid, the judgment
IV. ~c.'l'lYE DATE
mediately upon filin_o with the Secretary
Dated: February 12, 2013
THE TOWN BOARD
o~X~m~ ov SOuT~OLD,
[o ~ ~e h~, s~e~ ~d we
~ut ~ ob~ au~o~-'
~ ~eafi~ ~ ~ en~g ~SE~ uon.
~ ~g to ~1 of do~
~ ~y c~, ~nten~, para~a~
~ ~r domes~ ~ ~OU~out S~on, or
· ~ ~p~r ~ of the ~e og ~e
a whole or ~y ~ ~ereof o~er t~
o~ ~ ~u~old is hereby ~ended
~ ~ ~ ~ or ~v~d.
of ~ ~ ~ ~e ~ ~ ~u~e~e~
~ to~t ~ ~gto:
~ ~~ ~-~ ~, BY ORDER OF
~-~
o'IICE Lq HEREBy GIVEN, ']~-~e~Oeri~ent-Bl~V in hi. ~.
there has been presented to tbe Town
~ ~.the To~ of Southold, S~o~ ~efi~ d~m 'a~;Z ~
~0~3'a ~ ~w enff~ ~~a~
' ~ ~ ~ndu~
w~~ Be pr~q~ ~ ~y ~ea~ofl~ ar~
~ ~'~r~der ~e '~uen~ °' int°~t~g
Town of Southold will hold a public
~heea/i~l_ g ou the aforesaid Local Law at
e ~outhold Town Hall, 53095 Main
Road, S0uthold, New York, 0n the
ume al/interested persons will be given
an opportunity to be heard. ~
STATE OF NEW YORK)
SS:
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK)
LINDA J. COOPER, Deputy Town Clerk of the Town of Southold, New York being
duly sworn, says that on the/q, day of -f/~.~ ,2013, she affixed a notice of
which the annexed printed notice is a tree copy, in a proper and substantial manner, in
a most public place in the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, to wit:
Town Clerk's Bulletin Board, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York.
Re: PH Chpt 83 and 193 Dogs on parks and rec areas
Sworn before me this
~__ day of~'~ ~a.~, 2013.
Notary F~lic
BONNIE J. DOROSKI
T?nt,qry Public, State Of New York
i , ] [)G6r~95328, Suffolk C~plmt~
I r :'!S hlly 7, 20 i~
Li'nda'J. Coo~er
Deputy Town Clerk
SUMMARY OF LUAMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 83 AND
CHAPTER 193, CONTROL OF DOGS OR DOMESTIC ANIMALS
THROUGHOUT THE TOWN
THE PROPOSED LOCAL LAW THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS
AFTERNOON'S PUBLIC HEARING AMENDS CHAPTERS 83 AND 193 OF THE
SOUTHOLD TOWN CODE.
REGARDING CHAPTER 83, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS REQUIRE
THAT ALL DOGS THAT ARE NOT ON THE PREMISES OF THE DOG OWNER
OR A CUSTODIAN BE LEASHED. AN EXEMPTION TO THIS REQUIREMENT
ARE DOGS IN THE COMPANY OF A HUNTER ON PREMISES WHERE
HUNTING IS PERMISSIBLE.
THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 193 ADD A NEW SECTION
OUTLINING REGULATIONS FOR DOGS OR DOMESTIC ANIMALS ON TOWN-
OWNED RECREATIONAL AREAS. DOGS AND DOMESTIC ANIMALS ARE
PROHIBITED ON RECREATION AREAS THAT ARE POSTED AS SUCH, ON
BEACHES WHERE A LIFEGUARD IS ON DUTY AND NEAR AREAS THAT
ARE POSTED FOR PROTECTION OF PIPING PLOVERS AND OTHER
ENDANGERED SPECIES. DOGS AND DOMESTIC ANIMALS ARE
PERMITTED ON ALL OTHER RECREATION AREAS IF SUCH DOGS AND
DOMESTIC ANIMALS ARE LEASHED. FINALLY, THE SUPERINTENDENT
(DPW DIRECTOR) IS AUTHORIZED TO DESIGNATE ADDITIONAL
RECREATIONAL AREAS AS AREAS WHERE DOGS AND DOMESTIC
ANIMALS ARE PROHIBITED.
THE FULL TEXT OF THE PROPOSED LOCAL LAW IS AVAILABLE FOR
REVIEW IN THE TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE AND ON THE TOWN'S WEBSITE.
LEGAL NOTICE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE 1S HEREBY GIVEN, there has been presented to the Town Board of the
Town of Southold, Suflblk County, New York, 12th day of February, 2013, a Local Law
entitled "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 83, Animals~ and
Chapter 193~ Parks and Recreation Areas~ in connection with Control of Dogs or
Domestic Animals throughout the Town" and
NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the Town Board of the Town of
Southold will hold a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town
Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, on the 26th day of March, 2013, at 4:32
p.m. at which time all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard.
The proposed Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to
Chapter 83~ Animals~ and Chapter 193~ Parks and Recreation Areas~ in connection
with Control of Dogs or Domestic Animals throughout the Town" reads as follows:
LOCAL LAW NO. 2013
A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 83~
Animals~ and Chapter 193~ Parks and Recreation Areas~ in connection with Control
of Dogs or Domestic Animals throughout the Town".
BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows:
Purpose.
The purpose of these Amendments is to protect the health, safety and wellbeing of
Town residents and guests using T~,;;m recreational areas by enacting regulations
pertaining to control of dogs and other domestic animals throughout the Town and
on Town-owned recreational areas, beaches, children's play areas, picnic areas
and athletic fields.
11. Chapter 83 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows:
{}83-6. Prohibited activities.
It shall be unlawful for any person owning, harboring, in possession of or in
control of any dog in the Town of Southold to permit or allow such dog to:
A. Run at large elsewhere than upon the premises of the owner or custodian
unless said dog shall be on a leash er acc~mpanic~ ~v~ ........... ~ vv. ov.. ~, .~,~' !2
j ....... e~, · ...... e ~ ................... g, or ~less it be upon the
premises of ~other person with the knowledge and consent of such
F ......v o. wo~ cf This prohibition ~ shall not apply to a
person. ~- '~ ........
dog or dogs hunting in the comply ':,'~tS ora h~ter or hunters upon ~y
premises where hunting is pe~issible. ~
IlL Chapter 193 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows:
§193-3.1. Regulations concerning dogs or domestic animals.
A. Prohibition. No person shall bring a dog or other domestic animal onto:
recreation areas, picnic areas, children's play areas and/or athletic
fields that are posted with signage indicating "No Dogs or
Domestic Animals Allowed" or "Dogs or Domestic Animals
Prohibited";
beaches during such times that a lifeguard is on duty;
an area that is within 50 feet of any recreation area that is posted
for protection of piping plovers and other endangered species.
Dogs or other domestic animals are permitted on all other recreational
areas unless specifically prohibited in § 193-3.1 (A), if leashed and under
immediate supervision and control of the owner or other responsible
person. For the purposes of this article, the requirement of a leash shall
not apply to a dog or dogs hunting in the company of a hunter or hunters
on recreational areas where hunting is permissible
All dog or domestic animal waste shall be removed in accordance with
§83-18(B).
The Superintendent may, in his or her discretion, deem additional
recreational areas subject to prohibition for § 193-3.1 (A) as circumstances
warrant.
§193-9. Behavior and conduct.
No person shall:
Be present in any recreational area while under the influence of
intoxicating liquor.
Build or attempt to build a fire except in such areas and under such
regulations as may be designated by the Superintendent.
D.C_ Fail to produce and exhibit any permit from the Superintendent which he
claims to have upon request of any authorized person who shall desire to
inspect the same for the purpose of enforcing compliance with any law or
rule.
E.D_ Disturb or interfere unreasonably with any person or party occupying any
area or participating in an activity under the authority of a permit.
Erect any structure, stand or platform or hold any meetings, perform any
ceremony, make a speech or address, exhibit any performance or form any
parade or procession in any recreational area without first obtaining
authorization.
11I. SEVERABILITY
If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by
any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the
validity of this law as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be
unconstitutional or invalid.
IV. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as
provided by law.
Dated: February 12, 2013
BY ORDER OF THE TOWN BOARD
OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Elizabeth A. Neville
Town Clerk
Please publish on February 28 and March 14~ 2013 and forward one (1) affidavit of
publication to Elizabeth A. Neville, Town Clerk, P O Box 1179, Southold, NY 11971.
Copies to the following:
The Suffolk Times
TC Bulletin Bd
Police Department
Town Board Members
Web site
Town Attorney
Dept of Public Works
RESOLUTION 2013-155
ADOPTED
DOC ID: 8580
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2013-155 WAS
ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON
FEBRUARY 12, 2013:
WHEREAS, there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk
County, New York, on the 12th day of February, 2013, a Local Law entitled "A Local Law in
relation to Amendments to Chapter 83~ Animals~ and Chapter 193~ Parks and Recreation
Areas~ in connection with Control of Dogs or Domestic Animals throughout the Town"
now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a public hearing on the
aforesaid Local Law at Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, on the 26th
day of March, 2013, at 4:32 p.m. at which time all interested persons will be given an
opportunity to be heard.
The proposed Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 83~
Anlmaln~ and Chapter 193~ Parks and Recreation Areas~ in connection with Control of
Dogs or Domestic Animals throughout the Town" reads as follows:
LOCAL LAW NO. 2013
A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 83~ Animals~ and
Chapter 193~ Parks and Recreation Areas~ in connection with Control of Dogs or Domestic
Animals throughout the Town".
BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows:
I. Purpose.
The purpose of these Amendments is to protect the health, safety and wellbeing of Town
residents and guests using Tzwn recreational areas by enacting regulations pertaining to
control of dogs and other domestic animals throughout the Town and on Town-owned
recreational areas, beaches, children's play areas, picnic areas and athletic fields.
1I. Chapter 83 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows:
§83-6. Prohibited activities.
It shall be unlawful for any person owning, harboring, in possession of or in control of
any dog in the Town of Southold to permit or allow such dog to:
Run at large elsewhere than upon the premises of the owner or custodian unless
id d h 11 b 1 h ........ ~'~ ~' ........... ~o, !2 ....... c
sa og s a e on a cas or ....... v ....... ; ,.v ............. ; .......
Resolution 2013-155 Board Meeting of February 12, 2013
....... r~ ~,-,-,~ ..................... 6, or unless it be upon the premises of another
person with the knowledge and consent of such person. For-the-purpose-~ This
prohibition ~ shall not apply to a dog or dogs hunting in the company w;.th
of a hunter or hunters upon any premises where hunting is permissible, t.~l hc
III. Chapter 193 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows:
§193-3.1. Regulations concerning dogs or domestic animals.
A. Prohibition. No person shall bring a dog or other domestic animal onto:
recreation areas, picnic areas, children's play areas and/or athletic fields
that are posted with signage indicating "No Dogs or Domestic Animals
Allowed" or "Dogs or Domestic Animals Prohibited";
beaches during such times that a lifeguard is on duty;
an area that is within 50 feet of any recreation area that is posted for
protection of piping plovers and other endangered species.
Dogs or other domestic animals are permitted on all other recreational areas
unless specifically prohibited in § 193-3.1 (A), if leashed and under immediate
supervision and control of the owner or other responsible person. For the
purposes of this article, the requirement of a leash shall not apply to a dog or dogs
hunting in the company of a hunter or hunters on recreational areas where hunting
is permissible
C. All dog or domestic animal waste shall be removed in accordance with §83-
The Superintendent may, in his or her discretion, deem additional recreational
areas subject to prohibition for § 193-3.1 {A) as circumstances warrant.
§193-9. Behavior and conduct.
No person shall:
Be present in any recreational area while under the influence of intoxicating
liquor.
G.B Build or attempt to build a fire except in such areas and under such regulations as
may be designated by the Superintendent.
Updated: 2/12/2013 1:46 PM by Lynne Krauza Page 2
Resolution 2013-155 Board Meeting of February 12, 2013
~.C Fail to produce and exhibit any permit from the Superintendent which he claims
to have upon request of any authorized person who shall desire to inspect the
same for the purpose of enforcing compliance with any law or rule.
Disturb or interfere unreasonably with any person or party occupying any area or
participating in an activity under the authority of a permit.
Erect any structure, stand or platform or hold any meetings, perform any
ceremony, make a speech or address, exhibit any performance or form any parade
or procession in any recreational area without first obtaining authorization.
III. SEVERABIL1TY
If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any
court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law
as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid.
IV. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as provided
by law.
Elizabeth A. Neville
Southold Town Clerk
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Louisa P. Evans, Justice
SECONDER: Christopher Talbot, Councilman
AYES: Ruland, Talbot, Doherty, Evans, Russell
Updated: 2/12/2013 1:46 PM by Lynne Krauza Page 3
ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, MMC
TOWN CLERK
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS
MARRIAGE OFFICER
RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NewYork 11971
Fax (631) 765-6145
Telephone (631) 765-1800
www.southoldtownny, gov
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
February 15, 2013
Re: Resolution Number 2013-155 "A Local Law
in relation to Amendments to Chapter 83, Animals,
and Chapter t 93, Parks and Recreation Areas, in
connection with control of Dogs or Domestic
Animals throughout the Town"
Andrew P. Freleng, Chief Planner
Suffolk County Department of Planning
Post Office Box 6100
Hauppauge, New York 11788-0099
Dear Mr. Freleng:
The Southold Town Board at their regular meeting held on February ! 2, 2013 adopted the
resolution referenced above. A certified copy is enclosed.
Please prepare an official report defining the Planning Department's recommendations with
regard to this proposed local law and forward it to me at a suitable time in order to allow
sufficient time for the Town Board to review it before the public hearing.. This proposed local
law will also be transmitted to the Southold Town Planning Department for their review. The
date and time for this public hearing is 4:32 P.M., Tuesday, March 26, 2013. Please do not
hesitate to contact me, if you have any questions. Thank you.
Very truly yours,
Linda J. Cooper
Southold Deputy Town Clerk
Enclosure
cc: Town Board
Town Attorney
ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, MMC
TOWN CLERK
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS
MARRIAGE OFFICER
RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NewYark 11971
Fax (631) 765-6145
Telephone (631) 765-1800
www. southoldtownny, gov
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
February 15, 2013
Re: Resolution Number 2013-155 "A Local Law
in relation to Amendments to Chapter 83, Animals,
and Chapter 193, Parks and Recreation Areas, in
connection with control of Dogs or Domestic
Animals throughout the Town"
Donald Wilcenski, Chairman
Southold Town Planning Board
54375 State Route 25
Post Office Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Dear Mr. Wilcenski,
The Southold Town Board at their regular meeting held on February 12, 2013 adopted the
resolution referenced above. A certified copy is enclosed.
Please prepare an official report defining the Planning Department's recommendations with
regard to this proposed local law and forward it to me at a suitable time in order to allow
sufficient time for the Town Board to review it before the public hearing.. This proposed local
law will also be transmitted to the Suffolk County Planning Department for their review. The
date and time for this public hearing is 4:32 P.M., Tuesday, March 26, 2013. Please do not
hesitate to contact me, if you have any questions. Thank you.
Very truly yours,
Linda J. Cooper
Southold Deputy Town Clerk
Enclosure
cc: Town Board
Town Attorney
RESOLUTION 2013-156
ADOPTED
DOC ID: 8582
THIS 1S TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2013-156 WAS
ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON
FEBRUARY 12, 2013:
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby authorizes and directs the
Town Clerk to transmit the proposed Local Law entitled "A Local Law in relation to
Amendments to Chapter 83~ Animals~ and Chapter 193~ Parks and Recreation Areas~ in
connection with Control of Dogs or Domestic Animals throughout the Town" to the
Southold Town Planning Board and the Suffolk County Department of Planning for their
recommendations and reports.
Elizabeth A. Neville
Southold Town Clerk
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Christopher Talbot, Councilman
SECONDER: Louisa P. Evans, Justice
AYES: Ruland, Talbot, Doherty, Evans, Russell
Page 1 of I
Cooper, Linda
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cooper, Linda
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 12:05 PM
Suffolk Times Legals
Redone- Chapter 83 and 193 - Revised Dogs in park and rec areas 3-26-13
Attachments: Redone- Chapter 83 and 193 - Revised Dogs in park and rec areas 3-26-13.doc
Good morning.
I can't remember if I sent you this Legal Notice for Public Hearing so here it is. Please publish in the
Suffolk Times on February 28 and March 14, 2013.
Please confirm receipt of this notice,
Thanks and take care.
Icoop
2/19/2013
Page 1 of I
Cooper, Linda
From: Candice Schott [cschott@timesreview.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 9:34 AM
To: Cooper, Linda
Subject: Re: Redone- Chapter 83 and 193 - Revised Dogs in park and rec areas 3-26-13
Hi Linda,
I have received the notice and we are good to go for the dates requested.
Thanks and have a great day!
Candice
From: <Cooper>, Linda <Linda.Cooper~town.southold.ny.us>
Date: Tuesday, February :19, 20:13:12:04 PM
To: tr-legals <legals~timesreview.com>
Subject: Redone- Chapter 83 and :193 - Revised Dogs in park and rec areas 3-26-13
Good morning.
I can't remember if I sent you this Legal Notice for Public Hearing so here it is. Please publish in the
Suffolk Times on February 28 and March 14, 2013.
Please confirm receipt of this notice.
Thanks and take care.
Icoop
2/20/2013