§ 90.34 EMERGENCY CUSTODY OF ATTACKING ANIMALS.
   (A)   Whenever the animal control officer or a police officer receives credible information that a dog or other animal has attacked savagely and brutally a human being or domestic pet, and the whereabouts of the attacking animal is known, the animal control officer shall have the emergency authority to enter the exterior area of private premises to retrieve the animal. The term exterior area shall mean any part of the premises which is outside the close of the residence, commercial building or other enclosed structure. The consent of the animal owner or the lawful occupant of the premises is not necessary to seize the attacking animal. No warrant shall be required under these circumstances, and it shall be unlawful to resist or interfere with the animal control officer or police officer in taking such action.
   (B)   Upon taking custody of the animal, the animal control officer shall provide to its owner a written notice of the basis for the seizure, shall arrange for the animal’s humane custody and confinement pending a hearing before the municipal judge, and shall notify the animal owner as soon as feasible of the expected hearing date, which shall be no later than five days from the date of seizure, unless the municipal judge shall determine there is compelling reasons to extend the date. Leaving the written notice reasonably secure at the front or primary entrance to the house or structure on the property where the animal is seized, shall be sufficient delivery to the owner if the owner is not present or if the owner’s location cannot be determined.
   (C)   At the hearing the animal control officer or police officer, or other representative of the town, shall present evidence, if any, that the animal presents a clear and imminent threat to public safety and that the on premises facilities for confining the attacking animal are not reliably sufficient to restrain the animal or to prevent its release by persons choosing to do so. The animal owner shall be afforded an opportunity to rebut the evidence.
   (D)   If the judge finds that the animal is by virtue of the known attack a dangerous or vicious animal, as defined in §§ 90.01 et seq., then the judge shall order that the animal shall be banned from the Town of Pendleton, regardless of the confinement precautions otherwise in place, and the judge shall order the animal removed from the town or destroyed, and if the animal is to be removed from the town then precautions against its re-entry shall be established to the full extent feasible. If the animal is not destroyed or removed as ordered by the judge, then it shall be a violation of this chapter to possess the animal or to allow it to run at large and each day of a continuing violation shall be a separate violation, punishable as otherwise provided for under this chapter.
   (E)   In lieu of a bench trial, the animal owner may elect to have a jury trial on the facts of the dangerous nature of the animal. Pending the jury trial, the municipal judge shall make arrangements that are just and fair for the retention of the animal.
(Ord. 16-08, passed 4-4-16; Am. Ord. 16-22, passed 9-6-16)