§ 91.46 DOG OWNERSHIP PROHIBITED; REVIEW.

   (A)   Dog ownership prohibited.

      (1)   Except as provided below, a person shall not own a dog if the person has been:

         (a)   Convicted of a third, or subsequent, violation of §§ 91.38, 91.39, or 91.40;

         (b)   Convicted of second degree manslaughter due to negligent, or intentional use, of a dog under M.S. § 609.205(4), as it may be amended from time to time; or

         (c)   Convicted of a gross misdemeanor harm caused by a dog under M.S. § 609.226, subd. 1, as it may be amended from time to time.

      (2)   Any person who owns a dangerous, or potentially dangerous, dog, and is found to be in violation of any of the provisions of this section, or had owned a dangerous, or potentially dangerous, dog, but never achieved compliance with this section may be prohibited from ownership, or custody of, another dog for a period of five years after the original declaration. Any dog found to be in violation shall be impounded until due process is completed.

      (3)   If any member of a household is prohibited from owning a dog in divisions (A)(1) and (A)(2) above, unless specifically approved with, or without, restrictions by the city, no person in the household is permitted to own a dog.

   (B)   Dog ownership prohibition review. Beginning three years after a conviction under division (A)(1) above that prohibits a person from owning a dog, and annually thereafter, the person may request, in writing, to the Chief of Police that the city review the prohibition. The city may consider such facts as the seriousness of the violation, or violations, that led to the prohibition, any criminal convictions, or other facts that the city deems appropriate. The city may rescind the prohibition entirely, or rescind it with limitations. The city may also establish conditions a person must meet before the prohibition is rescinded, including, but not limited to, successfully completing dog training, or dog handling, courses. If the city rescinds a person’s prohibition, and the person subsequently fails to comply with any limitations imposed by the city, or the person is convicted of any animal violation involving unprovoked bites or dog attacks, the city may permanently prohibit the person from owning a dog in the city.

(Ord. 19, third series, passed 6-21-2011)