HomeMy WebLinkAboutIII. COW Agenda Item Feral Cat Update 09/14/2010 Village of Mount Prospect Mount Prospect
Community Development Department
M P
MEMORANDUM
TO: VILLAGE MANAGER, MICHAEL E. JANONIS
FROM: ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH MANAGER
DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2010
SUBJECT: FERAL CAT DISCUSSION — FOLLOW -UP
At the May 11, 2010 Committee of the Whole Meeting, the Village Board continued their discussion of feral cats
from the January 12, 2010 Committee of the Whole Meeting and reviewed eight decision models for
consideration. After review and discussion, "Model 7 - Require Additional Control Regulations for Registered
Colonies" was determined to be the preferred option with some modifications. Those modifications included the
following items:
• Define the nuisance threshold
• Address individual colonies on a complaint basis
• Require the colony caretaker to eliminate any nuisance through containment options
• Relax the Village limit of 3 cats per household for registered colonies as long as all nuisances are
addressed
• Actively work with the sponsoring organization to ensure that the colonies are properly managed
Using the above guidelines, Village Staff developed a model program with input from a local TNR sponsor, The
Feral Feline Project. We developed a mutually- agreed upon framework for a program to address feral cat
nuisances and education. Assistant Village Attorney George Wagner reviewed the program and crafted the
attached ordinance for Village Board consideration. The proposed ordinance attempts to address all of the
modifications suggested by the Village Board at their previous meeting.
Below is a summary of the sections that have been changed.
Section 1. Registered feral colonies are exempt from meeting the stray animal provisions.
Section 2. Registered feral colonies are exempt from the limit of any combination of three dogs or cats per
dwelling.
Section 3. As a matter of housekeeping, poultry has been added to the list of prohibited animals to clearly prohibit
the keeping of chickens, geese, and other poultry as had been previously prohibited.
Section 4. As a matter of housekeeping the word "probation" has been replaced with "offense ".
FERAL CAT DISCUSSION — FOLLOW -UP
September 9, 2010
Page 2
Section 5. It will be a violation to feed any nuisance wildlife (squirrels, raccoons, skunks, opossums, fox,
coyotes, and feral cats); however, it does not apply to a feral cat colony caretaker who is feeding cats.
Section 6. The collar and rabies identification shall not apply to a feral cat within a feral cat colony.
Section 7. Defines nuisance as it relates to the feral cat colonies and provides remedies to address the nuisances
that may include requiring a six foot cat -proof fence to keep feral cats on the property. The definition of nuisance
has been developed to be consistent with County and State law. If a 6 foot fence is required, Village Staff has
proposed the following two options for consideration:
Option 1. The Director of Community Development shall have the authority to permit a fence with the
condition the fence must be removed within 60 days of the termination of the feral cat colony.
Option 2. A conditional use permit is required with the condition the fence must be removed within 60
days of the termination of the feral cat colony.
Section 8. Definitions have been added to correspond to the new language and requirements.
Please forward this memorandum and attachments to the Village Board for their review and consideration at their
September 14 meeting. Appropriate Village staff will be available to facilitate the discussion and provide
additional details relating to the administration of the ordinance.
c: Assistant Village Manager, David Strahl
Community Development Director, William J. Cooney, Jr., AICP
Att.
H:\ENVH\Village Board\Feral Cats \Feral Cat Memo 9- 9- 10.doc
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE VILLAGE
CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS,
REGARDING ANIMALS
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, PURSUANT TO ITS
HOME RULE POWERS:
SECTION 1: Section 20.101, "Stray Animals Prohibited ", of Article I, General Provisions, of
Chapter 20 of the Mount Prospect Village Code shall be amended by deleting the last paragraph
and inserting the following in its place:
This section shall not apply to a feral cat that is a member of a feral cat colony,
any animal that is being used for military or law enforcement work, or any animal
trained to assist persons with disabilities.
SECTION 2: Subsection E of Section 20.104, "Sale or Possession of Certain Animals
Prohibited ", of Article I, General Provisions, of Chapter 20 of the Mount Prospect Village Code
shall be deleted in its entirety and the following inserted in its place, to be and read as follows:
E. Except for feral cats that are maintained and cared for in feral cat colonies
authorized in Section 20.203 of this Code, no more than three (3) dogs, cats or
combination of dogs and cats that are more than twelve (12) weeks of age may be
kept or harbored in any dwelling unit. For purposes of this section, the term
"dwelling unit" shall include, but not be limited to any garage, yard or other
structure associated with said dwelling unit.
SECTION 3: Section 20.104, "Sale or Possession of Certain Animals Prohibited ", of Article I,
General Provisions, of Chapter 20 of the Mou.it Prospect Village Code shall be amended by
inserting the phrase "chickens, geese, ducks, fowl, poultry," after the word "bees ", to be and read
as follows:
B. No person shall keep, maintain and/or harbor any live swine, pigs, pigeons,
bees, chickens, geese, ducks, fowl, poultry, horses or cattle within the corporate
limits of the Village, unless such keeping, maintenance and /or harboring is done
pursuant to the business of providing veterinary or animal hospital services that
are in compliance with Village regulations.
SECTION 4: Section 20.107 "Prohibited Acts ", of Article I, General Provisions, of Chapter 20
of the Mount Prospect Village Code shall be amended by deleting the word "probation" and
inserting in its place the word "offense ", to be and read as follows:
20.107 Prohibited Acts:
No person shall permit an animal at any time to: a) molest persons or vehicles by
chasing, barking or biting; b) attack other animals; or c) damage property other
255563_1 1
than the owner's. This shall be an absolute liability offense. No proof of intent to
permit or allow shall be required.
SECTION 5: Article I, General Provisions, of Chapter 20 of the Mount Prospect Village Code
shall be amended by inserting a new Section 20.108, to be and read as follows:
20.108 Feeding of Nuisance Wildlife Prohibited:
No person shall feed any nuisance wildlife on private or public property.
Nuisance wildlife includes, but is not limited to, squirrels, raccoons, skunks,
opossums, fox, coyotes and feral cats. This shall be an absolute liability offense.
No proof of intent to permit or allow shall be required. This Section does not
apply to a feral cat colony caretaker feeding feral cats.
SECTION 6: Section 20.202, "Collar and Identification ", in Article II, Dogs and Cats, of
Chapter 20 of the Mount Prospect Village Code, shall be amended by inserting the following
sentence at the end of the Section:
The collar and identification requirements of this Section shall not apply to a
feral cat which has been identified as a member of a feral cat colony.
SECTION 7: A new Section 20.203, "Feral Cat Colonies ", shall be inserted in Article II, Dogs
and Cats, of Chapter 20 of the Mount Prospect Village Code, to be and read as follows:
20.203 Feral Cat Colonies
Feral cat colonies, managed by a feral cat colony caretaker, may be operated within the Village
in accordance with Cook County Ordinance 07 -0 -72, subject to the following additional
requirements:
A. A feral cat colony caretaker shall not permit a stray or feral cat to create a nuisance.
B. A "nuisance" for purpose of this Section shall include conduct by a stray or feral cat that
disturbs the peace. A stray or feral cat may create a nuisance by 1) habitually or continually
howling, crying or screaming, or 2) destroying, desecrating, or soiling property against the
wishes of the owner of the property and running at large.
C. Nuisance complaints related to a feral cat shall be addressed in the following manner:
1. Reasonable efforts shall be used to determine if the feral cat is the member of a feral cat
colony;
2. If the feral cat is identified as a member of a feral cat colony, the feral cat caretaker
should be contacted, advised of the complaint and provided recommendations to remedy
the complaint. Such recommendations may include, but are not limited to:
a. Placing and maintaining a litter box on the caretaker's property;
b. Limiting feeding to certain times;
c. The construction of a six foot (6') cat -proof fence to keep feral cats on the caretaker's
property. In the event that a cat -proof fence is recommended,
2555631 2
Option A: The caretaker shall submit an application to the Director of Community
Development, who shall have authority to approve the construction of such a fence,
so long as it meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, except for height.
Option B: The construction of such a fence in excess of the height limitations set
forth in the Zoning Ordinance may be authorized only in accordance with the
procedures for conditional uses, as set forth in Section 14.203 of the Zoning
Ordinance.
Except to the extent that such a fence is permitted as a matter of right under the
Zoning Ordinance, the approval of such a fence shall be limited to the time during
which the property is being utilized for a feral cat colony, after which the fence shall,
within sixty (60) days of the termination of the property's use for a feral cat colony,
be removed, or modified to meet the requirements for a fence that is permitted as of
right, unless otherwise authorized under the Zoning Code.
and /or
d. [Other options ?]
1 fir Upon a feral cat caretaker's failure to comply with the Village's recommendations to
remedy complaints, subsequent nuisance complaints may be enforced by the issuance of
citations to the feral cat caretaker.
j , ,5? Nothing herein shall prevent the village from taking such other lawful action to prevent
( or remedy any violations, including, but not limited to, notification of the Department
regarding nuisance complaints.
SECTION 8: Section 20.402, "Construction ", in Article IV, Definitions, of Chapter 20 of the
Mount Prospect Village Code, shall be amended by inserting alphabetically the definitions set
forth below, to be and read as follows:
Department: Cook County Department of Animal and Rabies Control
Feral Cat: a cat that (1) is born in the wild or is the offspring of an owned or feral
cat and is not socialized, (2) is a formerly owned cat that has been abandoned and
is no longer socialized, or (3) lives on a farm.
Feral Cat Colony Caretaker: any person who provides food, water or shelter to, or
otherwise cares for, a feral cat and is an approved managed feral cat caretaker by
the Department.
Feral Cat Colony: a group of cats that congregate, more or less, together as a unit,
and are managed and cared for by a feral cat colony caretaker approved by a feral
cat colony sponsor. Although not every cat in a Colony may be feral, any
nonferal cats that congregate with a colony shall be deemed to be a part of it.
Feral Cat Colony Sponsor: Any animal humane society authorized as a feral cat
colony sponsor by the Department.
255563_1 3
SECTION 9: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage,
approval and publication in pamphlet form in the manner provided by law.
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
PASSED and APPROVED this day of , 2010.
Irvana K. Wilks
Mayor
ATTEST:
M. Lisa Angell
Village Clerk
H: \CLKO \WIN \ORDINANCE2 \Ord Ch 20 Animal - feral cat and prohibited acts draft.DOC
255563_1 4
& �nis �1(
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
JANUARY 12, 2010
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:15 p.m. in the Village Board Room of Village Hall,
50 South Emerson Street, by Mayor Pro Tem Arlene Juracek. Present at the meeting
were: Trustees John Korn, Paul Hoefert, John Matuszak, Steven Polit and Michael
Zadel. Staff present included Village Manager Michael Janonis, Assistant Village
Manager David Strahl, Community Director William Cooney and Environmental Health
Coordinator Robert Roels.
{I. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF
DECEMBER 8, 2009.
Motion made by Trustee Polit seconded by Trustee Matuszak to approve the minutes.
Minutes were approved.
III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
None
IV. FERAL CAT DISCUSSION
Mayor Pro Tem Arlene Juracek provided opening remarks regarding the discussion of
this topic and the plan for discussions this evening with the general goal for information
exchange regarding this issue.
Assistant Village Manager David Strahl provided an overview of the feral cat situation
as it exists in the Village currently. In addition to information regarding past discussions
regarding feral cat control within the Village. He also outlined the program whereby
colonies of feral cats can be sponsored under an ordinance through Cook County Health
Department and the procedures for creating and monitoring such colonies.
Comments from the Village Board members included the following items:
• There was general discussion regarding the operation of colonies as they are
sponsored and monitored by the sponsoring agencies.
• There was also a general discussion regarding uncontrolled breeding and feral
cats that are not part of a colony.
• There was a discussion regarding the Cook County ordinance procedure for
following through on complaints regarding colonies.
Committee of the Whole Page 1 of 4 1/12/10
• A discussion ensued regarding the means of communication between the Village
and county regarding situations that may arise regarding colony management.
• There was a general discussion regarding the resource options for removing feral
cats and the potential expense for trapping and removing the cats.
• There was also a discussion about the number of colonies in the community and
the fact that most of them operate under the radar and the ongoing trap, neuter
and release program and its value to control the population.
Serena Fried of the Feral Feline Project spoke. She stated there are semi annual
reports that are submitted by the colony caretakers, forwarded to the sponsor and
eventually forwarded to the County. She stated that she maintains a data base of all
cats under the sponsorship of her organization. She also stated one of the benefits of
having a TNR program (trap, neuter and release) is it will keep the cats from looking for
food in the garbage and becoming more of a nuisance since the cats are territorial.
She stated reports of new cats are provided by the colony caretakers and these cats are
trapped in order to be spayed and neutered and released back into the colonies. Kittens
are removed immediately before they get too old and can be socialized. She stated
there are more cats dumped illegally than any program can try to control. There are too
many cats to remove from the equation and there is no place to remove them to if they
were to be removed. By having an existing colony, since the cats are territorial, they
keep additional cats from moving in and expanding the colony. She stated the TNR
programs do manage the population and the cats eventually die off from the colony due
to environmental issues. She stated the average size of a colony is approximately five to
six cats.
There have been some studies regarding the colony life cycle. She did state feeding of
the colony does not need to be observed but monitored and feeding stations are
available if requested with feeding recommended to be done on a regular schedule. She
stated the size of the colonies have had no relationship to the complaint numbers in her
experience in sponsoring the colonies.
Greg Paradowich of 1102 S. Cherrywood spoke. He stated there appears to be an
unregulated colony at 1111 S. Cherrywood where he has observed a group of cats that
are a problem. He also inquired as to how dead animals are to be removed.
Robert Roels stated the Village does not provide a service to remove dead animals and
such removal is the residents' responsibility and should be placed in their regular
garbage bin.
Lisa Pacini at 303 S. Elmhurst spoke. She stated the nuisance factor has not been
addressed in her mind. She stated the resident at 307 has observed sixteen cats
regularly and it is common to see eight to ten cats feeding at the colony location. She
stated the cat feces and wastes have ruined her outdoor furniture and they tend to hang
around her property since the colony is right next door to her. She stated she believes
the practice of trap, neuter and release does not release does not work and not enough
is done to keep the cats off neighbors property.
Committee of the Whole Page 2 of 4 1/12/10
Ht \VILM \Cow12010 \MINUTES \ -12 -10 COW Minutes.doc
She also has a concern of wild animals feeding at the colony site by being attracted to
the feeding site and has previously called the County and the Village requesting
additional options be undertaken to keep cats off her property. She thought the sprinkler
option connected to a motion detector is not practical for her situation. She also stated
the large sandbox that is available at the colony site for the cats to use is out in the open
and should have a cover on it to encourage better use. She stated this problem has
been impacting her property for at least a year and a half.
Julie Filipic at 304 S. Pine spoke. She stated she observes cats constantly in her yard
and did see kittens removed from her property. She suggests that there should be a limit
on the number of animals within the colony and also felt that this is not the only colony
that has created an issue within the community.
Dr. Rebecca Baptist of 907 S. Candota spoke. She stated that she has helped by
working with the feral cat program through the TNR approach as a service that she
provides. She stated the population in the neighborhood is under control through the
colony program.
Kurt Meyer of Feral Fixers of Dupage County spoke. He stated that he appreciated
the fact that the Village Board is trying to learn about the issue and stated the TNR does
work in cutting down the breeding issues of unregulated cats. He said there are a
number of resources available and would like to be partners with the community. He
also stated there is a need to contain the nuisance and that options are available to
contain such a nuisance.
LaVon Porter a Rolling Meadows resident spoke. She stated she has partnered with
the Police Chief in Rolling Meadows and inspectors in obtaining some public tax dollars
to assist in colony management programs. She also is involved in running TNR
programs and will be running an adoption program through the Petco at the Mt.
Prospect Plaza. She stated additional information can be obtained through the Best
Friends Animal Sanctuary website.
Gerry Stone — 305 S. Elmhurst spoke. He stated he has sponsored a cat colony and
has lived at his address for 31 years. He noticed cats in the area prior to participating in
the TNR program and the colony that he services contains five cats plus two additional
cats that appear erratically to feed. He has volunteered to remove cat waste from
several neighbors' yards but some have chose not to take him up on the offer.
General comments from the Village Board members included the following items:
• There was a question whether leaving the cats outside is humane and there is a
need to address the containment issue.
• The fact that the TNR program was initially started due to health concerns of
rabies transmission should not be overlooked.
• Staff was requested to research possible remedies in conjunction with the Cook
County ordinance and possible options to contain the colony and clarify
responsibilities with the colony caretaker.
Committee of the Whole Page 3 of 4 1/12/10
H : \VILM \Cow\2010 \MINUTES11 -12 -10 COW Minutes.doc
• There was a question on whether the Cook County ordinance is detailed enough
to ensure that the goals of the TNR program are met and there was a concern
about the time necessary for a colony to run its course.
• There was also a comment whereby if someone impacts a neighbor then there
may be a need for additional regulation to minimize that impact.
• There was a general discussion regarding the question of legal authority for
regulation by the Village in relation to the County and its regulation and
ordinance.
• It was requested that additional research be undertaken to determine if other
regulations are available and what other resources are available to address the
nuisance issue.
• It was recommended that discussions be undertaken with the County to work with
them within their ordinance and review the existing Village ordinance to insure
that it is sufficient to address the situation.
V. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT
Village Manager Michael Janonis stated the Celestial Celebration is scheduled for
February 6, 2010 and tickets remain available.
VI. ANY OTHER BUSINESS
Trustee Korn reminded the viewing audience that holiday decorations need to be taken
down no later than sixty days from the holiday itself.
Trustee Polit warned the viewing and listening audience to avoid Central near Mount
Prospect Road and Rand due to some water main work and the impact on traffic.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 9:36 p.m.
Committee of the Whole Page 4 of 4 1/12/10
H: \VILM \Cow12010 \MINUTES \1 -12 -1 0 COW Minutes.doc
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MINUTES
May 11, 2010
CALL TO ORDER — ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m. in the Village Board Room of the
Village Hall, 50 South Emerson Street, by Mayor Pro Tem Arlene Juracek.
Present at the meeting were Trustees Paul Hoefert, John Korn, John Matuszak,
Steven Polit, and Michael Zadel. Staff present included Village Manager Michael
Janonis, Assistant Village Manager David Strahl, Community Development
Director William Cooney, Environmental Health Coordinator Bob Roels and
Village Attorney George Wagner.
II. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
MEETING OF JANUARY 27. 2010.
Motion made by Trustee Polit seconded by Trustee Zadel. Minutes were
approved
ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
MEETING OF MARCH 23, 2010.
Motion made by Trustee Korn seconded by Trustee Polit. Minutes were approved
III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
David Toeppen — 409 S. Hi -Lusi spoke. He wanted to advise the Village Board
about the need to consider taking advantage of a new lighting technology at the
new Randhurst Development. He stated the new technology allows for very
minimal light trespass and he has seen these new light fixtures in action and
would recommend considering them. He stated the new fixtures require less
height and are flat lenses with full cut off. He also stated similar lights are in place
at the new Wal Mart store in Mount Prospect.
William Cooney responded stating that the PUD that is in place for the
Randhurst Development already includes the cut off light requirement.
IV. FERAL CAT UPDATE
Mayor Pro Tem Juracek provided a summary of previous discussions from
January 2010. She also stated that staff was requested to undertake some
additional research at that time. She stated the purpose of this meeting is to
discuss various decision models which could eventually lead to a Village
ordinance or policy. She stated that at the conclusion of this discussion there will
likely be at least one more Committee of the Whole meeting to discuss possible
ordinance issues prior to finalization.
5/11/10
Committee of the Whole
H:\VILM \Cow\2010 \MINUTES \COW Minutes 5- 11- 10.doc
Village Manager Michael Janonis spoke. He stated that there are no clear
solutions which will make everyone happy and there are questions regarding
studies from both sides of the aisle. He stated staff has no specific
recommendations regarding this issue and it is truly a public policy decision and
subjective topic depending on your point of view. He also stated that there are
legal ramifications attached to each possible decision option.
Assistant Village Manager David Strahl provided an overview of each decision
model.
Decision Option I
The current process is complaint driven. Whereby, Village inspectors go out to
check on possible complaints primarily to determine whether someone is feeding
cats that would create a health hazard or a nuisance due to cats defecating on
other properties. He also stated that by Village ordinance there are to be no more
than three total dogs and cats per property. He stated that if a violation is found
the violator is advised of the violation and given a period of time to rectify the
situation. If they fail to rectify the situation a citation is issued and there may be
court proceedings to enforce the ordinance. He also stated that if the address
has a registered colony, it is confirmed with the local sponsor and if there are
violations according to Village ordinance those violation concerns are forwarded
to Cook County for investigation of the colony. There could be a situation in the
future whereby the County determines the colony is in compliance with County
ordinances, but not with Village ordinances, such a conflict would likely result in
legal proceedings at the Circuit Court level. However, there have been no
situations which have progressed to that level to date. There are also some
different definitions of "owner" is in terms of a citation for control of the cats
between the County and the Village.
Decision Option II
This could be described as modifying the current process and any complaint that
is filed regarding a registered cat colony is directed to the local sponsor for
resolution. This would consist of possibly two tracks, the typical track regarding
an issuance of a complaint by the Village, reinspection and legal proceedings if
failure to comply in case of the violation not being a colony. If a colony was the
root of the complaint, then the County would be responsible for investigating and
resolving the complaint. Another scenario is that the Village would terminate
proceedings once the County completed its investigation and released its results
relating to a registered colony.
Decision Option III
This could be described as utilizing the current process with a modification of
utilizing humane traps coordinated through staff for placement. This process
would have three basic directions. If a complaint was received, an inspection
would be undertaken and if it was determined not to be a sponsored colony, staff
could set up a trap to capture the animal and if the animal is not registered to a
colony it would then be euthanized. If a trapped animal was registered to a
colony it would be released on site. If an animal could not be trapped, the
process for inspection /reinspection and legal proceedings would be follovippl
Committee of the Whole Page 2 of 5
u -wit M \rr AA7f11 \MINI ITFc \C:C)W Minutes 5- 11- 10.dOc
the current process. The final aspect of this approach is to advise the sponsor of
a nuisance violation and depending on the results from the County's investigation
as to the nuisance, a resolution might be accepted from the County. However, if
the Village was dissatisfied with the result it could challenge the inspection report
through legal proceedings. This scenario would increase staff time to set and
monitor traps and to work with an animal control contractor and would likely
result in capturing numerous wildlife for euthanizing.
Decision Option IV
This option is the creation of an animal control division within the Community
Development department. This process would still be triggered by a complaint
from a resident, although the Village would have staff available to focus the
majority of their activities on animal nuisance violations, whereby the Village staff
would try to determine the owner once the animal was trapped and it was not
wild life. If after the animals have been identified and the nuisance is not abated,
this could result in additional court proceedings, either through utilizing the
sponsor or through colony for failure to comply with the judgment. This program
would be estimated to cost approximately $150,000 a year for one full time staff
person, vehicle, equipment training and immunizations, in addition to the
extensive cost of maintaining and providing the traps.
Decision Option V
This option is similar to the existing process, whereby it is complaint driven
however, the Village would lend traps to property owners that are being exposed
to a nuisance for the trapping and relocation or euthanizing of the trapped
animal. The main issue with this option is the cost of the animal control contractor
and the possibility that the resident that trapped the animal would relocate the
animal illegally.
Decision Option VI
This option is to refer all cat nuisance complaints to Cook County animal control
for their investigation and recommendation.
Decision Option VII
The final Option VII is to register local feral cat colonies within the Village and
manage their proliferation in an effort to minimize the nuisance created by the
colonies in the immediate surrounding area. This option for decision
consideration is to require registration of feral cat colonies caretakers through the
Village so that the Village is aware of these locations and to insure that if there
are nuisance issues they are addressed in a timely manner. However, this
scenario would likely result in legal proceedings with the County and the colony
sponsor without some type of involvement from the colony sponsor.
5/11/10
Committee of the Whole Page 3 of 5
u•NnI 11111r`•..•AnA1Al11AUAlt ITCQ1r'C Al 11Ainiifc g_11 in ,1,,r.
General comments from the Village Board members included the following items:
• There were general concerns about Options 5, 6, 4 & 3 and it was also
suggested that another option could be added as Option VIII whereby the
colonies would be prohibited all together.
• The remaining Options of 1, 2, and 7 could be considered for further
discussion.
Marilyn Furor - 2000 W. Lincoln spoke. She stated that she would support
Option VII and suggested that the Village focus on protecting the residents
regarding complaints and consider treating all cats as strays. She stated that
animals should be contained on your own property if you choose to care for
them.
Linda Wilcox — 1714 Pheasant Trail spoke. She stated that she feeds the
animals out of a sense of need but does not leave out the food overnight. She
stated that this discussion has allowed her to open up communication with her
neighbors regarding the resolution and retention of a cat colony in the area.
Serna Fried of the Feral Feline Project spoke. She stated the colony locations
are not publicly identified in compliance with the Cook County ordinance and
Cook County has investigated complaints in the past. She stated that she would
cooperate with the Village in confirming a colony location if a complaint is lodged
through her agency.
General comments from the Village Board members included the following items:
• It was suggested that the ordinance may be created to prohibit feeding
unless ownership can be confirmed. Thereby, there is no question about
the responsibility of the animals.
Julie Fillic — 301 S. Elmhurst spoke. She stated that even with the feeding
prohibition the colony is allowed to feed the cats thereby violating the number of
cats that are allowed on a single property. She said she would support Option VII
if the cats could be contained within a registered colony and deterrents on
neighbor's property could be extensive enough to keep animals off the property
that was not connected with the colony.
Lisa Pacina — 303 S. Elmhurst spoke. She stated that she would support
Option VII for containment and the caretaker agreement requires communication
with the residents which has not taken place in her situation.
General comments from the Village Board members included the following items.
There was the general consensus that Option VII would be the most likely option
with some modifications. Those modifications included the following items:
+ Focus on defining the nuisance threshold.
❖ The Village would only know of a colony after a complaint was
investigated and confirmation from a sponsor.
❖ It would require the colony to work with staff to eliminate the nuisance
through containment options.
•:• If the colony does not contain the cats to address the nuisance or
eliminate the nuisance then a violation and possible court proceedings
could be undertaken. 5/11/10
Committee of the Whole Page 4 of 5
i.0 "' • nt••_...tnnA •All.11 ITCQ\/sntn/ 11Ai.,1.1r.r• G. 11 . 1 (1 rinn
❖ A three animal limit would need to be relaxed for a colony if it was
registered, but would still require the nuisance to be addressed.
• There would be a need to work with the sponsoring organization to
accept this regulation and cooperate with caretaker agreements and
nuisance elimination on a more active basis than exists today.
• Obviously these options would require additional education and
responses from the TNR program for the standards to be followed.
Consensus from the Village Board was to direct staff to review Option VII with
these suggested modifications and prepare an ordinance for future consideration.
V. VILLAGE MANAGER REPORT
Village Manager Michael Janonis stated the Village is planning an American
Idol Party assuming the Idol from Mount Prospect continues through the process.
He also stated this upcoming weekend is the Village wide Garage Sale and the
Public Works Open House.
VI. ANY OTHER BUSINESS
Trustee Korn stated that plans were becoming more firm regarding the 4 of
July festival with a schedule of events to be released very soon.
Trustee Polit reminded the audience of the dates for the up coming car shows.
Trustee Juracek provided information regarding a Historical Society fundraising
event for the first peak at Fire Station 14
VII. ADJOURNMENT
Motion made by Trustee Korn seconded by Polit to move into Closed Session at
9:33p.m.
The Board reconvened into Open Session at 9:42 p.m. There was no other
business and meeting was immediately adjourned.
5/11/10
Committee of the Whole Page 5 of 5
L1•11 /11 IA\P. .....\ ITC[ L 44 .1 J__