By KIRSTEN LASKEY
Los Alamos Daily Post
kirsten@ladailypost.com

Los Alamos County Council unanimously approved a revised animal code ordinance at its meeting Tuesday night in Council Chambers at the Municipal Building, 1000 Central Ave.

The revised ordinance reflects the feedback Council provided to county staff in March, based on input received from the community.

An overview of the revisions listed in the staff report includes the following:

• Removes all provisions of the code that are shelter policies.
  Allows the Police Chief to develop and promulgate rules and policies on shelter operation subject to the County Manager’s review and approval.
• Revises the definition of “Keeper” to eliminate the more-than-six-day threshold before control or custody of an animal can be established.
• Revises “unreasonable animal noise prohibited” to read “Except for noises made by livestock, it is unlawful for anyone to own, keep or harbor any animal that habitually howls, yelps, whines, barks, or makes other noises in a manner which unreasonably disturbs the public peace.”
• Deletes language related to the disposition of dangerous animals so that it complies with state law.
  Clarifies the redemption times of impounded animals and payment of applicable fees and cost.
  Clarifies language regarding the failure to meet a pet’s wellbeing.
• Designates Ashley Pond as a Wildlife Protected Area.
• Clarifies the reimbursement of costs incurred by the County for impounded animals.
• Clarifies the reimbursement of costs incurred by the County for impounded exotic animals.
• Revises language for the adoption of impounded animals to remove the fee schedule, which will require separate Council approval, and modifies the adoption process, including the sterilization requirements.
• While the approval was unanimous, there was lengthy discussion about the proposed changes, including regarding establishing neighborhood mediation for barking dogs.

Council Vice Chair Theresa Cull said she felt a policy for neighborhood mediation might be a good idea. Councilor Suzie Havemann added she felt that the Police Department and Animal Control could develop a policy for neighborhood mediation as well as how to monitor calls and complaints about barking dogs.

Council Chair Denise Derkacs added she supports the code revisions.

“I will support these revisions … we could tweak this and tweak it and tweak it and never finalize it,” she said. “This is acceptable, and we should go forward with this …we can revisit it as needed.”
In an unrelated matter, council approved, 5-1, with Councilor Keith Lepsch absent and Councilor David Reagor opposed, to create a Diversity, Equity and Inclusivity Task Force.

The council further directed the County Manager to draft a charter for the task force.
Cull recommended approving the formation of the task force. When Derkacs asked what the task force would strive to accomplish, Cull said existing organizations in the community could be used as guides. Councilor Randall Ryti noted that the County is a member of the Government Alliance on Race and Equity, which could help as well. He encouraged approving the task force.

“There are things we need to work on,” Ryti said. “I think we just need to resurrect this effort and get a charter written.”

Reagor disagreed, saying he felt the issue isn’t about race but about economics and class.

“The entire economic system is set up to transfer wealth out of the middle class to these giant corporations … all this racial division is sewn intentionally to distract people from the real economic structure that is just brutal for the whole middle class everywhere in the country,” Reagor said. “I think we shouldn’t participate in that cause (because) this is really misleading … “
He added he felt discussions about race, inclusivity and equity are “…dishonest and they are intentionally provoking racial division as a distraction to the public. What is really going on is a terrible economic thing for 20-30 years starting with trade agreements that are decimating the middle class and that is a big concern, and all of this is participating in a smoke screen of distraction.”

Several councilors disagreed with Reagor.

“There are definitely segments of the population that are, if not outright discriminated against, treated differently whether it is on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, the list goes on and on,” Derkacs said.

In other business, council honored retiring Deputy Police Chief Oliver Morris. Morris is retiring after 20 years of service. Police Chief Dino Sgambellone commended Morris for his work.

“Thank you for recognizing Oliver … he has been so instrumental to so many people … let me say that in my 33 years it’s been a rare occasion to have the honor to work with someone like Oliver, he exemplifies everything we all strive to be, and he has done so with honor and distinction…,” Sgambellone said.

County Manager AnneLaurent joked that if the County could have refused Morris’ retirement, it would have, adding, “(We) thank him for everything he has done and all we learned from him and all that he has modeled for us to aspire to be.”

Morris credited his family for all the successes in his career.

“(With all of those things) that I’ve been part of it is impossible to be successful if you don’t have a supportive family,” he said. “All that applause is for my wife of 20 years, Kateri … and my two children Ty and Sierra.”

Council also approved 5-1, with Ryti opposed and Lepsch absent, to accept and refer to county staff for further investigation a citizen’s petition to improve road and pedestrian safety in White Rock. These improvements called for four-way stops at Sherwood and Grand Canyon, Rover and Grand Canyon and Aragon and Grand Canyon, mechanisms to remind drivers of their obligation to yield to pedestrians, and a traffic light at Sherwood and N.M. 4. Council directed that these suggested improvements be investigated and researched, in collaboration with the petitioners, the Transportation Board and any affected developers and the findings be presented to council. Ryti opposed the motion, arguing that the issue did not need to be returned to council.