After Athabasca county council passed a controversial new kennel bylaw on August 25, effectively regulating all commercial facilities that house dogs, the opponents that voiced their concerns over what they see as “micro management” are weighing their options for moving forward.
Heather Betts, owner of The Dog Cottage boarding kennel, expressed her disappointment in council shoving through the bylaw amendment after they had said they would use public input to review it.
“I think what was really upsetting was that they pushed it through without due consideration,” she said, adding that she is spearheading the movement to have the bylaw amended or quashed.
After making a call to Municipal Affairs of Alberta, she said she has a few routes to take.
She can file a petition with the county manager within 60 days of the bylaw passing, a deadline of October 25. That petition can call on council to amend or repeal the new bylaw, and requires the signatures of 10 percent of the county’s population, roughly 750 names, all of which must be eligible voters.
She added that she would be seeking help from a lawyer or the Taxpayers Association, of which she is a member. The national advocacy group often assists individuals or groups who feel they have been treated unfairly by governments.
The passing of the bylaw comes two years after the previous council started the process. After the forming of a kennel committee in 2010, council struck down a proposed amendment after receiving feedback that it went too far in its management of such businesses, since its original intent was to control barking and nuisance dogs.
Betts admitted that it is good to have some sort of legislation in place and that she agreed with most of the bylaw, but said the county goes too far in this version of the bylaw.
She specifically cited the setbacks in the bylaw as her main area of concern, and the petition will directly call for their removal from the legislation.
The setbacks require 300 to 800 metres between facilities and their nearest neighbour depending on the class of facility. The bylaw also includes setbacks of 60 to 150 metres from property lines. Within the bylaw, class 1 is set at facilities housing 5-10 animals, class 2 is 11-20 and class 3 is 21 or more.
“I don’t like how they’re trying to control us to this extent, there’s got to be some control but this is really to an extreme,” she said. “We don’t think that’s fair, you don’t hear of farmers being told they have to have stay 300 feet away from the road.”
The issues of controlling operating hours and when dogs can be let outside are also examples of the county overplaying its power, she said.
Although her current facility will not be affected by the bylaw, since it only applies to new or expanding businesses, she believes it will hinder economic growth in a sector that is well needed in the county.
Elaine Leeuw, manager of planning and development, said that any business could apply for a variance from the setback requirement the bylaw imposes.
She said the owners must receive letters of support from their neighbours, after which it would be “very likely” that the county would grant the exception.
Doris Splane, the county councillor who sat as chair at the public hearing, said that she believed the concerns of the opponents of the bylaw had been addressed.
“Every issue that was addressed that day was brought up and discussed,” she said. “This time I voted for it. We’ve been working on it over the last three years, and we could finally say that we have a document to cover issues that we’ve been dealing with.”
At the August 25 council session though, Splane told those at the meeting, including Betts, that council would be reviewing the information that was put forward.
After coming out of an in-camera session at the end of the day, Councillors Denis Willcott and Mike Demko motioned for second and third reading and thought enough had been done to satisfy the public’s concerns already.
The lone councillor to oppose the motion’s, Kevin Haines, said he would have liked to see the issue looked at further.
“I felt that we had spent two years looking at this bylaw, and we still had a few concerns from the public,” he said. “I felt that their concerns warranted one more look at it, before it was finalized.”
