Laserfiche WebLink
CC Work Session <br />Meeting Date: 11/25/2025 <br />Primary Strategic Plan Initiative: Not Applicable <br />Information <br />Title: <br />Animal Code Update <br />2. 4. <br />Purpose/Background: <br />City Staff is working on an update to Chapter 10 of Ramsey City Code, also commonly known as the 'Animal Code'. As part <br />of drafting a new animal code, members of the Community Development and Police Departments have been meeting <br />regularly to discuss various items within Chapter 10 that require updates, revisions, or additional context. The following list of <br />questions have been drafted as a result of these meetings and Staff is seeking feedback on these questions before bringing <br />the full ordinance forward for a formal review. <br />1. Staff gets many complaints about roosters (some justified, some legal). Should we continue to allow roosters with the <br />2.5-acre minimum and 2 rooster maximum per property? Should the decision on roosters also apply to crowing <br />hens? <br />2. The "round down to the nearest quarter -acre" is confusing and a straight proportionality to lot size would be easier to <br />understand. Should this "round -down" remain? <br />3. Should we reduce the 75-foot setback for stables to match that of other accessory structures? <br />1. Do we want separate setbacks for different sizes of animals? <br />2. Should there be a different setback for fenced roaming areas versus stables? <br />4. The creation of four general categories instead of specific regulations for each allowable species (large, medium, <br />small, dogs/cats) would be easier to administer. This would include alist of allowed or permitted animals, with the <br />clause that any species not explicitly allowed is considered prohibited. This change would align the animal code more <br />closely with how the zoning code is written, and it would prevent Staff from needing to list all prohibited species. <br />5. Should the City keep a non-traditional animal license to allow for species that are not explicitly allowed, though we do <br />not appear to have any currently active? <br />6. Should we update our private kennel license regulations to address the following items? <br />1. Should we keep the number of allowed dogs at 3 per property or increasing the number of dogs allowed? <br />2. Should cats be added to the private kennel license requirements? They are currently unregulated from a <br />number standpoint. <br />3. If we add cats to the limit, do we want the limit to be a total of 4 animals or a hybrid increase? <br />4. Does the Council still want to see private kennel licenses or just cases over some defined number of animals? <br />Additional questions may arise from discussion, and the topic may be brought forward to future work sessions for <br />additional discussion and feedback. <br />Notification: <br />No notification is required at this stage. <br />Funding Source: <br />The Animal Code Update is being handled through Staffs normal duties. All work has been done in-house <br />without the use of consultants, aside from an anticipated review by the City Attorney. <br />Recommendation: <br />Staff is seeking feedback on the above items related to the Animal Code Update. <br />Outcome/Action: <br />Provide feedback to Staff regarding items related to the Animal Code Update. <br />Attachments <br />