Sadly, we can't take any credit for that wonderfully sensible, intelligent, and humane (did we forget to mention strikingly handsome?) ordinance that was posted about yesterday.
This morning, we received written confirmation that they did not use our Pet-Friendly Guide -- but that doesn't mean it isn't a brilliantly-crafted ordinance that is friendly to pets, owners, and the community. We love it!
In fact, the one issue we had concerns about, defining a "potentially dangerous dog," is a complete non-issue, as it is limited to unprovoked attacks occuring OFF-property -- or in other words, places where owners should have control over their pets. I think it's safe to say they covered their bases pretty well here:
Revise the definition of potentially dangerous dogs to “when unprovoked, has killed, seriously bitten, inflicted injury or otherwise caused injury attacking a domestic animal off the property of the owner/guardian or keeper of the dog” from the current two incidents within 36 months.
One of the first comments we received after posting yesterday's blog was "A sensible animal law? In CALIFORNIA?!?" which is either hilarious or tragic, depending upon your viewpoint. But obligatory Cali jabs aside, it is always good to see people working to make their communities fair and safe for pets and their owners.