Elk Grove has altered how it responds to complaints of vicious animal attacks in the aftermath of a pit bull's fatal attack on a neighbor's cat last year, according to a report headed to the City Council on Wednesday night.
During the meeting, the council is expected to respond to a May finding issued by the Sacramento County Grand Jury.
The grand jury described three "vicious or dangerous animal" incidents in Elk Grove during the last year, saying that in one case the city gave incorrect information to the owners of the cat and did not follow a procedural timeline outlined in the city's municipal code.
In that case, the family reported last September that its cat died in an attack by a neighbor's pit bull after the dog broke through the fence during Labor Day weekend.
The family called city animal services and was sent a "vicious or dangerous animal affidavit" by mail but was not told they could request a visit by animal services, the grand jury said. A hearing eventually was scheduled, but neither the independent hearing officer nor the dog's owners appeared.
The cat's owners initially were told that after a behavior assessment the dog could be euthanized or the owners would be required to construct a kennel or secondary fence to contain the dog, the report said.
But after the behavioral hearing, the dog owners were required only to pay a fine and license the dog.
The grand jury recommended that the city establish procedures to ensure timely responses to complaints and that it alter the city code so that complainants are told they can request an immediate visit from an animal control officer.
Elk Grove City Attorney Susan Cochran, in her staff report to the City Council, said the city changed its procedures before the grand jury released its findings. And on weekends or after service hours, she wrote, animal control officers are dispatched the next business day.
Cochran, after consulting with Mayor Gary Davis, is recommending that the City Council vote to agree with all the grand jury's findings. But she is proposing that the city continue with its altered procedures rather than change the city's municipal code.
The city's response must be sent to the presiding judge of the Sacramento Superior Court by Oct. 1.
