NEVER, NEVER, NEVER...............BUT THERE IT IS.
http://www.michbar.org/animal/model.cfm
In its entirety and just in case they take off their website, here it is:
Michigan State Bar Association Animal Control Ordi...
(this thing prints out on 26 pages - I doubt there are two pages worth printing.
TMB/kbmc County Ordinance, September 1999
B. An example of a police power ordinance, providing for general animal control, and exotic and dangerous animal prohibitions, along with providing for prosecution of animal abusers. This ordinance contemplates that a county would have an animal control office and have authorized staffing for such office.
Could this be the origin of the bullshit ordinances like Shiawassee County's? It sure looks like it. But it says 1999. Shiawassee County adopted theirs in January 2000. I'm thinking maybe this wasn't even the original. This was copied from somewhere else. (maybe?)
Text of Ordinance
Section 1. Preamble.
Section 1.100. Purpose, Findings and Policy.
The County of ____ deems that the ownership of an animal carries with it responsibilities to the County and its residents with regard to care and control of the animal.
In interpretation and application, the provisions of this Ordinance shall be construed to impose a primary responsibility for compliance of this Ordinance on the owner of an animal.
The County of ______ concludes it advisable to adopt a revised Animal Control Ordinance in the interest of protecting public health and safety, promoting the welfare of animals within _____ County and
providing for the orderly and uniform administration of the provisions of Act 339 of the Public Acts of 1919 as amended.
The Board of Commissioners finds that the presence of dangerous animals, as defined in this Ordinance, within _____ County creates an increased danger to public health and safety and to the welfare of other animals and people.
The Board of Commissioners, in recognition of the reallocation of governmental functions brought about by Act 139 of the Public Acts of 1973, as amended, assigns the Animals Control Division, under the direction of the Animal Control Officer, to the ______.
It is the policy of the Board of Commissioners that this Ordinance shall be vigorously enforced, to the extent that financial means permit such enforcement, whenever the activities of animals and their owners within ______ County directly endanger human life and whenever animals subject to protection by state law or this Ordinance are cruelly or inhumanely treated.
Section 1.200. This Ordinance shall be known as the ____ County Animal Ordinance.
Holy crap! Does that give you an idea of what a bullshit piece of crap this "model" is? It should. The first two sentences are just superfluous legalize. void of anything meaningful or useful.
The third sentence............Act 339 of the Public Acts of 1919 as amended. These people aren't even smart enough to know the ". DOG LAW OF 1919, Act 339 of 1919 states quite clearly in its first section: 287.261 Short title; definitions Sec. 1. and first definition(1) This act shall be known and may be cited as the “dog law of 1919”." They put in Section 1.200 giving a name for the county ordinance but they don't know Act 339 of 1919 has that provision? How dumb can they get? Do lawyers ever actually read the law?
That third sentence also says "providing for the orderly and uniform administration of the provisions". I find that so hilarious.
Public Act 339 of 1919 (you know "the dog law of 1919) was put in place to provide for orderly and uniform administration and provide state control. Attorney General opinion 4353 provides some insight into that.
........................................................................................................................
Section 1.100. Purpose, Findings and Policy.
The County of ____ deems that the ownership of an animal carries with it responsibilities to the County and its residents with regard to care and control of the animal.
In interpretation and application, the provisions of this Ordinance shall be construed to impose a primary responsibility for compliance of this Ordinance on the owner of an animal.
The County of ______ concludes it advisable to adopt a revised Animal Control Ordinance in the interest of protecting public health and safety, promoting the welfare of animals within _____ County and
providing for the orderly and uniform administration of the provisions of Act 339 of the Public Acts of 1919 as amended.
The Board of Commissioners finds that the presence of dangerous animals, as defined in this Ordinance, within _____ County creates an increased danger to public health and safety and to the welfare of other animals and people.
The Board of Commissioners, in recognition of the reallocation of governmental functions brought about by Act 139 of the Public Acts of 1973, as amended, assigns the Animals Control Division, under the direction of the Animal Control Officer, to the ______.
It is the policy of the Board of Commissioners that this Ordinance shall be vigorously enforced, to the extent that financial means permit such enforcement, whenever the activities of animals and their owners within ______ County directly endanger human life and whenever animals subject to protection by state law or this Ordinance are cruelly or inhumanely treated.
Section 1.200. This Ordinance shall be known as the ____ County Animal Ordinance.
Holy crap! Does that give you an idea of what a bullshit piece of crap this "model" is? It should. The first two sentences are just superfluous legalize. void of anything meaningful or useful.
The third sentence............Act 339 of the Public Acts of 1919 as amended. These people aren't even smart enough to know the ". DOG LAW OF 1919, Act 339 of 1919 states quite clearly in its first section: 287.261 Short title; definitions Sec. 1. and first definition(1) This act shall be known and may be cited as the “dog law of 1919”." They put in Section 1.200 giving a name for the county ordinance but they don't know Act 339 of 1919 has that provision? How dumb can they get? Do lawyers ever actually read the law?
That third sentence also says "providing for the orderly and uniform administration of the provisions". I find that so hilarious.
Public Act 339 of 1919 (you know "the dog law of 1919) was put in place to provide for orderly and uniform administration and provide state control. Attorney General opinion 4353 provides some insight into that.
........................................................................................................................
AG 4353
The Court points out in Finley v. Barker that the county treasurer is the responsible licensing office of his county under general supervision of the state agency, assisted by township and city treasurers.
This case also holds that the control of dogs is a proper exercise of police power, and that
the intent of the statute is to remedy faulty administration of former dog laws by independent local officials by providing State control.
Statutes previous to the present law having as their objective the control of dogs, the protection of domestic animals from vicious dogs, and the licensing of dogs, have been held to be an exercise of State police power
rather than revenue measures.
The operative rule of statutory construction requires such reading as will give effect to the intent of the legislature and harmonize all provisions of the statute. In construing statutes, absurd results are to be avoided.
Turning to the legislative history of the Michigan dog law, and specifically that of Section 30, we find that during the days when Michigan was a territory, a tax was imposed on dogs, payable by the owner or possessor.
This law was repealed in 1806.
........................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................
So, in 1999, the legal eagles of the State Bar of Michigan think they need to put up this "Model" ordinance to undo everything the legislature was trying to do in 1919? bad juju
It is absolutely absurd to think there will be uniform administration of laws by having every county adopt their own ordinance defining how those laws are to be administered! Now that is absurd!
All things animal are under the directions of MDARD, always have been.
They say these are The laws relative to Animal Control Officers on their website at:
http://www.michigan.gov/mdard/0,4610,7-125-1569_16979_21261---,00.htmlI just cannot fathom every county adopting their own ordinance for every one of these statutes. That just would not make sense in my world.
But...........have I been too harsh on my (and other) county commissioners for them adopting such preposterous ordinances? Our prosecutor, too, who authored the Shiawassee County one. Or was he just as egregiously misled as he misled the commissioners? Are they all really dumb as a box of rocks? Or have they just been misled?
hmmmmmmmmmm.............well, definitely misled. Geez that is a tough one to fight. The State Bar of Michigan's "Model" county ordinance. Good grief, those people must know what they are talking about. They are the legal eagles of legal eagles........aren't they? How could a mere mortal stand up to that? I dunno.
I did once ask them if they knew how to read. You know, laws are supposed to be written such that a normal person should be able to understand them. But the commissioners said they weren't lawyers and apparently they couldn't read a law unless they were a lawyer. hmmmmmmmmmm, nope, don't think I've been too harsh. They are dumb as a box of rocks. Their lawyer can't even read a law.? This makes it easier to understand how county commissioners can be so far off the mark, but they still have not done their "due diligence". They allow just about anyone to lead them around and can't even read a statute for themselves. Shame one them.
I did once ask them if they knew how to read. You know, laws are supposed to be written such that a normal person should be able to understand them. But the commissioners said they weren't lawyers and apparently they couldn't read a law unless they were a lawyer. hmmmmmmmmmm, nope, don't think I've been too harsh. They are dumb as a box of rocks. Their lawyer can't even read a law.? This makes it easier to understand how county commissioners can be so far off the mark, but they still have not done their "due diligence". They allow just about anyone to lead them around and can't even read a statute for themselves. Shame one them.
No comments:
Post a Comment