DANGEROUS ANIMAL COMPLAINT                                                          S.B. 1227 (S-1):

                                                                                                    SUMMARY OF BILL

                                                                                      REPORTED FROM COMMITTEE

Senate Bill 1227 (Substitute S-1 as reported)

Sponsor:  Senator Steven M. Bieda

Committee:  Judiciary

CONTENT

The bill would amend Public Act 426 of 1988, which governs dangerous animals, to do the following:

-- Require that the owner of a dog, upon a sworn complaint that the animal was a dangerous animal, be given at least 28 days' notice of a mandatory appearance before a court and all evidence, investigations, notes, determinations, and communications.

-- Require the owner to pay for boarding and retaining the animal unless it was held by an animal control authority and the animal was exonerated.

-- Allow, instead of require, a court to order the destruction of a dangerous animal or compliance with other requirements if the animal caused serious injury or death to an individual or death to a dog.

-- Allow a dog found to be a dangerous animal to be microchipped, instead of tattooed, at the owner's expense.

-- Prohibit an animal control officer or investigating law enforcement officer from coercing or threatening the owner of a dangerous animal to cause the owner to relinquish the animal.

MCL 287.322                                                          Legislative Analyst:  Stephen Jackson

FISCAL IMPACT

The bill would have a minor fiscal impact on the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development in that the bill would require the promulgation of rules and procedures to implement an animal identification numbering system. In addition, the bill could have a fiscal impact on local units of government that operated an animal control authority that housed an alleged dangerous animal, as the bill would make the owner of that animal not responsible for boarding and retention of that animal should the animal is exonerated of being dangerous. The bill would relieve the owner of an exonerated animal the costs of that housing, but does not specify how that housing would be paid for, which without other direction, would fall on the budget of the animal control authority.

Date Completed:  12-18-18                                                   Fiscal Analyst:  Bruce Baker

This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan Senate staff for use by the Senate in its deliberations and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent.