Connecticut 2012 Regular Session

Connecticut House Bill HB05124

Introduced
2/16/12  
Introduced
2/16/12  
Refer
2/16/12  
Refer
2/16/12  
Report Pass
3/14/12  
Report Pass
3/14/12  
Refer
3/26/12  
Refer
3/26/12  
Report Pass
4/2/12  
Report Pass
4/2/12  
Engrossed
4/17/12  
Engrossed
4/17/12  
Report Pass
4/18/12  
Report Pass
4/18/12  
Chaptered
5/8/12  
Chaptered
5/8/12  
Enrolled
5/9/12  
Passed
5/14/12  

Caption

An Act Concerning The Appeal Of Certain Animal Restraint Orders.

Impact

If enacted, the bill modifies existing statutes pertaining to animal control by clarifying the authority of animal control officers and the processes they must follow when dealing with animals that have attacked individuals. It specifies the appeal rights of owners when they are aggrieved by an animal control order, thus impacting how such cases are managed at the local level. By formalizing these procedures, HB 5124 aims to enhance accountability among animal owners and improve public safety regarding animal interactions.

Summary

House Bill 5124 addresses the appeal process related to certain animal restraint orders. The bill outlines the conditions under which an animal may be quarantined if it has bitten or attacked someone, specifically detailing the responsibilities of animal control officers. It establishes a clear procedural framework for the handling of incidents involving dangerous animals, emphasizing the necessity for prompt notices to be given to affected parties, such as individuals who have been bitten. This ensures that there is a mechanism in place to address public safety concerns in a swift manner.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 5124 appears largely supportive, with advocates highlighting its potential to enhance community safety by providing clear guidelines on how to handle animal attacks. There may be some concerns raised by pet owners regarding the implications of potential quarantines and the powers given to animal control officers. However, overall, the discussions suggest a consensus on the need for legislated clarity in this area, indicating a generally positive view of the bill's objectives.

Contention

Notable points of contention may arise concerning the balance between public safety and the rights of pet owners. Some may argue that the bill gives too much authority to animal control officers, while others may believe it does not go far enough to protect individuals from dangerous animals. The specifics of quarantine orders and the appeal processes could spark debate in community discussions as stakeholders consider the ramifications of the proposed changes.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CT SJ00007

Resolution Granting The Claims Commissioner An Extension Of Time To Dispose Of Certain Claims Against The State Pursuant To Chapter 53 Of The General Statutes.

CT HJ00041

Resolution Granting The Claims Commissioner An Extension Of Time To Dispose Of Certain Claims.

CT HJ00023

Resolution Granting The Claims Commissioner Extensions Of Time To Dispose Of Certain Claims Against The State.

CT HJ00038

Resolution Concerning The Disposition Of Certain Claims Against The State Pursuant To Chapter 53 Of The General Statutes.

CA AB2009

California Travel and Tourism Commission.

CA AB1920

California Travel and Tourism Commission.

CA AB2323

Insurance: covered communications.

CA AB736

California Travel and Tourism Commission: meetings: records and minutes.