Gavin Stone | Daily Journal
                                Councilman Eddie Martin is leading an effort to change the City of Hamlet’s ordinances to allow individual residents to file complaints about dogs causing disturbances.

Gavin Stone | Daily Journal

Councilman Eddie Martin is leading an effort to change the City of Hamlet’s ordinances to allow individual residents to file complaints about dogs causing disturbances.

<p>Gavin Stone | Daily Journal</p>
                                <p>Hamlet City Manager Matthew Christian told the City Council Tuesday that civil penalties may be a more effective way to mediate concerns over dogs causing nuisances than charging residents with code violations which are often dismissed in court.</p>

Gavin Stone | Daily Journal

Hamlet City Manager Matthew Christian told the City Council Tuesday that civil penalties may be a more effective way to mediate concerns over dogs causing nuisances than charging residents with code violations which are often dismissed in court.

<p>Photo courtesy of the City of Hamlet</p>
                                <p>The now-approved amendment to Hamlet’s Code of Ordinances regarding livestock animals.</p>

Photo courtesy of the City of Hamlet

The now-approved amendment to Hamlet’s Code of Ordinances regarding livestock animals.

<p>Photo courtesy of the City of Hamlet</p>
                                <p>The proposed amendment to Hamlet’s Code of Ordinances regarding dogs.</p>

Photo courtesy of the City of Hamlet

The proposed amendment to Hamlet’s Code of Ordinances regarding dogs.

HAMLET — The Hamlet City Council on Tuesday approved an amendment to its Code of Ordinances that adds more specifics to the types of animals that are not allowed to be kept within city limits and continued their discussion of a concern over a barking dog that remains unresolved.

The new language in Chapter 4 of the Code of Ordinances states that, “It shall be unlawful for any person to have or maintain any livestock animals, including, but not limited to, cattle or animals of the bovine species, horses, mules, donkeys, ponies, pigs, hogs, swine, fowl, chickens, roosters, turkeys, goats, or sheep on his or her premises located within the city limits.”

Previously, the ordinance only barred hogs and fowl. With the amended ordinance now in effect, those who currently have these animals within the city limits do not have to get rid of them, but residents cannot replace those animals or increase their number, including through breeding.

Barking dog exposes weakness in city codes

At Hamlet’s May meeting, Councilman Eddie Martin raised an issue he had spoken about extensively with a Hamlet resident involving a dog being a public nuisance. According to Martin, the issue with the dog had been going on since at least spring 2020 and the resident finally got the police out there to charge the neighbor with violating the city’s Code of Ordinances 4-34(D), which outlines the rules for keeping a dog within the city limits.

However, once the issue got to court, the judge dismissed the case, Martin said, because the city’s ordinance was not specific enough about whether a violation required there to be a disturbance to an entire neighborhood or just one neighbor.

The existing ordinance only defined a nuisance as conditions which “disturb the peace and quiet of the neighborhood of the general public, and result in a neighborhood or public nuisance,” and doesn’t refer to any impact on a particular individual.

The council had a long back-and-forth about this issue at the May meeting, and asked the city manager and city attorney to present them with an amendment at the June meeting.

The proposed amendment included language to specify that these noises must not cause “discomfort of neighbors or others in proximity to the disturbance, or to make any other noises in such a manner so as to result in a serious annoyance or interference with the reasonable use and enjoyment of neighboring premises.” Additionally, the amendment would add language to disallow residents to keep, possess or maintain on a property any dog or dogs that make “continuously disturbing” noises, in addition to language outlawing dogs that “result in unsanitary conditions, or that bark, howl, [or] fight.”

There is a line in this new language which states that a dog is considered a public nuisance is making these disturbing noises “for 10 minutes within a 15-minute period.” When Councilwoman Abbie Covington asked how this would be enforced, Martin said he hadn’t seen this language, and agreed that this should be stricken from the amendment. This required further discussion at a later meeting.

City Manager Matthew Christian advised the council that civil penalties, as opposed to going through the court system and criminal action, would be an alternative solution that would allow for these issues to be addressed and mediated more quickly without requiring a protracted legal battle. And, the city attorney explained, if civil penalties have been issued prior to a formal charge of violating an ordinance, it could help get a conviction rather than have it be dismissed off the bat and waste residents’ time and money, as code violations often are.

Christian and the attorney will present more details on the civil penalty approach at the council’s next meeting.

To support the Richmond County Daily Journal, subscribe at https://www.yourdailyjournal.com/subscribe.

Reach Gavin Stone at 910-817-2673 or [email protected].