[nagdu] Denver City Council rejects service exemption for pit-bullban

[Jordan Gallacher]

Frankly, I couldn't see using a Pitbull as a service animal.  On that note
though, if there happens to be a violation of Federal law, well then Denver
is out of line.  Pitbulls aren't all bad, but as with all animals they have
their problems.  
Jordan

-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf
Of Ginger Kutsch
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 7:47 AM
To: NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users
Subject: [nagdu] Denver City Council rejects service exemption for
pit-bullban

    Denver City Council rejects service exemption for pit-bull
ban
By Kyle Glazier 
The Denver Post
Posted: 12/07/2010 01:00:00 AM MSTUpdated: 12/07/2010 01:01:03 AM
MST
 

The Denver City Council on Monday rejected a measure to exempt
pit bulls classified as service animals from Denver's ban on the
breed, a move that exemption supporters say challenges the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
 
A revised version of the ADA takes effect March 15.
 
The council delayed a vote on the measure in September, sending
the issue back to committee for further discussion. 
 
On Monday, council members voiced concerns that the breed is
unsafe and that approving the exemption would make Denver's 1989
pit-bull ban difficult to enforce. The council voted 9-4 to
reject the exemption.
 
Of particular concern to some members was language in the ADA
that prevents public-safety officials from demanding proof that a
dog is a service animal.
 
The law defines a service animal as "any dog that is individually
trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an
individual with a disability." Under the act, officials can ask
only if the animal is a service animal and what task it performs
- not what breed the animal is.
 
"I need to be able to see that the animal is trained," said
Councilwoman Peggy Lehmann, who opposed the measure.
 
Councilwoman Paula Sandoval, who supported the exemption, said
she was counting on honesty to overcome the loophole in
enforcement. "I'm hoping people won't try to game the system."
 
Councilman Charlie Brown urged his colleagues not to "roll over
and play dead" for the federal government and to stand by the
pit-bull ban.
 
Asked about the civil liability of Denver in possibly defying
federal law, Assistant City Attorney David Broadwell declined to
comment.
 
"Projecting who might sue us, or how they might sue us, is
something with some sensitivity around it," Broadwell said.
 
Supporters of the exemption said that public-safety concerns
about the breed had nothing to do with their feelings.
 
"I don't care about pit bulls," said David Kennedy, chairman of
Denver's Commission for People With Disabilities. "This is about
them chipping away at civil rights."
 
Kennedy said that he feared that Denver taxpayers would have to
bear the burden of the council's decision, anticipating numerous
lawsuits challenging Denver's refusal to allow service pit bulls.
 
Candice Adler of the Rocky Mountain ADA Center, which provides
guidance on the act in the Rocky Mountain region, said that the
Americans with Disabilities Act requires governments to make
"reasonable modifications" to local law to accommodate those with
disabilities. Adler admitted the language was vague. 
 
"It will depend on what's 'reasonable,' " she said. "We do see
both sides."
 
Kyle Glazier: 303-954-1638 or kglazier at denverpost.com 
 
Source:
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_16794485
 
 
 
 
_______________________________________________
nagdu mailing list
nagdu at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nagdu:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/jgallacher1987%40gmai
l.com