Tiara
11-15-2005, 11:59 AM
Lawsuit asks court to toss city pit bull ban
by J.C. O’Connell (jc@aurorasentinel.com)
the Aurora Daily Sun & Sentinel
http://www.aurorasentinel.com/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=11157&SectionID=8&SubSectionID=&S=1
Friday, November 11, 2005
Aurora | The city’s controversial ban on pit bulls has been debated at countless meetings and on the steps of city hall, but the argument is about to move into the courts.
A lawsuit filed Nov. 3 in the 18th Judicial District Court asks the court to overturn the ban and compensate pit bull owners who have paid the annual $200 licensing fee to grandfather-in their dogs or had their dogs confiscated. City council banned new pit bulls last month.
The ban goes into affect later this year.
“It’s unconstitutional and it’s wrong. It does nothing to make Aurora safer,” said Tina Villani, who filed the lawsuit on her own behalf.
The lawsuit claims the ban contains an “unconstitutionally vague” definition of pit bulls and violates a right to due process because it allows Aurora Animal Care to determine whether dogs are pit bulls and then seize them.
The ban also discriminates against pit bull owners and unconstitutionally restricts owners from selling their dogs, according to the lawsuit.
Villani owns three pit bulls and a rental property in Aurora but lives in Brighton.
“It raises a very good issue as to whether she does indeed have standing (to file a lawsuit),” said City Attorney Charlie Richardson. “We’re going to be looking at that,”
Villani claims in her lawsuit that the ban prohibits her from being able to move into her rental house.
“I’m not surprised,” said state Rep. Debbie Stafford, R-Aurora. “I feel like this issue has not been resolved in the Colorado courts, and for Aurora to prematurely implement a ban before it was resolved, it was probably a given that they would end up being sued.”
Stafford, an outspoken critic of the ban, said she’d rather see taxpayer dollars be spent on city services than on litigation.
“They’re going to end up spending at least a quarter-million dollars, if not more,” said Glen Bui, a member of the American Canine Foundation.
Bui said ACF is helping fund Villani’s lawsuit and has successfully opposed breed bans around the country.
by J.C. O’Connell (jc@aurorasentinel.com)
the Aurora Daily Sun & Sentinel
http://www.aurorasentinel.com/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=11157&SectionID=8&SubSectionID=&S=1
Friday, November 11, 2005
Aurora | The city’s controversial ban on pit bulls has been debated at countless meetings and on the steps of city hall, but the argument is about to move into the courts.
A lawsuit filed Nov. 3 in the 18th Judicial District Court asks the court to overturn the ban and compensate pit bull owners who have paid the annual $200 licensing fee to grandfather-in their dogs or had their dogs confiscated. City council banned new pit bulls last month.
The ban goes into affect later this year.
“It’s unconstitutional and it’s wrong. It does nothing to make Aurora safer,” said Tina Villani, who filed the lawsuit on her own behalf.
The lawsuit claims the ban contains an “unconstitutionally vague” definition of pit bulls and violates a right to due process because it allows Aurora Animal Care to determine whether dogs are pit bulls and then seize them.
The ban also discriminates against pit bull owners and unconstitutionally restricts owners from selling their dogs, according to the lawsuit.
Villani owns three pit bulls and a rental property in Aurora but lives in Brighton.
“It raises a very good issue as to whether she does indeed have standing (to file a lawsuit),” said City Attorney Charlie Richardson. “We’re going to be looking at that,”
Villani claims in her lawsuit that the ban prohibits her from being able to move into her rental house.
“I’m not surprised,” said state Rep. Debbie Stafford, R-Aurora. “I feel like this issue has not been resolved in the Colorado courts, and for Aurora to prematurely implement a ban before it was resolved, it was probably a given that they would end up being sued.”
Stafford, an outspoken critic of the ban, said she’d rather see taxpayer dollars be spent on city services than on litigation.
“They’re going to end up spending at least a quarter-million dollars, if not more,” said Glen Bui, a member of the American Canine Foundation.
Bui said ACF is helping fund Villani’s lawsuit and has successfully opposed breed bans around the country.