- About Us
- Local Savings
- Green Editions
- Legal Notices
- Weekly Ads
Connect with Us
Council updates vehicle impound, dangerous dog laws; approves county planning policies
POULSBO — The Poulsbo City Council brought two ordinances in line with state law — vehicle impound and dangerous dogs — on Wednesday.
Hearings for impounded vehicles were moved from the Mayor’s Office to Municipal Court. The fine remains $250 a day.
The council also updated the dangerous dog ordinance, which is now in accordance with the due processing rights afforded by a 2010 state court decision.
The state Court of Appeals found in the Downey vs. Pierce County that, before a person is deprived of his or her property (in this case, a dog), the person shall receive an evidentiary hearing without being charged a court fee, and the local jurisdiction must prove the dog meets the definition of dangerous.
Previously, the burden was on the owner to prove the dog did not meet the definition.
Council approves planning policies, growth rate
On the advice of the Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council, the Poulsbo City Council reviewed and adopted the Kitsap Countywide Planning Policies on Wednesday.
The planning policies are required by the state’s Growth Management Act, and help determine future population allocations within defined Urban Growth Area boundaries.
Local resident Jan Wold and a few councilmembers raised concerns about the growth rates, which predict Poulsbo’s population will reach nearly 15,000 by 2025. However, because the city is required to ratify the amendments, and will hold discussions regarding growth rates in 2014, the council unanimously voted accept the amendments.
The Kitsap Board of County Commissioners recently adopted amendments to the policies; cities and tribes within the county must ratify the amendments within 90 days.
The proposed amendments align the county’s planning policies with the Puget Sound Regional Council’s VISION 2040. According to the agenda summary, these include recognizing the importance of local agriculture to the economy and local “rural character”; references to human-related impacts to air and water quality; expands inter-jurisdictional coordination in infrastructure and planning communities; and allows restrictive Fully Contained Communities, among others.