Senate OKs Legislation Regulating Vicious Dogs

The Senate on Monday passed heavily amended legislation to crack down harder on both vicious and “potentially dangerous” dogs and to require their masters to carry $100,000 in liability insurance.

In a display of pre-Election Day action, the Senate also approved a $2-million bill to finance AIDS prevention education in grades seven through 12 and a proposal to exempt from public records information on why a person was issued a permit to carry a concealed gun.

The vicious-dog bill by Sen. Art Torres (D-Los Angeles) was introduced after the widely publicized fatal attack last June by a pit bull terrier against 2-year-old James Soto of Morgan Hill.

The bill went to the Assembly on a 24-4 vote. Originally, it was aimed at pit bulls, a breed some critics contend is inherently vicious but whose defenders insist is docile unless trained to be mean.

However, opponents of the bill, including the American Kennel Club and other dog-owner organizations, succeeded in securing amendments that eliminated references to pit bulls and avoiding mentioning any breed by name.

Torres maintained that the legislation would make California a safer place for “innocent children” by establishing uniform procedures for leashing, segregating and, if necessary, destroying vicious dogs.

Drew Fire

But the provision requiring owners of a dog declared to be vicious to carry $100,000 in liability insurance to cover any damage or injury caused by the canine drew fire from opponents who asserted that such coverage is not available.

“We may be going too far on a subject that could be better taken care of at the local level,” said Sen. Ralph Dills (D-Gardena), who challenged the insurance provision as well as charging that the state was moving into an area traditionally covered by local leash law control ordinances.

However, Torres said that representatives of the insurance industry had indicated to him that liability coverage could be provided by merely adding it to existing homeowner or renter insurance policies.

Under the bill, a dog would be subject to being declared vicious by a Municipal Court and its owner would be held liable if, among other things, it was used for fighting, had killed or seriously injured a human or had attacked another domestic animal such as a dog or cat three times within 36 months.

Subject to Fines

The legislation would require such a dog to be kept in confinement on the owner’s property and be tattooed with its license number. The owner could be subject to fines ranging up to $1,000 for violations.

A dog found to be “potentially dangerous” would be required to be kept on a leash when it was not on the owner’s property. The “potentially dangerous” label would be determined by a Municipal Court and would apply to dogs that had attacked or bitten other domestic animals.

Sen. John Garamendi (D-Walnut Grove), whose district includes rural regions of Northern and Central California, voiced concern that the legislation might be unenforceable in agricultural parts of the state. “In rural areas, you’re going to have a cat (and dog) fight at least once a week,” he said.

The bill requiring AIDS prevention instruction for public school students in the seventh through 12th grades was sent to the Assembly on a 28-3 vote. Carried by Sen. Gary K. Hart (D-Santa Barbara), the legislation would require parental consent before a student could receive such instruction.

AIDS Prevention Instruction

Some school districts, including Los Angeles Unified, now offer AIDS prevention instruction. Most, however, do not. Last year, Gov. George Deukmejian vetoed Hart legislation that proposed a videotape instruction program in the schools, in part because it did not contain a parental consent provision.

The $2-million appropriation would finance materials, train teachers and enable schools to contract with outside experts on AIDS.

The Senate also approved, 26 to 0, and sent to the Assembly legislation that would exempt from public records information provided to law enforcement authorities by concealed weapons applicants.

Under the bill by Sen. Barry Keene (D-Benicia), the chief of police or county sheriff could withhold the information if he determined its disclosure would significantly risk the safety of the applicant.

Supported by law enforcement organizations and introduced on behalf of the California Rifle and Pistol Assn., the bill would allow the concealment of information that indicated “when or where the applicant is vulnerable to attack.”