Eat-Dog-Eat World Prevails at Complex: Vote Due on Big Pets

When is Fido too fat? That is the doggie dilemma pitting a condo association against the owners of pooches that exceed the group’s 35-pound weight limit for canines.

Audrey Weber’s dog, Snooper, went on a low-fat, high-fiber diet to slim down to the proper trim. But two other neighbors, owners of a 100-pound Airedale and a 48-pound Labrador retriever, decided to fight the regulation in court.

Round one went to the dogs. This week, the Jasmine Park Homeowners Assn. dropped its lawsuit against the pet owners and announced plans to give residents of the 47-unit gated community in Corona del Mar an opportunity to vote out the regulation. But dog lovers beware: Two earlier attempts failed.

If 75% of the homeowners don’t reject the rule, the association has reserved the right to refile the lawsuit in Orange County Superior Court. The vote among residents is scheduled to take place sometime within the next two months.

Stanley Feldsott, an attorney representing the association, said the rule is designed to keep large dogs out of small neighborhoods.

“It’s really a size issue,” Feldsott said. “This is a pretty high-intensity development and doesn’t have a lot of space for dogs. The association is under duty to enforce the provision.”

The association began to crack down on the weight limit after it received a complaint about one of the dogs. While the issue may seem petty, the association has an obligation to enforce all rules “across the board,” said one board member, who spoke on the condition that his name not be printed.

Dog owners were dumbstruck.

“At first, they sent me a letter requesting a certificate of weight from a licensed veterinarian and I thought it was a joke. I laughed,” said Gary Roberts, 38, who was sued after he refused to give up his Labrador retriever, Katie. “It’s a stupid regulation and doesn’t deserve a place in the association’s rules. It’s difficult to respect anyone who would enforce such a stupid rule.”

Roberts said he is determined to continue to lead the effort to get the weight regulation abolished, but said the entire experience has left him bitter. He plans to sell his townhome regardless of the outcome.

“I won’t be feeling victorious no matter what happens,” Roberts said. “I’m basically tired of the hassle. No one ever expects something so ludicrous to happen.”

Tania Allard, the other resident hit by the lawsuit, has lived in the quiet gated community for six years with her dog, Kahlua, a 13-year-old, gray-and-black Airedale mix.

“He’s such a mellow dog, very friendly and he loves people,” said Allard. “No one has ever complained about him. He’s blind in one eye and has arthritis in his back legs. Most people don’t even know I have him because I take him to the park instead of walking him around the neighborhood.”

The trouble started more than a year ago, Allard said, when she began receiving notices from the association’s board ordering her to get rid of the dog. Since then, Allard has ignored fines of up to $300 levied by the association and maintains she would rather sell her house than give up her dog.

Allard and her husband, John, have put their $500,000 home up for sale, but are hoping that the matter can be resolved.

“I like the beauty and the privacy of this neighborhood,” Tania Allard said. “But this all has been very stressful.”

Another resident, who asked that her name not be used, was also ordered to get rid of her 65-pound Samoyed shepherd she has owned for nine years. The woman said she received several warning letters since moving into the neighborhood last August, but was not among those sued.

“My attorney is laughing at me about this,” she said. “I can’t get rid of the dog, I couldn’t do that to my son. The association said they would do what they had to do and I said I would do what I had to do. I just can’t believe that anyone would spend this kind of time, money and effort over three dogs.”

Feldsott, the association’s attorney, said the final decision is up to the homeowners.

“If the residents don’t like the rule, they have the opportunity to change it, which they haven’t been able to do. Or, they can elect a new board.”

John Allard said there is an effort underway to vote the five current board members out of office--an action that would require a majority vote of all residents.

“This board just doesn’t have any common sense,” he said. “It just makes me so damned angry.”