Planning Commission vote on breeding kennel permit delayed to Feb. 14

Attorney Jay Neal tells county planners his clients, seated in back of room, are not adversarial in seeking reissuance of a commercial kennel permit following a March fire that killed 16 dogs. Photos/Roger Bianchini

At the request of a Woodstock-based attorney representing Wendy Tenney, a recommendation on her request for the extension of a Conditional Use Permit for a commercial-breeding kennel was postponed to the February 14 meeting of the Warren County Planning Commission.  At the planning commission’s January 10 public hearing Tenney attorney Jay Neal sought the delay on a vote to allow him more time to review background on the permit and planning staff’s initial recommendation it be revoked in the wake of a March 6, 2017 kennel fire in which 16 dogs died.

The Warren County Board of Supervisors sent the matter back to the planning commission and staff for further review after a November 7 hearing on that initial recommendation Tenney’s kennel permit be revoked.

The planning staff agenda summary cites a December 2016 pre-fire visit by a Sheriff’s Office Animal Control Officer Laura Gomez at which a space heater being used to warm the kennel was observed with a frayed wire believed to have been caused by one or more of Tenney’s breeding stock of Australian Shepherds gnawing on it.

A post-fire letter from County Planner Matt Wendling dated March 10, four days after the fire, notes that no electrical permit for the kennel building had been found by planning staff.

Other issues cited from either county staff visits or neighbor complaints prior to the fire were:

• accumulated trash and feces in the kennel;
• septic drainage toward neighboring properties and a consequent strong odor coming from the kennel property;
• a failure to license kennel dogs over a two-year period 2015-16;
• exceeding the maximum number of 11 permitted dogs by housing as many as “approximately 19” adult dogs;
• inoperable barking suppression collars;
• and repeated cancellations of scheduled county staff or animal warden visits without effort to reschedule.

Wendling wrote that the accumulation of combustible trash and debris in the kennel “certainly contributed to the rapid combustion of the structure as observed by both staff and (Animal Control) Deputy Gomez.”  Subsequent communications between Mrs. Tenney and planning officials indicates growing tension as Tenney denied she was alerted to any serious problems prior to the March 2017 fire.

During the January 10 discussion County Planning Director Taryn Logan noted that Mrs. Tenney felt she was “being targeted” by planning staff in the wake of the fire and resultant canine fatalities.  Logan disputed that notion, telling the commission that it was the department’s responsibility to review anyone’s permit for a judgment on whether it was in the best interest of the “health, safety and welfare” of the community (not to mention of the canines being housed there, she might have added).

County Planning Director Taryn Logan told commissioners her staff has not singled Tenney out for any scrutiny that would not be applied to any permitting application.

On August 31, 2017, a certified “Notice of Violation” letter from the planning department was sent to Tenney giving her 60 days to state why her kennel permit should not be revoked.  Two months later when planning staff and a county animal warden arrived for an unscheduled site visit the week prior to the November 7 board of supervisors hearing on the revocation recommendation, Tenney denied the group access to the property.

Among recommendations for the extension of Tenney’s kennel permit is submission to any scheduled or unscheduled site visits by county planning staff or animal wardens.

Tenney’s permit to operate a kennel for up to 11 adult dogs on her 3.17-acre property was originally issued in November 2012 under the county’s old ordinance.  That ordinance was updated in January 2013 to cover three different types of kennels: Boarding, Commercial and Non-commercial.  However, the Tenney permit was grandfathered in under the old, more general guidelines.  In the wake of the supervisors’ failure to act on the staff revocation recommendation in November, Tenney continues to be licensed under her original 2012 permit.

Staff recommendation on any permit extension cites a maximum number of 10 adult dogs.  However, in recounting conditions for extension of the Tenney kennel permit staff noted that the family kept one survivor of the fire as a pet.  That dog would not be counted among the 10-dog limit suggested for a new permit,” Logan said.

In introducing himself prior to asking for a delay on a vote, attorney Neal said his clients were not “adversarial” but did dispute public accounts of the kennel operation as “a train wreck waiting to happen”.  Neal said that the Tenneys homeschooled their children, so the kennel business was a convenient commercial use that the family enjoys.

During discussion of the requested delay in issuing a recommendation to the board of supervisors county Planning Commissioners Ralph Rinaldi and Hugh Henry expressed a desire to see both a building plan for a new kennel structure and a business plan for future kennel operations.

No one other than Tenney attorney Neal spoke at the January 10 public hearing.  With the public hearing adjourned, any member of the public wishing to address conditions of a permit extension could speak at “Public Presentations” near the start of February 14 meeting.  A final determination on extension or revocation of the Tenney kennel permit would come after another public hearing before the board of supervisors.

The family of applicant Wendy Tenney, center, listens to Jan. 10 discussion of whether her kennel permit should be revoked in the wake of fatal March kennel fire.