46) Randy O. Colbry - Opinion

Randy O. Colbry
Prosecuting Attorney
Shiawassee County
Michigan

LEGAL OPINION

RE: DOG LICENSE FEES

In 1973 Section 29a was added to the dog law of 1919. MCL 287.29a provides as follows:

Sec 29a. The board of county commissioners by ordinance may establish an animal control agency which shall employ at least 1 animal control officer. The board of county commissioners any assign the animal control agency to any existing county department. The animal control agency shall have jurisdiction to enforce this act in any city, village or township which does not have animal control ordinance. The county’s animal control ordinance shall provide for animal control programs, facilities, personnel and necessary expense incurred in animal control. The ordinance is subject to sections 6 and 30.

Because of this amendment to the dog law, the 1955 attorney general opinion provided by Ms Lauro indicating a county board of commissioners did not have the power to adopt regulations pertaining to dog kennels is, in my opinion, obsolete.

MCL 287.29a specifically directs; however, that a county animal control ordinance is subject to section 6 of the dog law (MCL287.266). MCL 287.266(5) provides in part: “The county board of commissioners may set license fees in the county budget at a level sufficient to pay all the county’s expenses of administering this act as it pertains to dogs.”

This section applies to individual dog licenses and license fees. It is my opinion that dog license fee revenue must reasonably relate to county expenses for animal control programs, facilities, and personnel involving domestic dogs. It is obvious such costs go well beyond the animal control budget and include costs incurred by the courts, the prosecutor, the treasurer and the county clerk as well costs related to the operation, maintenance and depreciation of the animal shelter.

It is further my belief that in determining an appropriate dog license fee the county is not limited to the budget year in question but could consider several years of costs in arriving at an appropriate fee structure.

Section 10 of the dog law (MCL 287.270) provides for the inspection and licensure of dog kennels and requires a fee of $10.00 for 10 dogs or less and $25.00 for more than 10 dogs. MCL 287.29a does not direct that a county animal control ordinance is subject to section 10. In my opinion, the county is free to regulate kennels and provide an appropriate fee structure under the terms of its animal control ordinance, and is not bound by the fee structure set forth in MCL 287.29a.