The Bradford City Board of Health will meet Tuesday evening on
the issue of feral cats in the city – this time to set an appeal
hearing for people cited for creating a nuisance by feeding the
animals.

“There will be a Board of Health meeting Tuesday at 6:30
(p.m.),” City Clerk John Peterson said on Friday, “to set the date
and time for the appeal hearing, to consider the request for a stay
… and for pre-hearing discovery.

“Council will act on those three bullet points,” he said.

Ron Langella, representing himself and his wife, Cathy, along
with the other person cited, Siglinde “Alex” Vanderhorst, is asking
the city for a stay on enforcement of the order until the appeals
are resolved.

In the public nuisance orders, the Langellas and Vanderhorst
could be fined each day they feed feral cats on their properties
and may accrue other penalties for noncompliance.

Noncompliance includes providing food, water and shelter for the
cats, according to the citation.

In the appeals, which are virtually identical and were prepared
by Ron Langella, who is an attorney, it is noted that neither the
Langellas nor Vanderhorst had been given notice or opportunity to
be heard regarding the board’s action.

Langella also states in both appeals that there was not
substantial evidence to support the board’s order that a nuisance
existed on either property; that the order directing them to
withhold food, water and shelter from the animals was against the
law, as it would constitute cruelty to animals; that other feral
cat care-givers “similarly situated” to them were not cited; that
the number of animals they care for is only a small portion of the
animals in the neighborhood; that the board failed to consider less
restrictive methods of solving the problem; and that the board’s
order would likely make the cats leave their properties and travel
more onto the neighbors’ properties, causing more of a problem in
the neighborhood.

The request for a stay expounds on what would happen should the
order be literally enforced.

“Literal enforcement of the board’s order at the present time
would likely exacerbate the conditions in the neighborhood, since
the order does not provide for any plan for a humane disposition of
the affected animals, nor a reasonable amount of time to develop a
plan to avoid the animals dispersing throughout the neighborhood to
seek food and shelter elsewhere,” the appeals read.

Langella also asked for pre-hearing discovery in the appeals. He
has asked to examine transcripts or notes of the meetings by the
board in which any action was discussed; a complete list of all
people who appeared or offered testimony to the board and a summary
of their statements; and copies of correspondence or other written
documents the board considered as part of its decision-making
process.