Dogs being bred, sold by illegal kennel
Quarryville, PA (US)Incident Date: Monday, Mar 31, 2003
County: Lancaster
Disposition: Not Charged
Persons of Interest:
» Stephen Z Stoltzfoos
» Sylvia K Stoltzfoos
For the second year, Bart Township denied Sunny Side Kennel approval to continue operating. It did so on the same grounds as last year: the owners' continuous violation of two requirements for running a dog kennel. A Bart Township kennel owner asked the same question and got the same answer: No.
Just last year, Stephen Z. and Sylvia K. Stoltzfoos asked Bart Township Zoning Hearing Board for two special exceptions to continue operating Sunny Side Kennel, at 881 Mount Pleasant Road, Quarryville. They were denied. On June 29, 2006, Stoltzfoos made his case again to board members, who denied him again. Although Stoltzfoos' kennel has been licensed by the state Bureau of Dog Law Enforcement since he opened it in 2003, the business was never approved by township officials. The illegal kennel came to township officials' attention last spring, when neighbors complained about noise. Among other requirements, kennels in Bart Township agricultural zones must be operated on at least 10 acres and at least 300 feet from all property lines -- two stipulations Stoltzfoos has violated since he quit his job to run the kennel full time three years ago on his 3-acre property.
The township sent Stoltzfoos orders to cease his business in April 2003, but he has continued operating the kennel and expanded it from about 10 dogs when it opened to 211 in November 2003. Stoltzfoos said he has about 160 dogs at the kennel now, and the state has boosted his license to K5 status, which allows him to house more than 251 dogs in 66 pens at the kennel. Board member Joseph Linton recused himself from the decision because he has business dealings with someone who endorsed the operation of Stoltzfoos' kennel.
But board chairman Edward Weidman and board member Charles Rogan said they denied the exceptions because Stoltzfoos' request was identical to one he presented in 2005, with no additional information, hardship or change in details of the property size or proximity to property lines. In addition, Stoltzfoos appealed the board's last denial to Lancaster County Court and was denied in March 2005. He then appealed the decision to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, which was an inappropriate court to hear the case, so it was forwarded to Commonwealth Court.
Bart Township solicitor Kenelm L. Shirk III said the burden of proof in Stoltzfoos' second request to the zoning board for special exceptions was "woefully missing." In his written statement to the zoning hearing board requesting dismissal of the appeal, Shirk wrote, "... this proceeding is unnecessary (and) serves only to harass the township and should not be allowed." Shirk raised an English doctrine of law, res judicata, reserved for repeat appeals deemed meritless. By raising the doctrine now, Shirk said future appeals by Stoltzfoos without new information could be automatically denied by the zoning hearing board or a court. "It's important to establish that doctrine in case this happens again," Shirk said. "This matter shouldn't have been here in the first place. It was already decided at great expense to the township."
David Smucker, who helped Stoltzfoos make his case to the board, said the kennel is clean and provides means by which Stoltzfoos supports his family, including his ailing parents. However, Robert J. Sparklin, of 179 Lamparter Road, who spoke during a public comment period, said he has done business in the township and had to adhere to ordinances in the course. "Are the zoning ordinances just for me or for everyone in the township?" Sparklin asked the board members. "If they're not for everyone, then throw the zoning ordinances in the trash can and you people go find another job." "This matter shouldn't have been here in the first place. It was already decided at great expense to the township." References« PA State Animal Cruelty Map
« More cases in Lancaster County, PA
|
