Bills › 90th General Assembly

SF 234Died when the session ended · February 8, 2023

Relating to the ownership of dogs, and making penalties applicable

Topics:Crime & correctionsState governmentCities & counties

Same legislation: HSB 152, SSB 1195, SF 476, HF 651

Write your legislators about it

Also covers HSB 152 and SSB 1195 and SF 476 and HF 651.

Where it is now

  1. Done: IntroducedFebruary 8, 2023
  2. Done: SubcommitteeFebruary 8, 2023
  3. Done: Senate committeeMarch 1, 2023
  4. Stopped: Passes the SenateDied when the General Assembly ended
  5. Skipped: House committeeSkipped
  6. Done: Passes the HouseApril 11, 202382–16
  7. Next: To the Governor
  8. Next: Signed into law

Died when the session ended The 2024 session adjourned on April 19, 2024, the General Assembly’s last regular session. Bills that didn’t pass both chambers died. What’s a funnel?

What’s in it

AI summary New rules would change how dogs are classified as property and lower the age at which they must be vaccinated against rabies. The bill also limits when police officers can kill a dog and prevents cities or counties from banning specific dog breeds or physical traits. People who own dogs older than four months without rabies shots could face a misdemeanor charge.1

Read the official explanation

This bill relates to the ownership of dogs. Under current law, a dog is deemed property if the dog is under six months of age or if the dog is at least six months of age and wearing a collar with a valid rabies vaccination tag attached to the collar. A person is prohibited from owning or having in possession a dog that is at least six months of age if the dog has not been vaccinated against rabies. The bill instead states that a dog is deemed property if the dog is less than four months of age or certain evidence exists to demonstrate ownership. A person is prohibited from owning or having in possession a dog that is at least four months of age if the dog has not been vaccinated for rabies. By operation of law, a person who owns or possesses a dog that is at least four months of age that is not vaccinated against rabies is guilty of a simple misdemeanor. A simple misdemeanor is punishable by confinement for no more than days and a fine of at least $105 but not more than $855. Under current law, a person may lawfully kill any dog for which a rabies vaccination tag is required when the dog is not wearing a collar with a rabies vaccination tag attached. A peace officer has a duty to kill such a dog within the peace officer’s jurisdiction when the jurisdiction does not otherwise provide for the seizure and impoundment of dogs. If a dog is wearing a collar with a rabies vaccination tag attached, a person may lawfully kill the dog if the dog is chasing, maiming, or killing any domestic animal or fowl, or when the dog is attacking or attempting to bite a person. A dog running at large shall be impounded by a local board of health or law enforcement official if the dog is not wearing a valid rabies vaccination tag or a rabies vaccination certificate is not presented to the local board of health or law enforcement official. The bill instead authorizes only a peace officer to kill a dog within the peace officer’s respective jurisdiction if such jurisdiction has not otherwise provided for the seizure and impoundment of dogs or, if the jurisdiction has provided for the seizure and impoundment of dogs, no temporary housing can reasonably be secured in or near the jurisdiction. The bill does not authorize a peace officer to kill a dog that is under the control of the owner or an agent of the owner. However, any person may kill a dog that is chasing, maiming, or killing any domestic animal or fowl, or when the dog is attacking or attempting to bite a person, regardless of whether the dog is wearing a collar with a rabies vaccination tag attached. The bill authorizes a designated agent of a local board of health or law enforcement official to impound a dog running at large. The bill prohibits a county or city from adopting, enforcing, or otherwise administering an ordinance, motion, resolution, or amendment that restricts or hinders a person’s right to own or keep a dog based on the breed, perceived breed, or physical characteristics of the dog, but does not inhibit the authority of a county or city to adopt, enforce, or administer an ordinance, motion, resolution, or amendment that applies to all dogs.

Changed since by amendment H-1195; see Amendments.

Full bill text2

Senate subcommittee

Named February 14, 2023. It hasn’t reported yet.

Three legislators hear a bill first and recommend what the committee should do; it’s the best time to weigh in. How to take part

Iowa Code it changes

Amends§351.25§351.26§351.27§351.33§351.37§351.45§364.3

Repeals§351.29

How the Code works3

Lobbying

4 for · 4 against · 16 undecided · Who →

Family tree

Tried before

This idea has been filed in an earlier General Assembly. None got through a chamber.

  • SF 143 Prohibiting a county or city from adopting, enforcing, or administering legislation specif…
    89th General Assembly · In committee · similar
    Cleared committee
  • HF 2211 Prohibiting a county or city from adopting, enforcing, or administering legislation specif…
    89th General Assembly · In committee · similar
    Cleared committee

Similar bills this General Assembly

  • HF 191 Prohibiting a county or city from adopting, enforcing, or administering legislation specif…
    90th General Assembly · In committee
    Similar

Matched by wording or an identical title.