GUILDERLAND — Tracy McCallum was tearful as she left last Wednesday’s zoning board meeting. She said that, because of the board and her neighbors, her dogs were going to die.

The board, in a six-to-one vote, had denied McCallum’s application for a dog kennel on her Leesome Lane property. Guilderland has a three-dog limit and McCallum had been violating that law by owning six dogs. She applied for the variance to keep her dogs — Rottweilers, boxers, and Doberman pinschers — and to breed more.

No one will want her older dogs, she claimed, so they will die.

Board member Charles Klaer, who cast the sole dissenting vote, sympathized with McCallum and her husband, Robert Cedano. He suggested the board let the couple keep their older dogs until they die.

But, the other board members were convinced — this meeting and last, by the couple’s neighbors — that a kennel variance would change the character of the quiet neighborhood. Nearly all of the residents on Leesome Lane said that the dogs are loud and aggressive and are often let loose.

Representatives of Camp Wildwood, a summer camp for disabled children at the end of Leesome Lane, also spoke against the proposal. They worried that, with reports of loose Rottweilers and Doberman pinschers and with constant barking, the children at the camp could be injured or upset.

Last try

The application had been adjourned in June to give McCallum and Cedano more time to provide specific details about their plan.
"The only house that can see the dogs in the yard is my immediate next-door neighbor..." Cedano told the zoning board last Wednesday. "You won’t even be able to see the fence from the northwest side; you can see part of it from the southeast side."
The application, he said, is for "three dogs extra in a rural area where deer, chipmunks, muskrat, and other wildlife are; there’s no environmental impact."

Cedano added that he’d be more concerned that a squirrel would attack his neighbors than one of his dogs.
The kennel would be inside the house, he said, with "portable, chainlink kennels" outside, but hidden from view.

Zoning board alternate Tom Remmert, who was filling in for Patricia Aikens, said he went to the property that morning and could see the kennels from the road.
"To stand there and say they’re not there is not true," Remmert said.
"They’re not going to be there," Cedano said.
"Are you going to take care of that in the same manner in which you took care of the problems Mr. Stone listed"" Remmert asked, referring to code-enforcement officer Rodger Stone. Earlier, the board discussed a year’s worth of zoning violations that Stone had issued to McCallum and Cedano because they own more than three dogs.
"If you go to the house right now, you’ll see one is up on an end," Cedano said of the cage. "We’ve already starting moving it. Once the fence is up, the final positioning will be done."

Chairman Bryan Clenahan asked if Cedano had tried to reach a resolution with his neighbors, as the board had recommended at the last meeting.
"No," Cedano said. "The only reason we’re trying to get the kennel license is so we don’t have to kill two dogs."

If the town doesn’t grant the variance, he said, he will have to find homes for three of his dogs. Two are very old, he said.
"They’re too old," he said. "Nobody is going to adopt them; they’ll get euthanized."

Proposed solution

Board member James Sumner asked Cedano how many dogs is too many. If he has six now, and is allowed to breed more, he might have 12 or 18 later, Sumner said.
"We have people interested in the Doberman puppies that she hasn’t even had yet," Cedano said. "The others may take longer, but they will be indoors in the basement. The noise will be minimal."
"What’s your long-term goal for dogs over the age of six months"" asked board member Klaer.
"None," Cedano said. "The puppies go right away and the older dogs, as soon as they die, we’ll have three."
"Three dogs over six months is permitted without a kennel variance," Klaer said. "If you want to keep two more, while you’re waiting for them to pass, maybe we can change it to a variance instead of a kennel application."
"Maybe there’s room for compromise about the older dogs, but I can’t see how a kennel is not changing the character of the neighborhood," Clenahan said.
He went on, "We’ve heard virtually all your neighbors express the same concerns...I don’t know that you’ve even responded to that, except by saying that your dogs are fine."
"This isn’t a problem with the dogs," said Cedano. "This is a problem with people."

His neighbors don’t like him, Cedano said, and they’ve sent the police to his house — for dog complaints — when the dogs were not outside that day.
"When you have that many neighbors expressing concern that it’s going to change the character of the neighborhood, that’s pretty convincing," Clenahan said.
Cedano insisted that the character of the neighborhood won’t be changed. "The neighbors’ dogs and cats run all over our yard," he said.

Dog owners have lived on Leesome Lane and their pets haven’t been a problem for Camp Wildwood, Klaer said.
"Enforcement of problem dogs probably needs to be more strict," Klaer said, "for the sake of the children at Wildwood."

Klaer proposed that the board approve the variance for a limited time. When the older dogs die, the approval will be removed, he said.
"That would be great," Cedano said.
"I’m outraged to think you’d suggest that someone in violation of the law be extended some courtesy," said Richard Powell, of Leesome Lane. "You’re telling them that’s against the law, but, if we grant a special-use permit, that’s okay."
"If you spend the rest of the evening here, you’ll see many things that are granting forgiveness rather than permission," Klaer said.
"With all due respect to the board and to my neighbors, we already have a situation that’s not in compliance," said Dan Sheridan. "I’m very concerned about future compliance. As their immediate neighbor, following the rules, my concerns should be looked at equally, rather than looking for a way to bail them out."

Board member Sharon Cupoli then addressed Klaer’s compromise.
"As much as you’re trying to give them a way out, Chuck, and I know you’re a dog lover...it’s going to come down to always being an enforcement issue," she said. "Maybe it’s better we let the dogs die gracefully being owned by a number of individuals, rather than these two individuals."

After some more brief discussion, the board then voted, six to one, against the application.

As Klaer cast the sole dissenting vote, he apologized to Cedano and McCallum for not being more persuasive.
McCallum cried, cursed her neighbors, and walked out mumbling, "Dogs are going to die."