Philadelphia’s City Council just voted 15 to 0 to pass a three-year moratorium on unlicensed dog breeding and puppy sales — a bill that Penny Ellison helped draft and testified in support. In this episode, she walks through exactly how it happened and what advocates everywhere can learn from it.
Using Philadelphia as a case study, Penny breaks down her Four Cs framework — Common Sense, Collaboration, Communication, and Compromise — and shows how each one played out in real time, from the first draft to the unanimous roll call vote.
Whether your issue is breeding, shelter funding, or another entrenched problem, this episode offers a practical framework for turning a good idea into a law that actually passes.
In this episode, you’ll learn:
- Common Sense: Why calling it a moratorium instead of a ban made the bill easier to explain, harder to oppose, and cleared the path to a unanimous vote
- Collaboration: How to build a coalition where different voices make different arguments — even when everyone agrees on the goal
- Communication: Why message discipline before hearings matters as much as what happens inside the chamber, and what the AKC got wrong because of it
- Compromise: What the drafting team gave up, what they held onto, and how to know the difference between a must have and a nice to have when you’re in the room
Key Takeaway
A perfect bill that doesn’t pass helps no one. A good bill that passes 15 to 0 changes things — and the difference is usually found in how you frame it, who shows up, and what you’re willing to let go.
Episode Highlights
00:00 – The moratorium passes: the vote, the roll call, and why it didn’t happen by accident
01:58 – The Four Cs framework: Common Sense, Collaboration, Communication, Compromise
02:43 – Why the law was needed: rising shelter intake, puppy influx, and community health impact
03:52 – What the moratorium does: exemptions, licensing requirements, and ad regulations
04:24 – Common Sense: making the bill simple, affordable to comply with, and hard to argue against
06:33 – Collaboration: how coalition-building and diverse testimony built such a strong case
08:26 – The voices that showed up: shelter leaders, veterinarians, and volunteers
09:14 – Communication: tight framing, avoiding divisive language
10:13 – How clear communication neutralized the AKC’s opposition
11:24 – Compromise: what was conceded, what was preserved, and why knowing what’s essential
13:32 – Why a unanimous vote is a policy achievement, not just a feel-good moment
14:13 – Implementation: why passing the bill is only the beginning
Transcript
Penny Ellison:
What a week! I hadn’t really shared this on the podcast before, but Philadelphia’s City Council has been considering a 3-year moratorium on unlicensed dog breeding and puppy sales that I worked on drafting and I advocated for. Well, this week it passed unanimously, 15 to 0. It’s now on the Mayor’s desk awaiting signature. And I have to tell you, I was not prepared for how emotional it would be to hear that roll call vote. One by one, every council member saying “aye” 15 times. After 3 separate hearings where dozens of shelter volunteers and rescue representatives showed up carrying signs. I don’t think City Council sees that level of public interest on most bills. And it didn’t happen by accident. Today I’m going to walk you through exactly why it did happen and give you a framework you can use to do the same thing, no matter what issue you’re working on.
Welcome to the Animal Advocate, where we arm animal lovers with the information and inspiration you need to become effective advocates. I’m your host, Penny Ellison, and I’ve taught animal law and advocacy at the University of Pennsylvania since 2006. If you’ve ever thought someone should do something about that. I’m here to guide you on your journey to being that someone. You can find us on the web at AnimalAdvocacyAcademy.com. And that’s where you’ll find show notes and resources, and you can send us your comments on episodes and ideas for topics you’d like to hear on future shows. So, onto today’s topic.
Getting this bill passed was a big deal to everyone in the Philadelphia animal welfare community. So today, I want to use this as a case study for a framework I’ve been developing, something I call the Four Cs of Legislative Advocacy for Animals: Common Sense, Collaboration, Communication, Compromise. These are the four principles that I believe make the difference between bills that pass and bills that stall.
If you want the full framework, not just how it played out on this bill, but how to apply it to whatever issue you’re working on, I’ve created a private podcast series that walks through each C in depth. The link is in the show notes but stay with me because today you’re going to see how all four applied in action with the moratorium.
First, let me quickly walk through what this law does and why it was needed. Philadelphia’s only open-intake shelter, ACCT Philly, has seen dog intake increase by nearly 1,000 dogs a year. Puppy intake jumped 45% in a single year. People have brought in puppies, sometimes more than once, openly telling staff that they couldn’t sell them. ACCT also regularly takes in the mothers when they’re no longer useful to the people breeding them.
And unregulated breeding doesn’t just drive intake up. It also drives adoptions down. Every person who buys a puppy from an unlicensed breeder is one fewer person adopting from a shelter. That’s one more kennel that stays full. So you’re getting hit from both sides: more animals coming in and fewer going out. Not to mention the contagious diseases like parvo that come into the community from unlicensed breeders who don’t vaccinate their litters.
The moratorium pauses unlicensed breeding and puppy sales in Philadelphia for three years. It does not ban all dog breeding. Anyone with a valid Pennsylvania kennel license is exempt. So are nonprofit rescues, service dog programs, and individuals doing a one-time personal rehoming. To cut off at least one distribution channel, the new ordinance requires that all ads for puppies include either a kennel license number or a rescue identification number.
Now, let’s talk about how this happened through the lens of the Four C’s. The first C is common sense. Does the proposal make sense on its face? Can you explain it easily in two sentences and have someone nod? This bill is built on common sense principles Starting with what we called it. It’s a moratorium, not a permanent ban. That distinction matters more than you might think. A moratorium is a temporary measure, in this case three years, designed to respond to urgent conditions. Shelters are overwhelmed, and the data show unregulated breeding is a driver. But I want to be clear, it’s not the only driver. Veterinary access issues, general affordability issues, housing issues— they all play a part. And those other issues need to be tackled in the long run, but they’re more challenging and harder to address without asking the city to come up with a budget allocation. A moratorium on unlicensed breeding gives the city breathing room to stabilize the situation while longer-term solutions are developed. The word ban would have put people on the defensive immediately. Moratorium is accurate, and it signals that this is a measured response to a real problem.
It costs the city nothing, doesn’t create a new agency, a new department, a new budget line item, and there’s a clear, affordable path to compliance. If you want to breed dogs in Philadelphia, get a state kennel license. For breeders with fewer than 50 dogs a year, that costs $100. That’s it. When your bill can be explained that simply, it’s very hard for opponents to gain traction.
So before you take any proposal to a legislator, ask yourself, “Can I explain this succinctly in two sentences?” If the answer’s no, keep working on it. The ask itself has to be clean and clear.
The second C is collaboration, and this is where the turnout at those hearings made all the difference. Legislative wins don’t happen because one person has a good idea. They happen because a coalition shows up, and that’s what happened here. Now, I want to be honest about something. Our coalition was almost entirely animal advocates on this bill. We were fortunate to have so many people who cared enough to show up, But even within a coalition of like-minded people, you want to make sure different voices are making different arguments. A rescue director talking about her budget is not the same as a shelter worker talking about what it’s like to run out of kennels, which is not the same as a veterinarian talking about disease transmission. Same cause, different angles. That’s what makes it a coalition, rather than a crowd.
At those three hearings, shelter staff talked about what it’s like to hold a dog while he’s being euthanized. Not because the dog was dangerous, not because the dog was suffering, but because there were too many dogs and no more space. And they talked about what they could accomplish if they had fewer animals coming in, especially fewer sick puppies that need intensive medical care before they can be put up for adoption. Council members also heard from leadership at the Pennsylvania SPCA about puppies they’ve seized in cruelty cases suffering from badly cropped ears and other painful conditions that consume so much of their resources. Private rescue organizations also testified about the toll unregulated breeding takes on their operations. They take in sick, unvaccinated puppies, puppies that need expensive veterinary care that the rescues are paying for out of their own limited budgets. Every dollar spent saving a sick puppy that never should have been bred is a dollar they can’t spend on another animal. Veterinarians talked about the impact on community animal health when unvaccinated puppies are being sold and spreading disease.
They talked about the health and behavioral problems these dogs have. With no genetic testing, puppies separated from their mothers too early, breeding with no regard for the animals’ welfare or development, or whether there’s a market for the puppies being produced. Each group brought a different perspective. Each made the case from their own experience. And together, they built a case that no single witness could have built alone. That kind of coalition doesn’t assemble itself. It takes deliberate work. Asking people to show up, and making it clear why their voice in particular matters.
The third C is communication, and this is where bills often succeed or fail before a single vote is cast. We were careful from the very beginning about how we talked about this bill. It’s a moratorium on unlicensed breeding, not a ban on dog breeding. That distinction sounds small, but it influences the kind of opposition you face. We never once used the term “backyard breeders.” That phrase is not only vague, but it can also come across as dismissive, and it can be heard as targeting low-income communities or people who breed specific breeds, like pitties. Neither of those is what this bill is about, so we didn’t use language that would let anyone make it about that. Instead, we kept the message simple and factual: if you want to breed dogs, get a license. The license exists. It’s $100. The path is clear.
The American Kennel Club submitted testimony arguing that the state licensing system isn’t designed to cover small home-based breeders. But home-based breeders get licensed all the time. And so do rescues that have foster homes. That argument didn’t hold up because we’d already communicated so clearly that all anyone needed to do was apply for a license, get inspected, and comply with existing state kennel regulations. The AKC was arguing against a bill that didn’t exist— the one they imagined, not the one we wrote.
If you’re organizing advocates to testify or speak publicly, get them a one-pager and an FAQ before they go anywhere near a microphone or a council chamber. You need everyone driving toward the same framing, especially on the points where opposition is most likely to try to create confusion. You won’t be in every conversation. Make sure your message is. When your framing is tight and your message is consistent, opposition arguments tend to collapse under their own weight.
The fourth and final C is Compromise, and it’s the one that advocates, including myself, sometimes struggle with the most. We went into this process with a provision that would have held online advertising platforms accountable for accepting puppy ads that didn’t include the required license numbers. That would have been a strong enforcement tool, something I’ve talked about in previous episodes, as a way to cut off the advertising infrastructure that connects unregulated breeders to buyers.
Well, we ended up striking that provision, and that was a real compromise. But knowing how to make those decisions is what this C is really about. And importantly, we held on to two things that still give the law teeth. The requirement that ads include a kennel license number or rescue employer identification number, and the authority to notify platforms of non-compliant ads. So the law creates a clear standard for what a legal ad must look like, and it gives enforcement a mechanism to flag violations.
So before you walk into any negotiation, think about whether there’s an aspect of your bill that, if push came to shove, you could reluctantly live without and know for sure what you can’t give up. I’ll also give you an example of where we could not compromise. We faced a proposal to limit the moratorium to “intentional breeding.” How would you ever prove that? As a lawyer, there was no way I was going to craft a law that required proving a litter was intentional rather than accidental. But in those discussions, we also heard that the original language around “allowing a dog to give birth” was perhaps too passive to hold someone legally responsible. So we worked toward a middle ground built on affirmative conduct— failing to take action to prevent a litter. That’s a standard that means something and can be enforced.
And here’s what matters most: we passed a bill unanimously, a bill that puts real tools in the hands of enforcement, creates a path to compliance, and sends a clear signal that unregulated breeding in Philadelphia is no longer going to be business as usual.
A perfect bill that doesn’t pass helps no one. A good bill that passes 15 to 0 changes things.
So what’s next? Another important advocacy lesson is that passing the bill is only the beginning. If anything, I expect to spend even more time on implementation than we spent getting it passed. Every breeder, every buyer, every platform that runs pet ads needs to know what the law requires and have a clear path to comply. That means a real communications plan and accessible spay/neuter services for anyone who wants to do the right thing. I’m working on that now, and it’ll get its own episode, because the real measure of this law is whether the people it’s meant to reach know about it and can follow it.
So that’s the Four Cs at work on one bill in one city. Common sense: a proposal that’s easy to explain, and hard to argue against. Collaboration: a coalition that shows up and makes the case from every angle. Communication: language and framing that controls the conversation and leaves opponents swinging at air. And compromise: knowing what to hold on to and what to let go of so the bill crosses the finish line.
If you’re listening to this and thinking about a law you’d like to see passed in your city or state -whether it’s about breeding, shelter funding, veterinary access, or anything else that affects animals – I mentioned at the top that I’ve created a free private podcast series called The Four Cs of Legislative Advocacy for Animals. It walks you through this framework step by step, not just what the principles are, but how to apply them to whatever issue you care about. You can get it at animaladvocacyacademy.com. Backslash four Cs, F-O-U-R-C-S.
For today’s Be the Change segment, if you live in a community where shelter intake of dogs is climbing and you suspect unregulated breeding is part of the problem, spend 15 minutes searching your city or county’s municipal code for words like “kennel”, “breeding”, or just “dogs”, and see what’s there. If there’s nothing, that’s a starting point for a conversation with your local council member. And now you’ve got a framework for how to have that conversation.
That’s it for today.
The Animal Advocate podcast is brought to you by the Animal Advocacy Academy. You can find episodes and show notes at animaladvocacyacademy.com, along with a link to our Facebook and LinkedIn pages where we discuss our podcasts, and we’d love to discuss your thoughts and experiences there. If you’re interested in learning more about protecting animals, subscribe to the show so you get every episode when it comes out. If you have any questions on this or any other topic related to animal law, email them to podcast@animaladvocacyacademy.com. At compassionandcompassionacyacademy.com, and we’ll make sure to get them answered. We’ll either email you back or feature them in a future episode, or both.
And remember, compassion is great, but compassionate action is infinitely better. Until next week, live with compassion.
That’s it for today. The Animal Advocate podcast is brought to you by the Animal Advocacy Academy. You can find episodes and show notes at animaladvocacyacademy.com along with a link to our Facebook and LinkedIn pages where we discuss our podcasts and we’d love to discuss your thoughts and experiences there. If you’re interested in learning more about protecting animals, subscribe to the show so you get every episode when it comes out. If you have any questions on this or any other topic, related to animal law, email them to podcast@animaladvocacyacademy.com and we’ll make sure to get them answered. We’ll either email you back or feature them in a future episode, or both. And remember, compassion is great, but compassionate action is infinitely better. Until next week, Live With Compassion.`
