|
|
|
Commission unanimously rejects breed-specific
ordinance (Manhattan, KS)
That settles it
Commission unanimously rejects breed-specific language, approves
tougher enforcement measures
It's rare when citizens who assemble at City Hall on a hot-button issue
collectively applaud the City Commission. But that's what happened
Tuesday when the commissioners voted unanimously in favor of a non-breed
specific dangerous dog ordinance.
Commissioners instead opted for a proposal by city staff that only
slightly modifies the current dog ordinance (see story, this page). They
steered clear of a harsher ordinance that would have deemed a dozen
breeds of dogs and others similar to them as "dangerous,"
based on their propensity to cause injury or tendency toward unprovoked
attacks. These include the doberman pinscher, rottweiler and pit bull.
Over eight months of debate and study, owners of these dogs have said
that picking on specific breeds is discriminatory, against the dogs and
their owners. They rallied in numbers at two work sessions. The
commission formed a Dangerous Dog Task Force comprised of a
cross-section of the community. Some of its recommendations are included
in the new ordinance.
Tuesday's public comment period and subsequent discussions lasted four
hours. The 5-0 vote was slow to emerge, with the commissioners visibly
stumped as to what course of action to take. They agreed that
identifying irresponsible dog owners and not persecuting any one type of
dog was the best approach.
"I don't want to cast a wide net that catches a bunch of innocent
bystanders," said commissioner Mark Hatesohl.
Animal Shelter/control supervisor Lynn Schumacher had commented that
animal control officers have a difficult time securing witnesses to
testify against some dog owners; that consequently, court cases
sometimes don't stick.
Hatesohl said people in Manhattan have to be willing to "stand up
and say, 'I'm not going to take this in my neighborhood,' and do
something about it."
"We just can't tolerate this type of behavior in our community,"
added mayor Tom Phillips about irresponsible dog owners and their
pets. He said breed-specific language couldn't prevent "a tragic
event from occurring," referring to a dog bite or mauling.
Not being a dog owner, commissioner Bob Strawn said he sought out
the advice of the K-State veterinary college and citizens, as well
as Schumacher.
The experience of visiting the animal shelter and witnessing a
violent pit bull that eventually was euthanized "scared the hell out
of me," Strawn said. But he added that K-State experts told him
breed-specific language is ''non-sense... not founded in good
science."
Commissioners Bruce Snead and Jim Sherow seemed to favor an
ordinance that leaned a bit closer to "breed-specific." Sherow used
a race car analogy, saying just as a NASCAR vehicle isn't allowed on
the streets of Manhattan, some dogs also should not be because they
are "big and powerful ... it's in the nature of the car that it
threatens the safety and public welfare."
Sherow was against muzzling dogs, a requirement that was dropped
from the new ordinance. He also said he didn't think some residents
could afford the expensive enclosures required under the confinement
provisions. He went along with the will of the commission, but said
he would expect "good record-keeping" from the animal shelter so as
to evaluate the effectiveness of the new law. If it's not effective
and doesn't accomplish "what the people want us to do, I will come
down very heavy on (in support of) breed-specific legislation,"
Sherow said.
Snead pointed out that other Kansas communities have put in place
breed-specific language, "and I have not heard overwhelming evidence
that it's not effective," he said.
Schumacher had indicated Abilene, Salina and Ogden saw a decline in
their numbers of dangerous dogs, though she said reports overall
tend to be "mixed," where breed-specific bans exists.
Like Sherow, Snead said the transitional nature of Manhattan might
make it difficult for dog owners to afford 6-ft. high and 1-ft. deep
chain link fences for their animals, as the ordinance mandates.
City staff had proposed an anti-tethering provision to the
ordinance, a task force recommendation. A maximum two-hour
continuous time limit was discussed, but Snead thought simply
offering "some freedom" from continuous tethering was the way to go,
which is what Salina and Overland Park require.
The commission plans to fine-tune the tethering provision during
second reading of the ordinance, scheduled for July 10.
There was some discussion about persons with disabilities who use guide and service dogs — how their dogs, if of a "dangerous" breed, would be treated by the city. Williams said the same laws would apply to those dog owners but that a judge would decide what course of action to take, once the citation had been issued. |
|
|