Vicki
Administrator
WC council drops breed ban idea
By John Tompkins
The Facts
Published August 12, 2009
WEST COLUMBIA — After learning state law was stacked against them, West Columbia City Council decided to use the laws it already has to combat dangerous dogs rather than ban certain breeds.
Council members opted not to take any action during a meeting Monday night on a proposal to ban pit bulls and Rottweilers from the city limits. Any such ordinance, City Attorney Wes Griggs said, would violate state law, which prohibits bans against specific dog breeds.
“There are ordinances on the books that deal with nuisance or vicious dogs,†Griggs said.
Council voted at its July 13 meeting to craft an ordinance to ban the breeds after several residents complained a pit bull lunged at a West Columbia resident and knocked her down, council members said.
Rather than placing a ban on a specific breed, the city should work to eliminate dogs that have posed a danger to residents rather than breeds, Councilwoman Donna Schwebel said.
“When an ordinance talks about a nuisance animal, that’s before the bite,†she said.
Prior to the meeting, West Columbia Mayor Laurie Kincannon read a statement to the crowded room apologizing for the decision to have the ordinance drafted.
“Our concern was for the health and safety of our citizens,†she said.
Kincannon said the council had “no intention†of violating residents’ rights.
“I’m very proud our council was able to step back,†she said.
When resident Allen McCormick planned to speak at the meeting about the ordinance Monday night, he said he believed Kincannon had beat him to the punch.
“It pretty much squashed what I came here to address,†he said.
McCormick said the problem with dangerous dogs most often is not the dog.
“I think we do need to deal with these irresponsible owners,†he said.
A Houston attorney who specializes in legal matters involving dogs spoke at the meeting and told residents existing laws are enough to control dangerous dogs.
A dog only has to lunge at a person and it can be deemed dangerous, regardless of the breed, said Zandra Anderson.
“Texas is one of the toughest states for dangerous dogs,†she said.
Dogs are not allowed to be loose in the city, and owners can be fined if their dogs are not secured, Police Chief Michael Palmer.
“They can be cited or fined,†he said.
Palmer said if a dog is found to be dangerous, police can require the owner to further ensure it is secure by putting up a higher fence. If the dog continues to pose a problem, animal control can take custody of it, he said.
If a dog bites a person and it causes a serious injury, the owner faces up to 10 years in prison, Anderson said. If the dog causes a death, it could mean 20 years in prison, she said.
“Punish the deed and not the breed,†she said.
John Tompkins is senior reporter for The Facts. Contact him at (979) 849-8581.
http://thefacts.com/story.lasso?ewcd=31b0b6ddc06c9beb
By John Tompkins
The Facts
Published August 12, 2009
WEST COLUMBIA — After learning state law was stacked against them, West Columbia City Council decided to use the laws it already has to combat dangerous dogs rather than ban certain breeds.
Council members opted not to take any action during a meeting Monday night on a proposal to ban pit bulls and Rottweilers from the city limits. Any such ordinance, City Attorney Wes Griggs said, would violate state law, which prohibits bans against specific dog breeds.
“There are ordinances on the books that deal with nuisance or vicious dogs,†Griggs said.
Council voted at its July 13 meeting to craft an ordinance to ban the breeds after several residents complained a pit bull lunged at a West Columbia resident and knocked her down, council members said.
Rather than placing a ban on a specific breed, the city should work to eliminate dogs that have posed a danger to residents rather than breeds, Councilwoman Donna Schwebel said.
“When an ordinance talks about a nuisance animal, that’s before the bite,†she said.
Prior to the meeting, West Columbia Mayor Laurie Kincannon read a statement to the crowded room apologizing for the decision to have the ordinance drafted.
“Our concern was for the health and safety of our citizens,†she said.
Kincannon said the council had “no intention†of violating residents’ rights.
“I’m very proud our council was able to step back,†she said.
When resident Allen McCormick planned to speak at the meeting about the ordinance Monday night, he said he believed Kincannon had beat him to the punch.
“It pretty much squashed what I came here to address,†he said.
McCormick said the problem with dangerous dogs most often is not the dog.
“I think we do need to deal with these irresponsible owners,†he said.
A Houston attorney who specializes in legal matters involving dogs spoke at the meeting and told residents existing laws are enough to control dangerous dogs.
A dog only has to lunge at a person and it can be deemed dangerous, regardless of the breed, said Zandra Anderson.
“Texas is one of the toughest states for dangerous dogs,†she said.
Dogs are not allowed to be loose in the city, and owners can be fined if their dogs are not secured, Police Chief Michael Palmer.
“They can be cited or fined,†he said.
Palmer said if a dog is found to be dangerous, police can require the owner to further ensure it is secure by putting up a higher fence. If the dog continues to pose a problem, animal control can take custody of it, he said.
If a dog bites a person and it causes a serious injury, the owner faces up to 10 years in prison, Anderson said. If the dog causes a death, it could mean 20 years in prison, she said.
“Punish the deed and not the breed,†she said.
John Tompkins is senior reporter for The Facts. Contact him at (979) 849-8581.
http://thefacts.com/story.lasso?ewcd=31b0b6ddc06c9beb