Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout05-29-1991 - Special Session BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS AND SAFETY OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND. INDIANA, MAY 29. 1991 SPECIAL SESSION 1 The Board of Public Works and Safety of the City of Richmond, Indiana, met in special session May 29, 1991 at 2 the hour of 9:00 A.M. in the Municipal Building in said City. The purpose of the special session was for a 3 hearing on an appeal by Mr. William Hengstler on the determination by the Richmond Police Department that a 4 dog in his possession was dangerous/vicious. Ms. Hauptstueck.presided with Ms. McFarland in attendance. 5 Absent: Mr. Smith Media in attendance: Palladium Item, WHON/WQLK and WKBV/WFMG. The following 6 business was had to-wit: 7 8 HEARING ON THE APPEAL OF A DANGEROUSNICIOUS DOG DETERMINATION 9 10 Ms. Hauptstueck opened the hearing for the appeal of Mr. William Hengstler that his dog, Bandit, was declared 11 dangerous/vicious by the Richmond Police Department. Ms. Hauptstueck explained that there were two issues 12 to be determined at the hearing being 1. To determine if the dog is dangerous/vicious and 2. If so determined 13 what to do with the dog. Ms. Hauptstueck requested information being given be only for the determination in 14 support of or in opposition to the dangerous/vicious dog determination. 15 16 Ms. Hauptstueck further explained that the DangerousNicious Dog Ordinance is not breed specific and the 17 breed of the animal is not a topic for discussion. 18 19 Ms. Hauptstueck established rules of procedure for the hearing and requested participants to be courteous 20 during the proceedings and announced evidence would be heard first on the situation leading to the 21 determination by the Police Department of the dog being dangerous\vicious and then evidence would be 22 accepted on the character of the dog in question. 23 24 Ms. Hauptstueck requested the Police Department to begin the hearing. 25 26 Officer David Glover presented the Board photographs of Officer Baker showing the wound obtained from a 27 alleged attack by Mr. Hengstler's dog. Officer Glover also presented voluntary statements from Officer Baker, 28 Lt. Chambers and three witnesses at a next door residence. 29 30 Officer Baker then presented testimony and informed the Board he was dispatched to South 13th and B Streets 31 at 9:45 PM on the evening of April 27, 1991 in response to a fight call with hammers being used. He said when 32 he arrived he saw a person running away with a dog on a chain and was told the person was going to go get a 33 gun. Officer Baker said he ran after the persons to South 14th Street where the individual was trying to enter a 34 residence. He said the dog was lunging and he told the individual to get the dog under control and put it away or 35 he would shoot it. 36 37 Officer Baker said Lt. Chambers then arrived at the scene and lit up the alley so Mr. Hengstler could see to get 38 in the house and put the dog up. Officer Baker stated that after he entered the house Mr. Hengster would not 39 come back out and in his attempt to get in the door the dog came out and attacked him on his thigh. He said at 40 that time he yelled for Lt. Chambers to shoot the dog and Lt. Chambers shot the dog and Officer Baker was also 41 wounded in the process. Officer Baker told the Board he had requested Mr. Hengstler to restrain the dog two or 42 three times. 43 44 Ms. McFarland asked if Mr. Hengstler ordered the dog to attack and Officer Baker said he did not remember 45 hearing that, but when Mr. Hengstler did open the door the dog lunged. Officer informed the Board the dog bit 46 him once,was shot once by Lt. Chambers and then took off running. 47 48 Ms. McFarland asked if the dog was still on a chain when it came out the door and Officer Baker said he was 49 not. 50 51 Ms. McFarland asked how long the time frame was and Officer Baker said from 9:45 PM to 10:00 PM. 52 53 Ms. Hauptstueck asked if Mr. Hengstler ordered the dog back in the house when it lunged and Officer Baker 54 said he did not recall. 55 56 Ms. McFarland asked who else was around and Office Baker said Lt. Chambers, himself and a couple of other 57 officers had arrived. 58 59 Ms. Hauptstueck asked if the shot made the dog flee and Officer Baker said it did. 60 61 Mr.John Holden,Attorney at Law, Dayton,Ohio representing Mr. Hengstler asked Officer Baker if he put his foot 62 in the door to prop open and Officer Baker said he had requested Mr. Hengstler to open the door and he did put 63 his foot in the door to keep it open. 64 65 Mr. Holden asked if Officer Baker had ever been trained in procedures for hostile situations other than placing his foot in doors. (Q Board of Works Minutes Cont'd May 29, 1991 Page 2 - 1 Officer Baker indicated when the door was he did this the dog was behind Mr. Hengstler and this matter was for 2 the Court and not this hearing. 3 4 Mr. Holden asked if Officer Baker had ever been involved with the dog before and Officer Baker said he had not. 5 6 Mr. Holden asked if the person with the hammer had complained the dog bit them and Officer Baker said they 7 did not. 8 9 Mr. Holden asked if the dog released Officer Baker after it was shot at his request and Officer Bake said it did. 10 11 Officer Glover asked for the testimony of Ms. Jill Zinkan, who witnessed the incident from a deck on the south 12 side of her house adjacent to Mr. Hengstler's house. Officer Glover informed the Board that Ms.Zinkan's written 13 statement indicated she during the struggle she heard Mr. Hengstler call for the dog to attack. 14 15 Ms. Zinkan informed the Board that was a mistake in her statement,that what she had heard was Officer Baker 16 calling for the dog to be shot. 17 18 Ms. McFarland asked what made Ms. Zinkan realize she had made this mistake and Ms. Zinkan said she has 19 known the dog for five months and it had not hurt anyone. 20 21 Officer Glover read from Ms. Zinkan's statement that she had said Mr. Hengstler had told her the dog was 22 trained to kill. 23 24 Ms. Hauptstueck asked Ms. Zinkan if she had read her statement before signing it and Ms. Zinkan said briefly, 25 but she was in a hurry at the time. 26 27 Ms. Hauptstueck asked for her comments on the statement regarding the dog being trained to kill and Ms. 28 Zinkan said she was not sure why she had said that and it had been awhile since she made the statement, but 29 she knows the dog would not hurt anyone. 30 31 Ms. Hauptstueck asked Ms. Zinkan to clarify why her statement was not correct and Ms. Zinkan said the 32 statement was not true. She said it was 1:00 AM when she was requested to come to the Police Department to 33 make the statement. 34 35 Mr. Bruce Metzger, City Attorney, asked Ms. Zinkan if she had been drinking and Ms. Zinkan said she had two 36 beers earlier in the evening and had had no other intoxicating substances. 37 38 Mr. Holden asked Ms. Zinkan if the words in the statement were her words or if she had been questioned off 39 tape and Ms.Zinkan said she responded to questions. 40 41 Mr. Holden asked if she were under oath when the statement was taken and Ms.Zinkan said she was not. 42 43 Mr. Holden asked Ms. Zinkan if she were now saying the dog was not vicious and Ms. Zinkan said that was 44 correct and that the dog was loving and affectionate. 45 46 Ms. McFarland commented that not once in Ms. Zinkan's statement did she indicate the log was loving and Ms. 47 Zinkan said the interviewing officer told her to stick to the incident that there would be a hearing about the dog. 48 49 Ms. Hauptstueck asked Ms. Zinkan if she could explain the discrepancy regarding the statement that the dog 50 was trained to kill since that was a very strong statement. 51 52 Ms. Zinkan said she did not know, that maybe she was confused since she had a friend with an attack dog, but 53 she has never seen the dog vicious. 54 55 Mr. Metzger asked if Ms. Zinkan had spoken with Mr. Hengstler since the incident and if so what about and Ms. 56 Zinkan said she had spoken with him a few times and they spoke about what she saw,verified that she would be 57 in attendance at the hearing, but they had not had any lengthy discussions. 58 59 Mr. Holden asked Ms.Zinkan if she had been intimidated to change her statement or did she remember that she • 60 had said and if her statements today were the truth. 61 62 Ms. Zinkan said she did not remember her statement and today's testimony was the truth. She said she had 63 called Detective Hobson, who did her original statement, last week to try and change her statement, but he had 64 not called her back. 65 Officer Glover said the statement was sealed in the evidence room since the investigation was closed. Board of Works Minutes Cont'd May 29, 1991 Page 3 1 Mr. Holden asked if there was not a procedure to change statements since they were not taken under oath and 2 Officer Glover said Ms. Zinkan had been read her rights before taking the statement and this is standard 3 procedure. 4 5 Ms. Hauptstueck asked what questions were asked off tape and Ms. Zinkan said they went through the incident 6 and then asked the questions on tape. 7 8 Ms. Hauptstueck asked if any of the answers or questions changed and Ms. Zinkan said the questions were 9 more detailed and she was not certain about her answers. 10 11 Officer Glover presented Lt. Chambers to the Board. 12 13 Lt. Chambers told the Board he was the second unit to respond and he was advised that Officer Baker was 14 involved in a foot pursuit. He said he went in the alley to the back yard and lit up the yard. Lt. Chambers said he 15 could see the dog on a leash being held near the collar and Officer Baker was advising the person to secure the 16 dog. 17 18 Lt. Chambers said he approached behind Officer Baker and it appeared the dog was very excited and Mr. 19 Hengstler was trying to go into the house. Lt. Chambers said that when the dog came back out it was off the 20 chain. He said the dog then attacked and he stopped the attack with one shot which hit the dog bounced off the 21 concrete and struck Officer Baker. 22 23 Lt. Chambers said the dog then came at him and he fire four more shots with two hits, but nothing serious. He 24 said the rest of the incident involved the arrest of Mr. Hengstler. 25 26 Ms. McFarland asked if Lt. Chambers heard Mr. Hengstler trying to control the dog and Lt. Chambers sad he 27 was not able to hear anything from his position. 28 29 Ms. Hauptstueck asked where Mr. Hengstler was located after the dog got loose and Lt. Chambers said he did 30 not see. 31 32 Ms. McFarland asked if Lt. Chambers did not shoot the dog until it had bitten Officer Baker and Lt. Chambers 33 said that was correct. 34 35 Mr. Holden asked when the dog circled Lt. Chambers what happened and Lt. Chambers said it charged at him 36 and went behind him. 37 38 Mr. Holden asked if that was after he shot the dog and Lt. Chambers said that was correct. 39 40 Mr. Holden asked where Officer Baker was and Lt. Chamber said five ft. away. 41 42 Mr. Holden asked if the dog were loose when he came out and Lt. Chambers said he was not on a chain when 43 he came out. 44 45 Mr. Holden asked if he was the dog after Mr. Hengstler went into the house and Lt. Chambers said he heard 46 Officer Baker telling him to secure the dog. 47 48 Mr. Metzger asked if Lt. Chambers could see how far in the house Mr. Hengstler was and Lt. Chambers said he 49 could not. 50 51 Ms. Hauptstueck asked how long it was between them entering the house and coming back out and Lt. 52 Chambers said it was seconds. 53 54 Ms. Hauptstueck asked how the dog was acting when it entered the house and Lt. Chambers said very 55 aggressive. 56 57 Ms. McFarland asked if it was routine procedure to put your foot in a door in this type of incident and Lt. 58 Chambers said it was. 59 60 Mr. William Hengstler,Jr.,owner of the dog in question, addressed the Board. Mr. Hengstler said the evening of 61 the incident he had been with friends at South 13th and B and another individual started throwing rocks and a 62 hammer at him. He said he went home from there between 9:30 PM and 10:00 PM and he was not running 63 since he was already going home. He said his keyring contains a lot of keys and he was trying to find the right 64 key in the dark and had not heard the Officer say anything to him. He said he took the dog inside to unchain and 65 a little while later walked upstairs when he heard the door bell and knocking. Mr. Hengstler said his dog beat him down the stairs and when he arrived down stairs he opened the door. old ? Board of Works March 29, 1991 Page 4 1 Mr. Hengstler said he was told by the Officer at the door that he wanted to speak with him about the incident at 2 13th and B and he told the Officer he was going to the prosecutor the next day to file charges against the person 3 throwing rocks and the hammer at him. 4 5 Mr. Hengstler said while he was speaking to the Officer he was telling his dog to get back and was telling the 6 officer he needed to shut the door when the Officer put his foot in the door and the dog came out. Mr. Hengstlet 7 said he dove out after the dog and tried to grab the dog causing a wound on his leg from the threshold of the 8 door. He said he then heard shots. 9 10 Ms. McFarland asked Mr. Hengstler if he was back to his house, had entered and was upstairs before he 11 realized there was an officer there and Mr. Hengstler said that was correct. 12 13 Ms. McFarland asked Mr. Hengstler if he had run down the alley and he said no he couldn't run due to injuries. 14 He said there is no fence in his yard and if they were in pursuit they could have driven up to his back door. 15 16 Officer Baker indicated that Mr. Hengstler had seen him pull up at 13th and B. 17 18 Ms. Hauptstueck asked if Officer Baker put his foot in the door and Mr. Hengstler said after he had opened the 19 door and was telling the officer that th dog was trying to get out he stuck his foot in the door and pushed it open. 20 21 Ms. McFarland asked if the dog was well trained and Mr. Hengstler said it was not. 22 23 Ms. McFarland asked Mr. Hengstter if he had any control over the dog and he said the dog knows the sit 24 command. 25 26 Ms. McFarland asked again about his ability to control the dog and Mr. Hengstler said when the dog hears the 27 door he tries to get out. 28 29 Ms. Hauptstueck asked if it was necessary to chain latch the door just to put up his dog and Mr. Hengstler said 30 that was his right. 31 32 Ms. McFarland asked if he was going back to the door and Mr. Hengstler said he was. 33 34 Ms. McFarland asked Mr. Hengstler if he had the dog by the collar when he went to the door and he said no just 35 trying to keep it back. 36 37 Ms. McFarland asked Officer Baker if he conversation with Mr. Hengstler before he entered the house and he 38 said he did. 39 40 Ms. McFarland asked if the dog gets out does it run up the street and Mr. Hengstler said the dog is never loose it 41 is always chained. 42 43 Ms. McFarland asked why it took such a heavy chain and Mr. Hengstler said a small chain would rust and break. 44 45 Ms. McFarland asked if he had problems with the dog running away and Mr. Hengstler said no. 46 47 Ms.McFarland asked how long he had the dog and Mr. Hengstler said three years and he got it from a friend. 48 49 Ms. McFarland asked why he has the dog and Mr. Hengstler said for a pet and he keeps it indoors and it walks 50 to work with him. 51 52 Ms. McFarland asked if the dog was trained for attack and Mr. Hengstler said no. 53 54 Ms. McFarland asked why the dog attacked the officer and Mr. Hengstler said it was being aggressive to protect 55 it's domain and itself. He said that he had been told neighbors have seen other officers taunting the dog. 56 57 Mr. Hengstler said he had a petition with over 400 names saying the dog is not vicious. 58 59 Ms. Hauptstueck asked for the petition and Mr. Hengstler said he did not have it with him, but he did have a 60 petition regarding the persons seeing officers taunting the dog. 61 62 Mr. Metzger asked Mr. Hengstler why if he shut the door to secure the dog did he not come out to speak with the 63 officer and shut the door to secure the dog. 64 65 Mr. Hengstler commented that he knew how officers were and he even took a couple of drinks when he was upstairs to calm down. .%?G � Board of Works Minutes Cont'd f'leLe, Mar-eh 29, 1991 Page 5 1 Ms. Hauptstueck asked Mr.'Hengstler if he felt threatened by Officer Baker and he said no, but he did not know , 2 how he would react to his having taken drinks. 3 4 Ms. Hauptstueck commented that at that time Mr. Hengstler had no idea what Officer Baker wanted. Ms. 5 Hauptstueck asked how long it was for Mr. Hengstler to get home, go upstairs, have a couple of drinks and Mr. 6 Hengstler commented you could take a couple of drinks out of the bottle in three seconds. 7 8 Mr. Holden asked how long Mr. Hengstler was in the house and he stated five to six minutes. 9 10 Ms. Hauptstueck asked if he were afraid he would be arrested for PI if he stepped out and Mr. Hengstler said he 11 only had a couple. 12 13 Mr. Metzger asked Mr. Hengstler if he had other drinks and he said he had two beers earlier in the afternoon. 14 15 Mr. Hengstler shared photographs of his leg injury he received when he dove out the door after the dog. 16 17 Mr. Holden asked if the dog was shot before or after he bit Officer Baker and Mr. Hengstler said hear the shot as 18 he dove out the door. 19 20 RECESS AND RECONVENE OF THE HEARING 21 22 Ms. Hauptstueck called for a short recess of the hearing to allow time to obtain the petitions in support of Mr. 23 Hengstler's dog not being vicious. 24 25 Ms. Hauptstueck reconvened the hearing and accepted the petitions. 26 27 Ms. Hauptstueck asked if there were any further questions on the incident before the Board took testimony on 28 the character of the dog. 29 30 Mr. Holden commented that they have a few other remarks, but they are on the character of the dog. 31 32 Mr. Metzger asked how long Mr. Hengstler had the dog and where did he get it and Mr. Hengstler said three 33 years and he got it from an associate in Florida. 34 35 Officer Glover shared an incident that occurred in the past dealing with the same dog. He said they checked out 36 a call regarding the dog being chained at a vacant house in the alley in the 200 block between 8th and 9th 37 Streets. He said the dog was chained by a very large chain and padlocked to a post in the yard. He said there 38 was no shelter,food or water available. Officer Glover said they were told the dog was left there and abandoned 39 and the officers did not feel safe in approaching the dog at this time. He sid he left the area and returned later 40 with the mechanic and bolt cutters and was going to free the animal and then secure it. Officer Glover said when 41 he returned he was approached by Mr.Hengstler and informed the animal was left at the vacant house to protect 42 the premises. Officer Glover said the dog had been aggressive and did quite down upon Mr. Hengstler's arrival. 43 He added the property was not fenced and no warning signs were posted regarding the presence of the dog. 44 45 Ms. Hauptstueck asked where the complaint about the dog being abandoned came from and Officer Glover said 46 he did not know, he was responding to a note from a second shift supervisor. 47 48 Ms. McFarland asked when this happened and Officer Glover said two to two and one half months prior. 49 50 Ms. McFarland asked if Mr. Hengstler said how long the dog had been left there and Officer Glover said no he 51 was advised the property belonged to a friend. 52 53 Mr. Hengstler informed the Board the property is owned by Robert and Bernice Spencer and asked the Board to 54 note the petition regarding officers taunting the dog being second shift officers. He said he told Officer Glover 55 the dog was not abandoned and he walks it to and from the premises and has permission to keep it there. He 56 said there was one isolated incident when he left the dog there overnight. 57 58 Ms. Peggy Hengstler told the Board that four weeks prior to the April 29th incident a Mr. Mike Bodiker saw the 59 60 Police with the dog and told her how many times the dog had been harassed by the Police. She said she was at the hearing because of the dog and the dog was not vicious. 61 62 Officer Dale Sharits told the Board he has known the Hengstler family since he was small. He said he has had 63 two occasions to deal with the dog. Officer Sharits told the Board that in 1987 he responded to a call in the 500 64 block of North 17th and 18th with a fight with guns and a pit bull involved. He said the incident was very 65 emotional and they discovered the dog on a chain in the 500 block of North 18th. Officer Sharits said there were ,72oy Board of Works Minutes Cont'd May 29, 1991 Page 6 1 allegations of the dog being loose prior to the Police coming and one father had a shot gun and was going to kill 2 the dog. 3 4 Officer Sharits said it was determined that Mr. William Hengstler was the owner of the dog and Mr. Hengstler 5 had fled the scene and was arrested for PI and resisting arrest. He said the dog was left secured and when he 6 approached the dog it seemed scared and aggressive,but he did not know if the dog had been loose. 7 8 Officer Sharits said in 1990 he went to Mr. Hengstler's home to take a report and when he stepped in the front 9 room the dog came out of the back room in a aggressive mode. He said Mr. Hengstler called for the dog to stop 10 and he did and was secured, but was in a highly alert mode. 11 12 Officer Sharits said he was assured the dog was friendly, but did not like people in uniforms and was also told 13 the dog was kept in the house or chained at the side of it. Officer Sharits said that he asked about children in the 14 area and was told by Mr.Hengstler that the kids know better than get close. 15 16 Ms. Hauptstueck asked if the stop command given by Mr. Hengstler was gentle and Officer Sharits said it was 17 authoritative and the dog minded. 18 19 Mr. Holden asked if Officer Sharits was aggressive when he entered the house and was told no he entered and 20 stopped. 21 22 Mr. Holden asked about the prior incident and if there was a lot of commotion in which the dog was scared and 23 aggressive and Officer Sharits said he was within chain length and in a squatting position. 24 25 Mr. Holden asked if he had other knowledge of the dog bitting and Officer Sharits said he did not. 26 27 Ms. McFarland asked if Officer Sharits was warned of the dog when he entered the house and he said not was 28 not and the dog was loose in the house. 29 30 Ms. Hauptstueck asked if Mr. Hengstler agreed with Officer Sharits on his commanding the dog to stop in the 31 house and Mr. Hengstler said he did. He said the dog would mind in the house, but if a door were opened he 32 would run out and not be able to be caught. 33 34 Ms. Hauptstueck asked if Mr. Hengstler had a fear of the dog running out of the house when Officer Sharits 35 came in and he said he did not because he thought it was a friend coming in. 36 37 Ms. McFarland asked if the dog had a bad experience with uniforms and Mr. Hengstler said the dog had been 38 harassed by people in uniform. He said the dog was just a pup when the North 18th Street incident happened 39 and he was a friends house when he was told the dog was let loose from the yard. 40 41 Ms. McFarland asked if he would be comfortable having a stranger or child around the dog and Mr. Hengstler 42 said he would. 43 44 Ms. McFarland asked about having control of the dog when it was in the house and Mr. Hengstler said he does 45 have control in the house, but if the door were opened he would have no control to keep the dog in the house. 46 47 Ms. McFarland asked if the dog got out would he mind Mr. Hengstler and Mr. Hengstler said he would have to 48 chase the dog all over the town and that was why he kept him on a rope or chain. 49 50 Ms. Hauptstueck questioned Mr. Hengstler about Officer Sharits visit and why he wasn't concerned about the 51 dog getting out when the door was opened that time. 52 53 Mr. Hengstler said the dog was in the other room and he had time to get to the door first. 54 55 Ms. McFarland asked about the petitions and if all the people named have had hands on experience with the 56 dog. 57 58 Ms. Hauptstueck commented on the name of Ms. Violet Nelson and that she had spoken with Ms. Nelson and 59 she had no prior knowledge of the dog until she visited with him at the Vet after the incident. 60 61 Ms. Hengstler said that Ms. Nelson knew her and knows the dog is not vicious. Ms. Hengstler said she was here 62 to keep this from happening to other people. She said there was no reason to fire that many shots over a dog 63 and asked what if a child had been around. 64 65 Ms. Hauptstueck invited comments from persons having first hand knowledge of the dog. Board of Works Minutes Cont'd May 29, 1991 Page 7 1 Ms. Judy Breedy, 3200 New Paris Pike, told the Board she had known the dog for three to three and one half 2 years and it is not mean of vicious. She said she had the dog at her home for one year and there were kids 3 around the dog and also her grandmother. 4 5 Ms. McFarland asked if the dog obeyed and Ms. Breedy said he was not trained but would obey. She said he 6 would get loose at every chance, but the never had problems with the dog getting rough. She further stated that 7 she has pups by this dog and they do the same thing. 8 9 Ms.Jody Grubbs, 132 South 14th Street,told the Board her son and her both played with the dog when it was in 10 the back yard and it was always friendly. 11 12 Ms. Hauptstueck asked how old the son was and was told six years old. 13 14 Ms. Hauptstueck asked how long Ms. Grubbs lived at her current address and she stated three and one half 15 months. 16 17 Ms. Irene Shaffer,3200 New Paris Pike,told the Board the dog was friendly and would not hurt anyone. 18 19 Ms. Jill Zinkan, 132 1/2 South 14th Street, told the Board she had lived behind Mr. Hengstler for 5 months and 20 has never seen the dog vicious. She said she has played with the dog and it is always chained in the yard. 21 22 Ms. McFarland asked if the yard was fenced and Ms.Zinkan said it was not. 23 24 Ms. Francie Schlichte, 132 1/2 South 13th, told the Board the worse the dog does is bark and she had never 25 even heard it growl. She said she was never afraid to approach the dog. 26 27 - Mr. Holden asked if she were home the night of the incident and she said she was. 28 29 Mr. Holden asked how quickly the incident happened and Ms. Schlichte said she did not see it, but heard it and it 30 was over very quickly. 31 32 Ms. Hengstler explained that a resident of Westwood had also assisted with the petition. 33 34 Mr. Hengstler told the Board that others had been ready to come to the hearing, but were unavailable when the 35 date was changed. 36 37 Ms. Doris Wilbur, Wernle Road, said she felt the act was to vindicate how the Police Officers felt about the man 38 and she did not understand why they would go after the dog. 39 40 Mr. Holden said there are still a lot of questions regarding the incident, but the Board needed to decide if the dog 41 was vicious and stated there was not enough evidence to show the dog was vicious. He said it was an 42 unfortunate incident. 43 44 Mr. Holden said this incident would never have happened in Dayton,Ohio and felt that training was a problem for 45 local officers and that the placement of a foot in a door was an action of aggression and that a hostage team or 46 negotiating type system would be better. 47 48 Mr. Holden said there is no evidence to prove the dog is vicious. It had not bitten anyone prior. He said we have 49 a non-vicious dog with no history of viciousness,but the issue is being addressed under the"pit bull syndrome". 50 51 Ms. McFarland stated the Board was not looking at training for attack or if the dog is a pit bull, but is the dog 52 tends to attack and how much control the owner has over the dog to prevent this from happening. 53 54 Mr. Holden said is someone aggressively comes to the dog's home this is how would react. he said the dog is 55 not shown to be vicious, but rather had an isolated problem and the circumstances of the incident would justify 56 how the dog reacted. Mr. Holden continued that the dog is also evidence in the upcoming trial and Ms. 57 Hengstler stopped the officers that arrived the following morning to shoot the dog. He said that Ms. Hengstler 58 was able to get Officer Bledsoe to secure the dog. 59 60 Ms. McFarland stated that she was not prepared to make a decision right now and felt the need to look at more 61 closely. 62 63 Mr. Metzger said it was desirable for the Board to make a prompt decision. 64 65 Mr. Holden stated that they were not demanding the Board call a special meeting to make a decision. Board of Works Minutes Cont'd May 29, 1991 Page 8 1 Ms. McFarland stated that the Board did not want to drag out the proceedings and understood the burden of the 2 cost of impoundment of the animal. 3 4 Ms. McFarland moved to set June 3, 1991 at 9:00AM for a special meeting of the Board to give its final decision 5 on the appeal of the dangerous/vicious dog determination, seconded by Ms. Hauptstueck and on unanimous 6 voice vote the motion was carried. 7 8 ADJOURNMENT 9 10 There being no further business,on a motion duly made, seconded and passed the meeting was adjourned. 11 12 13 14 15 16 Carrie Hauptstueck, President 17 18 19 20 21 ATTEST: 22 Carol Brady, Deputy City Clerk 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65