Leash law is in effect

After an almost four-year saga, the part of Boulder City code that allowed dog owners to have their dogs off-leash in public as long as they were under verbal control practically (though not officially) goes away as of Dec. 4.

Last month, after multiple votes, contentious discussions, one council member being the lone person to stand his ground and another council member changing their mind on her vote at least three times, the council voted to tighten the law. After a 20-day legally mandated period after the law changes were officially published, the changes have taken effect.

What the council voted to do was not to remove the command and control provision, added to city code back in 1997. Instead, they added a line.

The old law said that dogs have to be on a leash in public, unless, that is, they are under “the direct supervision and control of an owner or trainer who is giving auditory and/or visual commands to such animal; provided, that the animal is obeying such commands.” The exception remains, but now it only applies, “in an area designated by resolution of city council as an off-leash area.”

At the meeting where the vote was taken, there was a lot of discussion about where those areas should be and a last-minute change to the agenda probably ensured that the council would not fail to act for the fourth time because they got bogged down in details about where dogs could be off-leash. As of today, dogs will be able to be off-leash in:The city’s two official dog parks

An area referred to as the “Hemenway Channel” which is an unfenced grassy area that runs for about a quarter of a mile north of Boulder City Parkway between Ville Drive and Lake Mountain Drive

Some desert areas surrounding the city but not in the larger Eldorado Valley or in the undeveloped area adjacent to Veterans Memorial Park

North Escalante Park during park hours

Wilbur Square between 5 a.m. and 8 a.m. and between 3 p.m. and 6 p.m.

The last one comes with a caveat. It is dependent on staff being able to identify and organize a group of residents to be responsible for those hours, including cleaning up after dogs. Also, Wilbur Square will be closed from January until March for maintenance of the irrigation system.

A similar effort for a residents’ group will be made for the Pratt Field area and the council will hear the results of that in six months.

The saga began after the exception had been part of city law for 25 years when then-mayor Kiernan McManus asked that the issue be added to the agenda in early 2022, saying he knew it was “an emotional issue for a lot of people.”

“We have a problem here. … I’m not sure that everyone gets what is happening here… . There are people who simply don’t use our parks anymore because of the dogs that are loose,” he said.

Then-councilman James Howard Adams agreed with McManus and said the “problematic” behaviors need to be addressed.

The other council members disagreed.

Councilwoman Claudia Bridges said she thought the proposed changes were “harsh” and that the hot spot areas should be regulated, not all of the parks.

“We’re addressing those that are misbehaving and not providing options for those that are behaving,” said Councilwoman Sherri Jorgensen.

Bridges, Fox and Jorgensen voted against making changes to the ordinance, while McManus and Adams voted for the changes.

The vote went directly against the counsel of both Police Chief Tim Shea and then-Animal Control Supervisor Ann Inabnitt who unexpectedly resigned and retired and moved to Indiana in early 2025, at least partially over this issue.

Inabnitt said back in 2022 that the “under verbal command” makes the ordinance almost unenforceable.

“I can’t enforce it unless something bad happens, so the dog is under verbal command as long as it doesn’t accost someone,” she said. “It’s under verbal control as long as no one falls down because it charged. … When all the dogs are off-leash, you’re all at fault or no one’s at fault.”

Inabnitt said Animal Control receives 500 calls a year for dogs running at-large. Additionally, they have regular reports of dog-on-dog attacks and a dozen instances in the previous two years where people had been attacked and injured.

“The problem at the parks with running at-large is consistently nine to 11 percent of our calls, whether it’s Veterans (Memorial) Park or the park by the post office. … That means there is a huge problem,” she said. “We have seen a lot of things that I wish I had not seen. We have had dogs torn apart down there.”

“Why can’t we enforce the current laws as written?” asked Councilman James Howard Adams.

Boulder City Police Chief Tim Shea said the code is written so that violations, which are considered misdemeanors, have to be committed in the presence of an officer.

“We get called after it happens. … I don’t want our officers to be waiting there for an animal to do something bad,” he said. “We’re trying to prevent it.”

He compared it to traffic laws and said it’s like not being able to enforce them until after a crash.

“The area we have most of the human conflicts between dog people and non-dog people is at Pratt Field,” said Shea in 2022. “That is where most of them occur. Up to and including one just recently, where the person had to punctuate his opinion with his pistol.”

It is notable that the event that finally got the council to change course was another incident in which a resident not only drew a firearm but actually shot at a group of off-leash dogs, fearing for his safety and that of his wife. That event also occurred in Veterans Memorial Park.

A seemingly technical change at the last meeting mat have been the most important part of getting the changes to city law finally passed. Staff requested that item 9 (a staff presentation about additional “off-leash recreation” options) and item 12 (the actual vote on changing the law) be reversed.

In past discussions on this matter, the council has gotten bogged down trying to come up with areas where residents would be able to walk their dogs off-leash. As recently as June of this year, a vote to tighten up the law failed when council members could not agree on additional places and/or times for off-leash dog activity.

Had the agenda gone down as originally written, that may have been the outcome again. But, by switching the order, the council had voted themselves into a corner. Now, they had to make a straight up or down vote on changing the law. Only after that had happened, would they be able to hear a staff presentation about additional off-leash options and vote on a resolution making those official.

“I guess I wish I realized that nine was after 12 because I’d really like to have that discussion first,” Jorgensen said. “I have heard it said that this represents what was brought forward years ago. I was there at that time, so I do know what that looked like. This does look a little bit different after we discuss options, but when we don’t discuss options, it doesn’t.”

“I think I’m with Sherri,” said Booth. “I would have preferred to do the other one first. So that I knew and I know what’s happening. So I don’t know if there’s a way we can. Can we do that? Could we talk about it first?”

Walker pointed out that there was already a motion to pass the changes to the law on the floor and that it had been seconded. McKay said, “Don’t forget at the beginning of the meeting there was a motion and it was voted on to change the order.”

Hardy explained that in order to discuss additional off-leash options before voting on changing the law, the council would have to go back and undo their earlier vote.

After the unanimous vote to change the law, Hardy quipped, “Now we will go to No. 9 and this is where it will be fun.”

City Manager Ned Thomas presented a report outlining options that was developed by the city’s parks and recreation staff. He picked up on the theme of “this is the fun part” by saying that Parks and Recreation Director Julie Calloway was away on a pre-planned vacation. “So I’m pinch-hitting for her tonight. I’ll try to do my best to present the information that they’ve prepared, and yes, she owes me.”

For better than another hour, the council ground through those recommendations with the mayor masterfully corralling the discussion and getting the council to agree on small chunks before they put all of it into a resolution for a vote. At one point, when Walker pointed out that everything would need to go into a resolution, Hardy said, “I’m in charge here.”

In a discussion in a meeting last summer about finding options for off-leash dog recreation and should the city get itself in line with every other municipality in the region and mandate leashes in public, Jorgensen started up her oft-used, “We don’t want to be Vegas or Henderson,” line. She said that one of the things the Boulder City Council does is “listen to residents.”

Indeed, leashing dogs is only one area where the council seemed ready to make a change only to reverse themselves when a group of residents complained. In the past two years, airplane owners and residents who live near the municipal golf course also come to mind.

“We have locations in our city where we don’t have the opportunity and, as has been expressed, not everyone can access the dog parks that we do have,” Jorgensen said last summer. “So I would love to see the ability to have open spaces or dog parks in other areas. Also something that has been suggested to me by our citizens is an option to have certain hours at our parks, posted hours in specific parks, when dogs can be off-leash.”

She specifically mentioned Wilbur Square, which is a location where mostly homeowners in the area gather to socialize while their dogs run and play off-leash. In justifying her idea, she noted that many in the city have “small backyards and dogs need a place to run around.”

In the space of three years, Jorgensen has reversed herself on this issue three times. In 2022, under a different mayor who had proposed tightening the law, she voted, nay. Then, in November of last year, notably after Hardy and his wife had a run-in with an off-leash dog in a city park, she reversed herself saying that the situation had changed and that there were now “more dogs than children in Boulder City.” She reversed herself again earlier this month when the issue was finally decided.

Hardy also reversed his vote from last year over the summer. Only Walton stood his ground.

Walton disagreed then with the idea of some parks being available for off-leash use during certain hours, saying that in the summer, lots of people use the parks early in the morning because it gets too hot to do so later. He also opposed the idea of limited off-leash hours.

“To lock people in or out of a park during a given time, I don’t think is fair to either group,” he said last summer. “If we’re gonna say, ‘Well, folks can have their dogs off-leash during these hours,’ then the folks that care about dogs being on-leash basically can’t use the park during those hours. Or won’t. I don’t know that I can support an hours arrangement.”

Walton also said he could not support any off-leash areas in any of the downtown parks with the possible exception of the area next to the post office which, again, is currently not in the city’s control. In the final vote earlier this month, he gave in on both downtown use and on specific hours for off-leash activity.

In the July meeting, Hardy picked up the comments by Booth about facilities in Henderson. “In Henderson, almost every park has a dog park and some of them are quite massive,” she said.

“I have a simple solution,” Hardy said. “We find out where those parks are in Henderson.” The comment elicited some laughter in the room.

“The reality is,” he noted, “when we look at the parks here with dogs and people intermixing, there are a lot of cars that bring the dogs to the parks. And quite frankly, some of those cars that bring dogs to the parks are not from Boulder City.”