Council votes ‘no’ on leash law

And, in the end, only one member of the city council was willing to stand up to a minority of residents and insist that dogs in public areas be on a leash.

After instructing staff to craft an amendment to city law in November removing the exception to the city’s leash law for animals “under the direct control” of an owner or a trainer, four of five members of the city council declined to adopt the change, instructing staff to come back with a new law that would come with new exceptions.

The council did vote to decriminalize minor animal violations (animal cruelty or leaving one locked in a hot car will still be crimes as will possession of a dangerous or vicious animal).

Bringing a number of animal issues that have been argued for years to a head, the council voted to mandate microchipping of animals found at large as a condition for them being released from the city’s animal shelter.

In November, it appeared that the council, after a change of heart by Councilman Steve Walton, was ready to mandate microchips for all animals in the city. Until, that is, a member of the public claimed that microchips in pets had been used in domestic abuse cases for an abuser to stalk or harass their victim further.

But City Attorney Brittney Walker said that the city had reached out to the county as well as all of the local cities and no one reported anything like that ever having happened in their jurisdictions. This led Councilwoman Cokie Booth to ask if the council could still make microchips mandatory. Walker replied that, while the council could do that, it would have to be in a separate action sometime in the future.

The vote on the looser version of microchipping was unanimous.

The next item up was the decriminalization of minor animal violations, which also passed unanimously.

The most controversial item came next as the council voted to remove the decades-old exception to its leash law if the animal is under the “direct control” of an owner or trainer.

After Jorgensen asked if it was possible to specify desert areas away from town for off-leash use and Booth presented statistics that she said showed that off-leash dogs are not a danger when it comes to documented cases of dog bites, Councilwoman Denise Ashurst asked about enforcement. Animal Control Supervisor Brendan Hanson said the first step would be education. Walker, again under questioning by Ashurst, reported that the proposed fines would be $95 for a first offense, $200 for a second offense and $500 for third and subsequent offenses.

The council questioned Hanson about how removing the “control” exception would change his job and he said it would make it easier.

In public comment at the beginning of the meeting, comments in favor of a tougher leash law were 5-2. In previous meetings that were more widely attended, the ratio was closer to 10-1.

In an earlier discussion about finding options for off-leash dog recreation should the city get itself in line with every other municipality in the region and mandate leashes in public, Jorgensen picked 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. “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, notably after Mayor Joe 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.” And this week she reversed herself yet again.

Hardy also reversed his vote from November. Only Walton stood his ground.

Booth said she had talked with Public Works Director Gary Poindexter about possibly designating the park area adjacent to the post office as a dog park but noted that is a process which could take a year or more as the city is working with the federal government over control of that land, specifically as it pertains to the possible removal of the grass.

When she voted against the changes back in November, Booth justified her vote on the fact that there are no dog parks for residents on the lake side of town or in the downtown area. “In Henderson, almost every park has a dog park and some of them are quite massive.”

Ashurst expressed some skepticism about the suitability of Wilbur Square as a dog park, calling it a “people park.” Indeed, a fenced area for dogs in Wilbur Square would be a challenge during city events when most of that park is taken up by booths and vendors. She also noted the potential cost of developing another specific dog park area, saying that the existing park in Veterans’ Memorial is not heavily used.

Seemingly supporting the idea of limited hours for off-leash dogs, Ashurst noted that early morning hours might work. “No one is really in the park at 5:30 a.m.,” she claimed.

Walton disagreed, 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. “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.

Hardy picked up the comment about facilities in Henderson, noting that instead of setting hours for off-leash use, the city might be better served directing people who want their dogs off leash to Henderson. He also noted that many of the people with off-leash dogs may not even be Boulder City residents.

“I have a simple solution,” he 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.”