At the March 9 Eureka City Council meeting, an ordinance amending the Eureka City Code relating to vicious animals and restricted breed dogs was presented for review.
Ordinance #4349, as presented, would have repealed Chapter II, Article 4 of the Eureka Municipal Code entitled “Pit Bull Dogs” and would have established registration and insurance requirements for certain dogs. According to Ordinance 4349, restricted breed dogs listed as Bull Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, American Bully, dogs of mixed breeds commonly known as pit bulls, or any dog exhibiting physical characteristics predominantly consistent with the above breeds would have been subject to mandatory registration and regulation.
Registration was to have included proof of vaccination and sterilization, proof of liability insurance, obtaining a current city license, and presenting two color photographs clearly depicting the dogs. Regulation of the restricted-breed dogs would have meant being required to be confined within a secure enclosure capable of preventing escape with a fence height of six feet tall or a dog run with a covered top, being leashed and muzzled when off the owner’s property, and not being permitted to be left unattended while restrained outside an enclosure or secured properly.
During discussion, Councilwoman Miranda Colangelo stated, the problem with the ordinance as it stands right now is that it’s not enforceable. “The dogs are already in this community. What this ordinance does is eliminate the grey areas that were in the initial one (ordinance) and cover liability and protection.” Colangelo said that with the new ordinance in place, the animal control officer could have step-bystep direction on how to proceed if an issue arises with the dog breeds in question.
Councilwoman Cinda Beals questioned the feasibility of residents obtaining the required insurance, saying that she felt it might be difficult for a renter or landlord to secure liability insurance on a restricted breed dog due to concern over potential lawsuits. Colangelo responded that, to her knowledge, many options are now available for dog protective insurance.
Beals also questioned the ability to monitor and enforce the regulations if a dog owner’s insurance were cancelled, noting the added responsibility that would fall on Eureka’s animal control officer, who is also part of the street department. “There are a lot of people who will follow the rules, but there are also people who won’t,” said Beals.
Councilman Dan Campbell made the statement that there are people who don’t follow the ordinance now, and he did not feel that changing the ordinance would necessarily cause people to begin to follow the new rules.
Councilman Jeff Marks said if somebody wanted to follow the rules, the old ordinance doesn’t have enough wiggle room to do it. “This way if I do have a dog, I have a way to keep it and take accountability for the dog.”
The council also discussed whether it would be the responsibility of the city to prove that a dog was a restricted breed or of the owner to prove that it was not. The general consensus to that question was that the burden would fall to the dog owner. The council heard public comment from local citizen Matt Wilson, who questioned the proposed ordinance’s maximum penalty, which was listed as $1,000 and revocation of registration. Wilson felt that would be much too light a punishment if something were to go wrong, specifying that an owner who had complied with all regulations might face no criminal consequence in a worst-case scenario.
Clearly, each council member had given the proposed amended ordinance considerable thought, and no member felt the ordinance was wholly inoperable. However, after much deliberation and sometimes heated debate, a motion to keep the ordinance as is (and not adopting Ordinance 4349) passed, 4-2, with councilmembers Colangelo and Marks voting in opposition.
Regarding the current ordinance, City Attorney William McClendon verified that the ordinance is constitutional without amendment. It was also stated that if any dog is found to be in violation of the city code, the proper procedure to be followed is that the owner would be ticketed or informed by mail and given a set amount of time to adhere to the city’s code before the issue would be brought before the city court.
Mayor Stephen Coulter told the council that Eureka’s animal control officer, James Reneau, has received multiple training courses since the incident with a citizen’s pit bull dog last August, which Coulter believes will make a big difference if any restricted dog issues arise again in Eureka.
Megan Unruh, of South Central Kansas Economic Development District (SCKEDD) joined the city council meeting via Teams to discuss the bid awards for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) housing rehabilitation projects. The city of Eureka received bids for multiple rehabilitation projects. Based on bid results and review for responsiveness, responsibility, and cost reasonableness, SCKEDD presented the following award recommendations: for 126 S. Poplar, the bid from Arambula Construction in the amount of $37,322; for 123 N. Oak, the bid from NWFA in the amount of $19,090; and for 112 S. Walnut, the bid from NWFA in the amount of $25,070.
Unruh clarified that for the address 112 S. Walnut, S&A Construction had presented a bid that was lower than that of NWFA ($22,980); however, because S&A was found to be currently past due on several projects, SCKEDD anticipated that the company may not get to the project at 112 S. Walnut for several months, preventing progression in the program. For these reasons, SCKEDD felt that S&A did not meet the criteria as the lowest “responsible” bidder and thus, recommended NWFA instead. The council voted to approve the recommendations put out by SCKEDD.
In public comments, Robin Wunderlich requested that garage sale permits and fees be waived for citywide garage sale days for Thursday through Saturday, April 2-4, and Thursday through Saturday, September 10-12. Wunderlich also requested that the city hold Trick-or-Treat Main Street on Thursday, Oct. 29, to coincide with the date of Halloween parties at the Eureka schools. Both requests were approved as requested.
Code Enforcement Officer Steve French presented two resolutions to remove junk and various refuse from private property. Resolution 26-02 regarding 217 W. 4th in Eureka was approved as presented. Resolution 26-03 regarding the property at 716 N. Elm was also approved as presented.
City Clerk Renee Burk reported that, on approval by the council, Eureka’s Fourth of July fireworks display will be scheduled for Friday, July 3, through Victory Pyrotechnics at a cost of $7,683.20. Burk explained that several other bids were explored, which were higher cost. Every provider’s schedule was fully committed for Saturday, July 4. July 3 was chosen as the best alternate date available.
The transfer of Eureka Lake Lot #31 was presented and approved. The lot will transfer from Marieke Wolfe and David Scott Murphy to Anne-Marieke Wolfe and D. Scott Murphy, Trustees of the Anne-Marieke Wolfe Revocable Trust.
The consent agenda, including the minutes of the Feb. 23 regular meeting, the scheduled claims list for expenses due through March 9, in the amount of $141,413.66, and purchase order #731148 to JEO Consultants for $7,939.25, was approved as presented.
The council held two executive sessions: a five-minute session to discuss personnel and a 10-minute session to discuss private business. No action was taken as a result of either.
Eureka City Council held a special meeting on Wednesday, March 11, to discuss alternative bids for the Memorial Hall window restoration grant. The council approved to accept alternate #1, from Pishny in the amount of $169,500. The next Eureka City Council meeting is scheduled for Monday, March 23, at 7 p.m. at the Eureka Public Library.
