In the first month after Lucas County, OH puppy killer Tom Skeldon's resignation (and even after he announced his resignation), things have gotten a lot better for the dogs in Lucas County and Toledo.
And things may get much better soon.
On November 18th, long time dog warden Tom Skeldon announced his resignation. Since then, the winds of change have been blowing quickly.
At the end of 2009, the county saw a dramatic increase in adoptions and dogs transfered from the shelter. In total, 682 dogs were adopted from the shelter -- 190 more than the previous year. However, about 1/3 of the adoptions (225-ish) occurred in the last 2 months of the year -- many after Skeldon's announced resignation. It isn't completely clear whether the increase was due to increased publicity surrounding the shelter (courtesy of the Toledo Blade) or if it was because of people showing the support for the shelter now that Skeldon was leaving is unclear....but either way, it's been good for the dogs.
Earlier this week, Lucas County Commissioners unanimously voted to reverse a long-time shelter policy prohibiting all 'pit bulls' from being adopted out by the shelter by allowing all healthy pit bull puppies under the age of 3 months to be transfered from the shelter to the local humane society. While the policy needs to be lifted to allow ALL pit bulls to be transferred, this is at least a good first step for the county shelter.
Also, while all of this is going on, the Toledo City Council (Toledo is the largest city in Lucas County) has been mulling over the idea of removing their breed specific legislation. The City is looking at instituting a dog advisory panel to provide recommendations for what the new dangerous dog ordinance would look like without being breed specific. The city admittedly went on the advice of Tom Skeldon for how the laws are written, but now, with him out of the picture, they are looking at other options. "I think we can potentially define vicious without being breed specific," said council member Rob Ludeman. "That is one thing I probably anticipate might come out of this advisory committee.
A court decision that came down yesterday may speed up that process.
The case was a situation where the Lucas County Dog Warden's office seized what it deemed to be three "pit bulls" from a Toledo man - -Hugh Smith - while Smith took his dogs for a walk. The warden cited Smith with 13 violations for having unmuzzled, uninsured, and improperly confined 'pit bulls', as well as having two 'pit bulls' over the limit of one in the county.
Yet Smith and his attorney's claimed that the dogs were in fact Cane Corsos. Yesterday, the Toledo municiple judge, Michael Goulding, not only ruled that Smith could keep his dogs, but also that the law was, in fact, unconstitutional.
One reason for Goulding's claim that the law was unconsitutional was that he said it violated the state home rule doctrine. "While the state statute does not specifically permit ownership of more than one dog 'commonly known as a pit bull', it does not prohibit it either."
Goulding also noted that the law lumping 'pit bulls' with 'pit bull mixed breed' dogs together was also unconstitutional.
This is the second time that the courts have ruled that the Toledo ordinance is unconstitutional -- and this case was declared unconstitutional for different reasons than the one that was overturned by the Ohio Supreme Court two years ago.
Toledo City Council President Joe McNamara, who was the one who initiated the look at changing Toledo's breed specific policy noted that the judges opinion:
"Underscores the need for us to re-examine the city's policies concerning the regulation of dangerous dogs. I do think Judge Goulding was correct when he wrote that 'a more uniform, practical and humane method of regulating dogs, which both preserves the safety of the public and focuses on the dangers and misdeeds of the irresponsible dog owners would seem preferable to the status quo."
I don't have a copy of Goulding's final verdict, and will hopefully get my hands on a copy soon. But with the second ruling of the law being unconstitutional, and continuing public and city leader support for a repeal, it looks like a long-time law on the books in Toledo could be overturned soon.
BSL is a failed policy -- that is virtually impossible for cities to enforce without some level of arbitrary enforcement -- which opens the city up to a host of legal challenges. Toledo is just one of many cities that are finally wising up to this and looking toward behavior-based ordinances that are more effective and target irresponsible owners -- regardless of what breed they happen to own.
Some more on the court case at Animal Law Coalition.
I just want to thank Jean and the OCDA for all of the great work they are doing
Posted by: Lisa in OH | January 21, 2010 at 02:09 PM
What an inspiring post. Sanity seems to be making a comeback all over.
Posted by: Ted | January 21, 2010 at 04:21 PM
I don't understand the difference between this judge's ruling and the Ohio SC ruling... but I'm HAPPY!
Posted by: EmilyS | January 21, 2010 at 07:37 PM
Emily,
The major differential appears to be that the dogs involved in this case were not 'pit bulls' where as the in the Tellings case the dogs actually were. So the case essentially differentiates between "pit bulls" and "pit bull type" dogs or "pit bull mixes". It's a bit of an odd ruling, but it has essentially made the Toledo ordinance completely null and void and is the third straight judge's ruling in Ohio that essentially says to the Ohio State law "really? There has to be a better way."
Posted by: Brent | January 22, 2010 at 01:16 PM