Dog Park Users Could Be Fined $500 for Not Following Ordinance

Now that San Angelo’s first dog park is set to officially open within a few months, the City of San Angelo wants to ensure some rules are in place. Based on an ordinance that passed its first public hearing today with a 7 to 0 vote by City Council members, people who fail to follow the rules will face a fine of up to $500.

At this morning’s City Council meeting held at the McNease Convention Center, Carl White, director of Parks & Recreation, introduced a dog park ordinance that mirrors that of Abilene’s, and amends Chapter 9, Article 9.02, Section 9.02.010 of the city’s Code of Ordinances. This ordinance allows and enforces specific rules people have to follow within the big and small dog park areas.

“Before we get this park opened, we wanted to have council adopt some ordinances related to the management of the dog parks,” White explained to council members. 

These rules state that visitors shall do the following:

• Obey dog park hours, which are from sunrise to sunset daily, unless otherwise closed for maintenance or after inclement weather events.
• Obey all other rules that govern COSA parks.
• Stay within the park and within the view of the dog at all times.

Additionally, White said no person shall bring into an off-leash area:

• A dangerous dog as defined by Section 822.041 of the Texas Health and Safety Code, as amended.
• A female dog in heat.
• More than two dogs at a time.
• A dog that is not currently registered, vaccinated, spayed or neutered in compliance with Chapter 3 of this code.

White added that any person who brings a dog into a designated dog park facility shall:

• Keep their dog(s) in the appropriate area as designated by signs.
• Dispose of all fecal matter in the appropriate container.
• Carry a visible leash at all times.
• Keep the dog(s) under voice control at all times.
• Remove any dog showing any sign of aggression towards any person or animal immediately.
• Remove any dog excessively barking.

 “This would become part of the park’s ordinance,” White said.

White also included prohibitions. The following is prohibited in all fenced areas of the dog park:

• Sick animals.
• Professional training.
• Spike or pinch collars.
• Food for humans or dogs, including treats.
• Children under the age of 10.
• Children between the ages of 10 and 16 years unaccompanied by a responsible adult.
• Children chasing or otherwise taunting or harassing dogs within the park.

Also, White read over the visitor acknowledgment that states the use of a designated dog park by any dog constitutes:

1. Implied consent of the owner, harborer, or person having care, custody or control of the dog to comply with all conditions and regulations stated in this section or posted at the dog park site.
2. Acknowledgment that visitors are solely responsible for damage and injury caused by their dog.
3. A waiver of liability to the City by the owner, harborer, or person having care, custody, or control of the dog and an agreement to protect, indemnify, defend and hold harmless for any injury or damage caused by the dog during any time that the dog is in the designated dog park.

After reading these regulations, White also read the penalty for not following these regulations. Within the code, the penalty states that “a person who violates a provision of this Division shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and fined in a sum not to exceed $500. Repeated violations may result in dogs and/or owners being prohibited from future use of the facility by the Director of Parks & Recreation.”

“I wanted to read this [ordinance] because folks will be watching the presentation, and are interested in the dog park and how we’re going to run it,” White said after presenting this information.

He told council that the city needs this ordinance in place, and it can be effectively enforced by the police if there are any issues.

Councilwoman Charlotte Farmer, Single-Member District 6, said previously the council and staff talked about signs that prohibit motorized vehicles of any kind that’s around the dog park as well. However, she said that does not prohibit wheelchairs that are motorized.

“That is an exception. Does that need to be stated in there?” Farmer asked.

Carl said that will indeed have to be clarified in the ordinance.

Mayor Dwain Morrison said he was concerned with the restriction on children under 10.

“That means no children under 10 would be allowed in this thing, and then from 18 down, they have to be supervised by an adult."

White clarified from ages 10 to 16, a responsible adult would have to be present, but any child under 10 would not be allowed. White said this rule exists mainly because younger children can panic with dogs all around them; they can also get knocked over by dogs.

“That’s unrealistic, Carl,” Morrison said about the restriction.

White said, “Well, it’s not like it’s a park or a playground. It is a location where there’s dogs. We don’t know the behavior of the dogs at all times, and they could scare the kids and knock over the kids. We’re trying to be concerned for the children."

Councilwoman Elizabeth Grindstaff, SMD5, said that’s why projects like the dog park are difficult. 

“Whose safety is paramount in this situation?” asked Grindstaff. “It’s close to Unidad Park, so this is built for children, but this is a dog park where dogs can run without a leash. I think we need to be very careful."

White agreed and said that’s the big issue. These dogs will be able to run without a leash. He added that there are areas where families can hang out, but this area is specifically designated for dogs to run around. 

Councilman Johnny Silvas, SMD3, said, “I can understand the large dog area, but what about the small dog area?"

“It would be the same,” White responded.

City Manager Daniel Valenzuela said sometimes kids can be very playful, and they can do something to make the dog more aggressive.

Farmer agreed with that assessment. She said she has a 2-year-old granddaughter who believes all dogs need a kiss, so she could run up to a dog not accustomed to that, and it could result in a mishap. That’s what city officials want to avoid.

Grindstaff, however, said, “I think there will be some people in the public who will not understand, and I think we have to get started with something, but I think there’s a reason to do things this way."

All the council members agreed this ordinance is a good start, and Silvas motioned to approve the ordinance as presented. Farmer seconded the motion. There was a 7-0 vote.

If people wish to voice their concerns about this ordinance, they will want to do so before the ordinance goes for final Consent Agenda approval.