Libby City Council committee proposes repeal of pit bull prohibition

By JOHN BLODGETT

The Western News

Proposed revisions to Libby’s animal-control ordinance — including the recommended repeal of the contentious prohibition of pit bulls — will soon be presented to the Libby City Council.

The City Council’s Resolution and Ordinance Committee voted 3-0 Wednesday night to advance its recommendations to the full council for review. In addition to proposing that pit bulls no longer be prohibited within city limits, the committee is recommending revisions to the part of the ordinance that addresses vicious dogs.

The committee has been contending with the ordinance adjustments since Aug. 3, when a meeting intended to discuss the overhaul of the cemetery ordinance was overtaken by public discussion on the pit-bull prohibition, an agenda item intended for discussion at a later date.

In reconsidering the ordinance, committee members Kristin Smith, Peggy Williams and Brian Zimmerman worked closely with Libby Police Chief Scott Kessel and Corey Cromer, Wendy Anderson and Kathi Hooper of animal control.

At Wednesday night’s meeting, Hooper said that after discussing the matter with attorneys for the city and Board of Health, she and Kessel were “comfortable” with the idea of removing breed-specific language from the ordinance and revising the definition of a vicious dog.

Hooper and Kessel suggested that definition to be “A dog which harasses, chases, bites or attempts to bite any human being without provocation or which harasses, bites or attempts to bite any other animal without provocation. The term animal includes all livestock and any domestic pet.”

While discussing the definition, Zimmerman wondered where to draw the line on harassment. He offered the example of a yard-bound dog charging toward a passing pedestrian yet being contained by a fence.

Kessel noted that it was the animal control officer’s duty to write a ticket “if (a situation) fits statute,” and that a judge would make the final determination.

Despite their stated comfort with removing the breed-specific language and updating the vicious dog definition, both Hooper and Kessel stopped short of recommending that the committee should do so.

“I would caution you all to go with what your constituents say,” Kessel said.

Smith said the next step is to introduce the revised ordinance at a City Council meeting, followed by its first reading at a subsequent meeting. At that point the City Council will vote whether to move it to a second reading at a subsequent meeting, at which it’s adoption would go up to vote.

The public will be able to comment at each step, Smith said.