Numerous members of the public called Tuesday night for an end to the pit bull dog ban in Junction City.

Junction City Commissioners in response were split on the issue with Tim Brown opposed, Commissioner Phyllis Fitzgerald wanting the final decision to focus on the safety of local residents, and Commissioner Jeff Underhill wanting time to become more educated on the issue. Mayor Pat Landes indicated he was open to reviewing the issue.  Staff will prepare information and bring it back to the governing body for their agenda at their next meeting in August.

Those supporting the removal of the ordinance put forth reasons ranging from the fact that there is already a vicious dog ordinance so one breed does not need to be singled out to the negative economic impact the pit bull ordinance is having on the community.

Mark Stenstrom, a local veterinarian, spoke first to the commissioners. He expressed the view that the pit bull ordinance is unnecessary now that there is an enforceable vicious dog ordinance in place. “I don’t feel like you discourage any criminal action by banning pit bulls because I think it’s still illegal to sell drugs and cook meth in Junction City, and I don’t think ownership of a dog is going to discourage someone from their career choice.”

Stenstrom told a story about a military couple new to the area who visited his office July 7th with two pit bulls. They informed him they couldn’t take the dogs on Fort Riley because they are banned on post. The Soldier asked if pit bulls were banned in Junction CIty. The couple was staying in a long-term hotel awaiting purchase of a home. Stenstrom informed him the dogs were banned in Junction City but when they asked about Abilene and Manhattan indicated to them he didn’t know. Stenstrom stated the Soldier told him they would be looking in Abilene and Manhattan.

Willie Thornberg said he had been informed why the pit bull ban was implemented in 1997, the specific threat to the safety of law enforcement officers and the public at-large.”And thankfully that threat, I think, was dealt with properly.” But Thornberg also noted some unintended consequences of the ban are being faced. “We have families not able to legally live in our community if they have a specific breed of pet in their family. I don’t think there’s a person who does not have a family member or at least know of families who have a pet pit bull as a trusted pet and a valued family member. Currently they call them every name other than a pit bull and live in fear that they’re going to have to make a decision to either leave our community or get rid of one of our family members.” Thornberg added he had experienced first-hand the effect of the pit bull ordnance on the labor pool.

Attorney Linnea Alt said there’s no need to have “breed specific legislation” when something is already in place.

City Commissioner Tim Brown expressed opposition to rescinding the pit bull ordinance by noting 433 Americans have been killed by canines since 2005 through 2017, 66% of those were killed by pit bulls.” Brown added, “I could not live with myself or look at myself in the mirror if one person, one child were killed or severely injured by something I took an action on on this commission.”

Commissioner Phyllis Fitzgerald stated she felt sad and bad for that breed of dog. because she didn’t feel it was the fault of the animal. She referred to one piece of information presented during the public comment session was when an animal is turned into the animal shelter the owners never come back and get them. They go get another one so we continue to have more and more of those animals that are not being taken care of responsibly.”

Fitzgerald said the commission’s decision must be based on the safety of the community  and the people living in this city. “If that’s the will of the commission at the end then that’s the thing I look at, is the responsibility of ourselves to ensure that the community and the citizens are safe here in our town.”

Commissioner Jeff Underhill said he had no opinion on the issue, but wanted time to educate himself on the differences between a general vicious dog ordInance and a breed specific ordInance, and compare what is in place here with what exists in other communities.

Mayor Pat Landes said he would be open to reviewing the topic. “And I think there are certain things that could be in place to assess the animals. They’ve all got to be licensed, they’ve got to have protections in place for the public as well. I think it could be done, there are many other communities that have done this. ”

Landes explained he understood why the ban was put in place in the 1990’s because there were a lot of drug issues and those involved in illegal activity had those kinds of dogs to keep the police officers away. “But I think times have changed, and I think there has been a lot more education about the breed and breed specific legislation that I think we need to take our time and review.”

Landes suggested if the commission didn’t want to deal with it alone and remove the ban perhaps it should be put to a public vote on the November election ballot. City Manager Allen Dinkel did not favor putting the issue on the election ballot and instead suggested that the staff prepare information with the commission then doing a review with more discussion.

Commissioner Nick Albritton was not in attendance at the meeting.