Controversial pit bull ban passes

Council Bluffs, IA -- Legal action will be taken against the city of Council Bluffs in response to the City Council's action Monday night approving a ban on pit bulls, a ban opponent said.

Meanwhile, Mayor Tom Hanafan said he has not taken a position on whether to use his veto power to override the council's vote.

Hanafan did say he has only used his veto power twice in 16 years as mayor and added, "It's going to be darn tough to do" after what happened at Monday night's meeting.

The mayor has 14 days to consider whether to veto the council's vote.

The council voted 3-2, as it has at two previous considerations, to approve the third and final reading of an ordinance that would ban the breed. Lynne Branigan, Chad Primmer and Dave Tobias voted in favor of the ban, and Matt Walsh and Scott Belt opposed it.

The city's Health Board recommended a ban on pit bulls earlier this year because of increased attacks on humans. The ordinance would allow current licensed pit bull owners to keep their dogs as long as they met various requirements. Once their dogs die, owners will not be allowed to have another pit bull.

Despite Monday's council action, the issue is not over, ban opponents said.

"We will not give up," said spokeswoman Charlotte Skokan. "We will continue to fight."

The American Canine Foundation will file a suit on behalf of the ban opponents, she said.

"They have committed that they will," Skokan said.

A fund to pay for the foundation's legal action has been set up at US Bank, she said.

Skokan supplied the council with what she said were 2,200 signatures of people who opposed the ban.

The final reading of the ordinance brought another full house to the council chambers, and the testimony got more heated than the previous meetings.

So much so that Hanafan said he was "embarrassed" by some of the things said by ban opponents, including one woman who was escorted out the door.

"I've never seen this type of activity," Hanafan said.

David Hibler of Nebraska, an outspoken ban opponent, told the council that in other communities that passed pit bull bans, pit bull owners became targets of hatred and bigotry.

Responding, Councilman Tobias said Hibler was the only person who ever brought up the notion of hatred and bigotry.

"And, you're not even from Council Bluffs," he said.

As at two previous meetings, the majority of speakers opposed the ban.

Ann Lyon said she talked to a local veterinarian about the ban.

"He didn't feel it was enforceable," Lyon said.

Kelley McAtee said the ban is a form of discrimination.

"It's creating a divide in our community," she said.

Deb Chapman told the council she has filed a complaint with the Iowa Supreme Court Board of Professional Ethics and Conduct against Primmer, an attorney, for conflict of interest.

"You stand to profit from any litigation," Chapman told Primmer.

She also said Primmer's mother, an insurance agent, would benefit from the $100,000 in liability insurance coverage pit bull owners must purchase to keep their dogs as part of the new ordinance.

Primmer described Chapman's action as "extremely underhanded" and "baseless."

Primmer offered his own response to the ethics board concerning Chapman's action.

He wrote that as the ordinance is penal in nature, and the office of the city attorney would prosecute those in violation, any potential benefits from the collection of fines would go to the city's general fund.

Primmer also wrote that it's questionable whether the insurance company his mother works for would issue a policy such as is required for existing pit bull owners under the proposed ordinance.

Primmer has been a target of many pit bull supporters, he said.

"I would say I suffered through this process more than anybody," he said. "We've got to make an attempt to protect the safety of the people of Council Bluffs. We are living on borrowed time."

Tobias defended his vote by saying, "I have an obligation to protect the citizens of the community. I believe pit bulls are a danger. I believe what I'm doing is correct."

After the meeting, Walsh said, "The facts indicate it's an irresponsible dog owner issue, not a breed specific issue."

Unless Hanafan vetoes the measure, the ordinance is expected to take effect on Jan. 1, 2005.