Leash Law and Dogs at Parks

These recommended amendments are terrible and I do not support them.

I have read the proposed ordinance modifications but will respond based on the summary written at the beginning of this discussion board.

Proposed change bullet #1, “Dogs must either be within a vehicle or container from which they cannot escape or they must be leashed.”

928.085 subdivision 1 already states and prohibits, “An owner must not cause or permit his/her dog to run a large within the city limits…”

Proposed change bullet #2, “The ordinance does allow the use of a retractable leash of no more 20 feet, provided that the leash is retracted to six feet whenever another person or animal is within 20 feet.”

The current code at 925.085 subdivision 1 clause a, states, “…at a heel beside a person having custody of it and obedient to that person’s command…” and 925.085 subdivision 1 clause c states, “controlled by a leash not exceeding six feet in length.” The code even goes further and states following 925.085 subdivision 1 clause c and states, “For purposes of clause (a) of this subdivision, the person must be able to demonstrate that the dog will respond to the person’s voice or nonverbal command on the first command given.”

Breaking this down further a dog at heel is not 6 feet away from its owner even when wearing packs/saddlebags like the ones I’ve owned and others I’ve seen. In my experience, the heel is at, most, within 4-5 feet when wearing a saddlebag or pack (due to the size of the packs).

So, I feel that it is safe to say, that under the current ordinance, when leash laws apply, the dog should be within 6 feet of the owner when leash laws apply (whether by heel or on leash).

And then, above the bulleted list it states, “dog owners may no longer walk their dogs off-leash and at heel.”

This is just an attack on owners who train and have trained dogs.

I can tell you, since I live adjacent to a county road in Minnetonka that has a sidewalk, these changes are *not* for the safety of the dog owner, dog, or benefit of the property owner next to the side walk.
1. With an extended 20 ft retractable leash, if the owner is standing in the middle of the 6 ft sidewalk and the dog darts across the street, the dog will have enough length of leash to cross a 6 ft bike lane and a 12 ft lane of traffic before the leash goes tight and pulls the owner off the sidewalk. If a vehicle hits the dog or leash, the owner of the leash, depending on how they are holding onto or, attached to the leash, could be pulled into traffic.
2. I’ve seen walkers almost run over on the sidewalk by electric bicycles, scooters, etc. This is a problem for all people walking on the sidewalk. This is worse for dog owners and there is no way that you can retract a 20 ft leash attached to a dog fast enough to prevent an accident if the electric bicycle, scooter, etc. comes driving on the sidewalk at full speed.
3. City Code 925.085 subdivision 11 already prohibits owners from permitting their dogs, “to defecate on public or private property without the permission of the property owner, unless the person immediately cleans up and disposes of the animal’s feces in a sanitary manner.” However, we know that this happens and some people don’t clean up after their dogs. So, now with a 20 ft leash, we have to worry about it 20 ft in instead of 6 ft in on private property. How soon, before we have to tolerate it at our front door?

So, looking back at 1, 2, and 3 above, one may ask how a dog on a 20 ft lead differs from a dog that breaks heel. A dog that breaks heel will not drag a strap across the traffic lane or across a sidewalk. The owner won’t be pulled into traffic because there is no leash to pull them in. A dog being walked on a sidewalk and at heel will not defecate 20 ft into private property.

And, for the changes proposed for 1135.010 and 1135.020, I oppose those as well. I see comments that people are coming from other cities to enjoy our parks. I believe there is a reason why. Our parks are the best parks out there for dog owners. I also believe that fenced in dog parks have their place but can be a mistake. I do not like fenced in dog parks.
1. Fenced in dog parks are typically too small.
2. Fenced in dog parks usually come with restrictions such as no dog toys so you cannot exercise/run your dog.
3. Fenced in dog parks encourage people to bring dogs that are not under control (because they are “fenced”) and, do I ever have the story to tell on this one.
4. Fenced in dog parks have their own enforcement issues.

If people are having problems with dogs on the groomed trails in the parks, the City needs to step up enforcement. From what I recall from previous City Council meetings, since this is enforcement of City Code, it does not require a licensed police officer to handle enforcement but can be handled by another City employee such as the Community Service Officer, Animal Control Officer, or whoever the City designates for City Code enforcement (I could be wrong about who can enforce City Code).

I don’t look at these as positive changes to our City Code but a move against people with trained dogs. You cannot make an untrained dog heel and walk with you down the sidewalk. The City Code already states that you must be able to demonstrate your dog’s training on the *first* command. Why attack the owner with the trained dog with ordinance changes like the ones being proposed? If this is because people are not following the rules, enforce the existing rules, don’t make new ones.

About me…
I had two German Shepherds I walked for 12 years (2009-2021), off leash, in the Glen Lake area and I exercised/ran them a lot at Purgatory Park. I cherish the time I had with my dogs and I had much positive feedback from the community when I walked with them. Some people told me that my dogs were ambassadors for the German Shephard breed. I believe that having well behaved dogs, walking them off leash and having good voice control inspires other people to do more with their dogs. And who knows, maybe it inspired somebody enough that they started training dogs as service dogs, search and rescue dogs or for other tasks that benefit the community.

Thank you for seeking public comment on the proposed ordinances. I support the ordinance amending section 925.085 relating to dogs at large, as well as the ordinance amending sections 1135.010 and 1135.020 relating to animals within city parks.

We should continue to allow dogs to be off leash if at heal or under voice command on walks. However, those dog owners that cannot maintain control of their dog should face penalties. There should also be breed restrictions as certain breeds should never be off leash in public areas given propensity for harm to people or other dogs.

I strongly disagree with this ordinance. This mandatory leash ordinance would apply 24-7 to all areas in the city of Minnetonka. Responsible pet owners often walk their pets in areas of the city and parks where there aren’t any other individuals, yet they will still be required to leash their pet even though no one else is around. This ordinance is extremely law-and-order hostile and infringes upon civil liberties of responsible citizens who have appropriately trained and control their pets.

This new ordinance is good. It is better for public safety. We all have seen and experienced folks with their off leash dogs which are NOT under their voice control. These owners think they have their dogs under control but most are NOT. That's reality. In my neighborhood I see a couple guys with their dogs off leash and the dogs go everywhere and straight up to other dogs and people. These dogs run up to other dogs with no dog social manners lead to dog fights and dog on human attacks. This ordinance is long overdue.

I appreciate that dogs off-leash in maintained park areas and trails can be challenging, but expanding this restriction to the unmaintained trails in our parks is going too far. I leash my dog and also allow her off-leash on dirt footpaths in several Minnetonka parks. I rarely see other people on these trails, and leash her immediately if I see people approaching. I have a disability and walking with my dog leashed is difficult for me, so I appreciate the ability to take breaks from it on unmaintained trails.

These ordinances are needed. Dog owners in my neighborhood let them run around unsupervised to toilet in neighbors' yards. Owners unable to control the dogs by verbal command when they run after little kids. Two of these situations on just one short street.
Meanwhile in Purgatory Park, it is scary to walk or ride bikes with young children. Too many dog owners cannot control their dog by voice command. These dog owners are denying peace of mind to those who want to enjoy the park or even their own yard. They place their dog above people.
Please pass these ordinances and arrange enforcement.

I do not support the leash ordinance for trained dogs on neighborhood streets, we work hard with our dogs to make sure they follow commands and heel when approaching other people or traffic. I would like to see statistics about trained dogs causing problems while in a walk.
If you are looking at this what about cats?? People just let them out as "outdoor cats" killing wildlife and soiling private property without any regulations.

I think the new ordinance further restrict areas for dogs to be off lease. Taking your dog to a dog park is not the same as trail walking with your dog. I do agree we all need to be more respectful of each other and do our best to maintain our parks and abide by the rules.

I would question how much pollution actually comes from our dogs. Is there any studies related to this. Obviously, there are other wild animals that share our spaces. Maybe we should be more concerned about what we put on our lawns from pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers. That runoff pollutes our ponds, lakes and streams.

I would hope common sense would prevail but there seems to be a shortage of this.

BMM

I'm in favor of designated off-leash parks and maybe adding more clearly marked areas. All other public areas should be on leash. This is not just about aggressive dogs, it's about unpredictable behavior.

I was at Willow Park and a young couple had their cat on a lease - along came a lady with her large dog unleashed. Fortunately I was able to warn cat couple so they could pick up cat before dog headed right for it. Dog owner tried to call, but didn't work once dog saw cat. Since the city has an unleashed dog park already, I would appreciate all parks have city code that all dog must be on lease. Also, with so many living complexes going up with pet owners who walk regular neighbors, on lease and poop bags appreciated!

I strongly disagree with the proposal. I’ve been walking my unleashed dogs for six years at Purgatory Park and never have had a problem. It is only those who do not like dogs and those who are afraid of dogs who complain. Construct a fence from the parking lot along the maintained trail to the steel bridge. Install signage at the parking lot warning of unleashed dogs. Minnetonka has no dog parks. Those who are afraid of man’s best friend should seek help. Those who hate dogs should walk elsewhere.

I would agree with maintaining/structuring leash ordinances. Too many untrained dogs out there and some of them are huge. Not a dog person, but I love to walk and feel much more comfortable and safe if dog's are controlled.

Keeping dogs in dog designated areas will also help wildlife and land flourish in their respected spaces. Domestic dogs are not native and can do damage to natural environments.

As a dog owner I absolutely see the concern of some humans who are fearful of dogs. As a dog owner, I also see how incredibly important it is for dogs to have access to unmaintained areas to roam free.
Please continue to keep the unmaintained areas off leash and encourage leashed dogs to ONLY walk on the maintained trail.

Could jt be possible to encourage any walkers and leashed dogs to only walk on the paved trails with the knowledge that any un maintained area may have unleashed dogs on it?
It seems like the dogs are being punished and the humans aren’t being asked to change at all.

Also loving the new signs from Paws for Parks!! Thank you!!

We strongly prefer that dogs can be off-leash in wide open trail areas like Purgatory and similar. On high traffic paved or rock paths, leashes make plenty of sense. But out on the back trails in our parks, trained dogs should be free to roam. I recognize it gets tricky defining "trained", but residents should know if their dog is safe to be off-leash.

I support the proposed ordinances. I also agree with the comments on owners needing to maintain control of their animals even if they are on a 6ft or less leash, and curiosity about enforcement.

I am in favor of these two ordinance revisions. I have concerns about the suggestion of using retractable leashes. They can be dangerous to both dogs and humans, and give a false sense of control. Dogs are very quick and can lunge at people or other dogs before the handler can retract the leash.
I also hope that restored or sensitive areas of parks will be protected from dogs and people creating pathways and leaving pet feces in them.
Enforcement has been a huge issue in the past, so I would like the staff to speak to this in the next meeting. The best ordinance is worthless if it cannot be meaningfully enforced.
Finally, this has been discussed in the context of Purgatory Park only. Please include all Minnetonka parks!

I am in favor of these ordinances as the city needs to fix the previous unenforceable leash ordinance and clearly define an area designated as off-leash. Currently, the park regulation for off-leash is up to individual interpretation which leads to a lack of community minded behavior. A new fenced dog park amenity for the city will be an asset for dogs, reduce conflict with other park visitors, and create a more positive park community.

I assume everyone's goal is for all residents to be able to enjoy public spaces with minimal infringement on individual liberty. If current ordinances are not being enforced, then creating new ordinances will not address existing valid complaints, it will just make people more upset when new ordinances are ignored and not enforced. Currently off leash dogs are allowed at Purgatory, except on the paved trails, when under voice command. If enforced, the existing ordinance should severely limit negative interactions with dogs in public spaces.
Instead of creating new ordinances, why not make an effort to enforce existing ordinances to see if that improves residence's experience at the parks? As with many issues, we don't need new laws, we just need better enforcement of existing laws.