In Monona, dog barking nuisances are becoming a nuisance
By Audrey Posten, Times-Register
During her monthly report to the Monona Council at its Oct. 18 meeting, police chief Jo Amsden said the department had 312 calls for service in September, including 12 dog-related calls. Complaints about dog barking have also become frequent, but the city’s nuisance ordinance lacks the teeth to discourage repeat occurrences.
“It’s not a big thing, just certain people’s dogs. But the ordinance says nothing,” acknowledged city administrator Barb Collins. “It says a nuisance can be a barking dog. There’s no length of time, there’s no stating whether it’s inside or outside. It doesn’t have decibels or time limits. What’s the consequence other than getting a ticket?”
“And most nuisances don’t go away,” she added. “When the police show up, the lawn is still long, the junk is still in the yard. A barking dog could have been put in a half hour later. By the time we get the call and get there, the dog is not outside. So it’s a tough thing. That’s an ordinance where we can go up to $750.”
According to Amsden, one resident alone has had eight calls related to a barking dog.
“How many times does it take?” wondered mayor Eric Koenig. “At one point does it become a nuisance for the owner?”
“He’s gone during the day. When he goes to work, they get put outside for the day,” Amsden stated.
Offenders can be cited through the courthouse and made to pay the court fine, but Amsden said that does not always cause the dog to quit barking. In fact, some people who’ve been cited get off or refuse to pay fees.
“For one, the dog owner went to court and she said, ‘Well, it only barked for a few minutes. Once we moved it inside, it didn’t bark.’ She got a deferred judgment out of the deal,” shared Amsden. “She didn’t really learn anything, but she’s got bark collars on the dogs now.”
Council member Preston Landt wondered if bark collars could be required after so many complaints.
Collins said she would bring Monona’s ordinance, as well as information about what other cities have done, for consideration at an upcoming meeting.
In the meantime, councilman John Elledge advocated a different approach.
“We make these rules and enforcing them totally sucks. Yet, we still deal with the complaints because we have rules. Whatever happened to people talking to people? ‘Let’s have a conversation because your dog is driving me nuts—I’m getting no sleep.’ Why is it all of a sudden my responsibility to sit at a city council meeting because someone whined about someone else’s dog?” he asked. “The people complaining about the dog, to me, are a nuisance. Unless our ordinance really starts having some teeth, this makes it really tough.”
In other police news, Amsden said the department conducted a “special project” one day because of complaints like speeding, loud mufflers, squealing tires.
“We can’t be everywhere to catch them all, but we tried our best to hit them all that day,” she said.
Nine tickets were issues, as well as warnings.
“It’s not like we’re nailing everybody who comes in or out of town. We try to treat people how we’d want to be treated, but you’ve got the chosen few who don’t want to follow the rules,” Amsden said. “If we keep getting complaints like that, we might just do a special project every three months.”
LMI survey meets requirement
The council approved a contract with Upper Explorerland Regional Planning Commission (UERPC), at a cost of $3,000, to complete a CDBG water/sewer grant application and environmental assessment for a possible $350,000 grant.
Surveys were mailed to a section of Monona residents who live around a sewer lining project area to be done in 2022, and the city needed a low- to moderate-income (LMI) percentage of at least 51.1 to apply for a CDBG grant of up to $500,000 for the sewer project. After tabulation, Diana Johnson, with UERPC, said the percentage was 52.84 percent. The deadline for the grant is Jan. 1.
