Governing body wrestles with dog walkers who won’t bag

Rawpixel image, public domain, dog in park.

HILLSDALE—Council members decided that they were barking up the wrong tree and pulled a revised ordinance on March 5 that would have prohibited dogs leashed and unleashed from roaming on local sports and rec fields.

After voting 4-2 to introduce the revised ordinance, Justin Fox later changed his vote to make it 3-3 to introduce. Mayor Michael Sheinfield broke the tie by voting against introduction, following a brief debate over what to do about dogs relieving themselves on local sports and recreation fields. 

He said the ordinance needed further study.

After changing his vote against ordinance introduction, Fox said, “This is not a police matter. Police don’t pick up feces so let’s move on.” 

Revised ordinance 24-06, was withdrawn by borough attorney Mark Madaio. He said he was told to revise the ordinance because there was a problem with dogs “defacing the actual playing surface” of sports fields. 

The ordinance revision stated that the borough “desires to modify section 220-3 to include subsection J to prohibit leashed or unleashed dogs from walking upon municipal sports fields.”

Council President John Escobar opposed the revision, noting that residents enjoy bringing their dogs to local parks. 

However, Madaio said the revision was directed at sports playing fields, not parks.

Escobar noted most local parks include recreation or playing fields, where dogs may be taken. However, though the ordinance prohibits unleashed dogs, many owners let their dogs run off leash in an open space or park area. 

Madaio said the revision was not intended to prevent residents from bringing their dogs to parks, but rather the pets defecating on sports fields.

Administrator Michael Ghassali said without an ordinance, authorities will not be able to enforce any posted signage that prohibits dogs from sports fields.

Councilwoman Abby Lundy opposed the revision, noting the borough does not have a dog park. She said she takes her dog to a “big fenced-in area” beyond the playing fields at Memorial Field.

Ghassali said, “The challenge is when they bring their dogs and they leave their stuff there and they leave it there and we go to clean it, if it’s grass it will leave a mark and it will kill the grass.”

He said a new grass field should be protected from damage from dog excretion. 

Later, councilman Clemente Osso said that the issue on recreational fields remains a constant problem for local teams, and a constant complaint. Most councilors said the majority of dog owners clean up after their pets, while some estimated up to a third or more do not do so regularly.

Councilman John Ruocco said while he was in favor of prohibiting dogs running on Memorial Field, Centennial Field or a baseball field, he thought the revised ordinance could be misinterpreted by residents who want to bring their dogs to local parks.

Ruocco said he wondered if an ordinance would be enforced, despite signage that noted dogs were not allowed on playing fields. “Legally this allows [police] to enforce it. From a practicality viewpoint, I’m not sure that they would do that.”

Sheinfield asked Ruocco if dog owners were required to pick up droppings. Ruocco said there was a requirement for owners to pick up after their dogs.

Lundy noted, “It’s like we’re penalizing the responsible pet owners if right now it’s supposed to be enforced.” Sheinfield noted there is an ordinance such that pet owners need to clean up after dogs.

Sheinfield wondered how the revised ordinance would stop dog owners who refuse to clean up after pets. Osso noted that the playing fields are frequently marred with dog feces.

Madaio replied that dogs appearing on playing fields would be easier to spot than trying to figure whether a dog left droppings that were not cleaned up. He said if officials observe no dogs on a large playing field, it will be likely that there is less dog poop on the field.

Ghassali said the ordinance could be made “more specific to the fields where you’re not supposed to be.” 

Madaio asked for suggestions from council members on how to revise the ordinance. No date for ordinance re-introduction was available at press time.