Tag Archives: repeal

Waterloo Wisconsin repeals breed discriminatory restrictions

In 2013 Waterloo Wisconsin officials were discussing the possibility of repealing their breed restrictions.

Enacted in 1996, the ordinance targeted  “(1)The pit bull terrier breed of dog. (2) The Staffordshire bull terrier breed of dog. (3) The American pit bull terrier breed of dog. (4) The American Staffordshire terrier breed of dog. (5) Dogs of mixed breed or of other breeds than listed under Subsections (1) to (4) above whose breed or mixed breed is commonly known as “pit bull,” “pit bull dog” or “pit bull terrier.”

These dogs and their mixes were considered to be vicious by default.  Dogs that were targeted had to be muzzled, on a leash of a certain length, confined to the specifications of the ordinance, both inside and outside the house, targeted dogs are not allowed to live in multi-dwelling housing and signs must be posted.  These rules apply to dogs that have been declared vicious by their behaviors, as well as those who are determined to be a targeted breed.

In 2013 Watertown, WI, looked into a breed discriminatory law and rejected the idea after a lengthy debate.  The proposal there was a mirror of Waterloo’s ordinance.  This rejection was used to galvanize support in the area against breed discriminatory laws, as well as highlighting and supporting the failure of such a law.

Alderwoman Laura Cotting suggested removing the breed discriminatory language at the October 3rd meeting of the Health and Safety Committee.

At their last meeting, officials acted on this suggestion by removing all breed based language from the dangerous dog ordinance.

We have been able to get some information about what happened there behind the scenes.

The issue first came up when a bike trail between Waterloo and Watertown was approved to be installed by the State.  A group of dog carting and sledding enthusiasts who hold events in the area decided, based on several factors, that this trail would be a great place to promote dog carting events, but because of the existing breed discriminatory law in Waterloo, participants would not be able to cross the city line without stopping to muzzle some of the participating dogs.   This raised some questions for competitions, as well as the legalities behind dogs that may not be residing in Waterloo, and whether the law would affect them.  Included in the participating dogs that were restricted are therapy dogs working in the surrounding areas.

The city was contacted by community members who were concerned about the effect the breed discriminatory law would have on such events and the city at large.

After the city was contacted, a committee was formed to investigate the issue, look at the existing law, make recommendations and draft changes to the existing law.  Three public Safety Committee meetings were held.  The public was invited to participate in all meetings.  After the changes were drafted, there was a public hearing on the new language in the ordinance.   Between 10 and 15 people attended the hearing.   There were some differences of opinion on aspects of the changes officials were making to strengthen the revised breed neutral law, such as leash requirements and licensing issues, but all the residents agreed that breed neutral was the way the city should go.

Only one person spoke in support of the existing breed discriminatory language.  This person was not known to the community members.  When it became clear that the idea of keeping the existing breed discriminatory language was not supported by any member of the community or council, we are told that the individual that was there supporting it became frustrated.  This person had, at one point, attempted to get some personal information of the people who suggested the repeal, but the members of the community refused to disclose any of that information.

There was only one dissenting vote to the changes.

Congratulations to the city of Waterloo, Wisconsin, for supporting safe and humane communities, and wanting to address the real causes of dangerous dogs, reckless and negligent owners.

Chesterfield, MO – Repeals Pit Bull Legislation


Chesterfield, Missouri! Bill No. 2909, which amends the “Dangerous Animals” ordinance to REMOVE all the breed specific language was APPROVED at the second reading on December 3rd, 2012!

Way to go Chesterfield!


Chesterfield, Missouri Council members will meet at 7:00 PM tonight, Monday, December 3rd to move forward with removal of the cities current breed specific legislation REPEAL.

If you are in the area, please attend the meeting in effort to show your support of this action.

For more information….

Worcester MA – Pit Bull Regulations Removed

According to the telegram, and communications between StopBSL.org and City Officials, Worcester will drop requirements that pit bulls be licensed, registered and muzzled in public.  Instead of the police chief ordering measures against problem dogs — restraint, removal from the city, or euthanasia — the city will have a complaint and hearing procedure.


Wilmington DE – Residents Want Pit Bull Legislation Changed

We had a great evening at Wilmington City Council. 3 people spoke in support of repealing the BSL and zero in opposition (even after the news paper called for opposition to come voice their side). We also had 4 supporters in the audience. We provided every council member with a letter including all of the information f

rom our END BSL tab on our website. There will be a new proposition drafted in the coming week and we will let you know when it will be brought forth for a reading/vote. We will need everyone to come out to support it! We are on the brink of change and we need everyone’s involvement. For more information, check out our website or email Amanda@pitbullsoldiers.com. The next meeting is November 1. Please mark your calendars and come out to support the innocent. Thank you to everyone who attended today’s meeting and to everyone who supports us in this fight. -A


Twelve years ago Wilmington DE passed an ordinance with strict regulations for any dog deemed a ‘pit bull’.  Owners of such dogs were required to register their dogs, muzzle them while in public parks and keep them on a leash no longer than 6 feet.  Their ordinance also required a person to be at least 21 years old in order to accompany the dog and all pit bulls would be spayed or neutered.

But four months ago resident Amanda Rodriquez started asking for change.

And every  month since then, Ms. Rodriquez has addressed the Wilmington City Council with the same request…Support legislation eliminating its strict laws governing pit bull ownership.

Council hasn’t been so eager to see change however, even though Mayor James M. Baker has introduced legislation to repeal Wilmington’s breed-specific legislation.

While some of the council members have expressed their apprehension to repeal the regulations, pointing out two recent incidents involving unlicensed dogs, others have reserved their decision requesting more information be available to review.

Councilman Michael A. Brown Sr. said “I always like to hear everybody, and apparently we haven’t heard everybody because everybody that has come up into the 30-minute public speaking period, all of them have been for it.  We haven’t heard any on them that are against it.”

Please send your POLITE, RESPECTFUL and PROFESSIONAL correspondence to officials in Wilmington, DE at:

Norman D. Griffiths
Council President

Charles Potter, Jr.
1st District Council Member

Ernest “Trippi” Congo II
2nd District Council Member

Eric D. Robinson
3rd District Council Member

Hanifa G.N. Shabazz
4th District Council Member

Samuel Prado
5th District Council Member

Kevin F. Kelley, Sr.
6th District Council Member
President Pro Tempore

Paul F. Ignudo, Jr.
7th District Council Member

Tracey Thomson Schofield
8th District Council Member

Michael A. Brown, Sr.
Council Member At-Large

Charles M. “Bud” Freel
Council Member At-Large

Loretta Walsh
Council Member At-Large

Justen A. Wright
Council Member At-Large

MANCHESTER, MISSOURI – Board of Aldermen Repeal Pit Bull Ban with Unanimous Vote

We reported in August that a Manchester resident had filed a suit against the City of Manchester on the grounds of violation of her constitutional rights because she had received at least four citations because of her dog.

Last night, the Board of Aldermen voted unanimously to repeal the cities pit bull ordinance, adopting instead a non-breed specific dangerous dog law.

According to City Manager, Andy Hixson, the revision to the existing ordinance removed the term ‘pit bull’.  The changes are effective immediately and all vicious dog designations will be determined by the individual dogs behavior rather than breed or appearance.


Ceredo, WV: Pit Bull Ban Debated in Ceredo (proposal to repeal)

Contact information for Ceredo city officials:
Main and B Streets, Ceredo, WV 25507-0691
Fax: 304-453-4675

City Council members: Joe Ratcliff, Steve Diamond, Dennis Adkins, Jim Billups, Robert Leslie, Otis Adkins (Mayor), Stanley Fink (Recorder)

Next city council meeting: November 2, 7:30 PM
Town Council Meetings are 1st Monday of the Month, 7:30 pm

There is a video with slightly more at the original link:

Pit Bull Ban Debated in Ceredo

Posted: 10:59 PM Oct 5, 2009
Reporter: Dave Benton
Email Address: dave.benton@wsaz.com

CEREDO, W.Va. (WSAZ) — A current ban of pit bull terriers in Ceredo is up for debate, and even City Council discussed the issue Monday evening.

Some pit bull owners want the law changed in one town where their pooches are now banned. […]

There’s a petition with more than 70 signatures, hoping Council will change the law. […]

Full article retrieved 10/6/09 from http://www.wsaz.com/news/headlines/63574217.html

Oak Harbor, WA reminder: City council to discuss repeal of BSL, October 6

Oak Harbor City Council will discuss possible repeal of their current BSL during their October 6th meeting.

The Oak Harbor City Council welcomes your attendance and participation at its meetings. The Council meets on the first and third Tuesday of each month, 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers at 865 SE Barrington Drive. You may speak to the Council during the Public Comment portion at the beginning of each meeting and during any Public Hearings.

Send correspondence for city council’s consideration to:

Connie Wheeler, City Clerk, cwheeler@oakharbor.org
Oak Harbor City Council
c/o Connie Wheeler, City Clerk
City Hall, 865 SE Barrington Drive, Oak Harbor, WA 98277

Previous alert for Oak Harbor: http://stopbsl.com/2009/08/29/oak-harbor-wa-oak-harbor-targets-pit-bull-ordinance-for-extinction/