Mount Prospect mulls giving 'vicious' dogs a 2nd chance

Mount Prospect dogs characterized as “vicious” could get a second chance at redemption, if the village board agrees to a code change proposed this week.

At Tuesday's Committee of the Whole meeting, Deputy Police Chief John Wagner outlined the change, which would allow the chief of police to clear dogs declared vicious after an 18-month waiting period.

The proposal would call for the animal to go through a minimum 25-hour course of remediation for aggressive animal behavior from a trainer whose clients include governmental agencies.

In addition, the occupants of bordering properties, having received proof of the training, could produce a petition requesting the declaration vacated.

However, the final decision would rest with the chief.

The proposal was up for discussion only, and would have to go through two official “readings” before the board votes.

Wagner said the proposal was motivated by requests from three owners wishing to have their dogs taken off the “vicious” list.

In March 2012, the code was amended to allow owners of dogs deemed vicious the ability to walk their animal after taking measures to make sure the dog was safely under control.

Since 2006, approximately 14 dogs have been declared vicious.

Wagner said of the trainer, “It's not something (where) you go to the park district and (receive) puppy training classes. It has to be a trainer that specifically deals with aggressive dogs. And the dog has to successfully complete that training and then get documentation from that trainer.”

Trustees had several questions. Mayor Arlene Juracek wondered about the requirement that trainers have experience with government agencies.

“You could have the best ‘dog whisperer' in the world, but maybe he doesn't have any governmental agency as his client,” she said.

Wagner said the wording came from the village attorney,

Trustee John Matuszak also had reservations about the language stating that the neighbors' petition requesting the declaration be vacated “shall” create “a presumption that the declaration should be vacated.”

He said, “What I'm having trouble with is if you come up there and say, all right, I've got my neighbors to sign off, you're going to have a presumption that now the village is going to have to overcome. Why should we put that burden on us?”

Juracek also speculated that, “If you have got one holdout neighbor, you're out of luck.”

Trustee Paul Hoefert suggested that there could, in addition, be bad blood between the neighbors and questioned whether the neighbors should have the capacity to make that judgment, rather than the chief.