Stories in this Regional News Roundup are excerpted from weekly newspapers from around the region. This is part two, with part one having appeared in Saturday’s Tribune.
———
GRANGEVILLE — Dogs in city parks? The signs say no, but owners and their dogs are there, regardless.
So, does the city get rid of the law and open parks up for legal dog use, or keep the law and accept that enforcement is largely problematic?
The Grangeville City Council hit the problems and frustrations of the municipal ordinance at its Feb. 1 meeting. No decision was reached as the council looks to gather public comment on the rule prior to revisiting the issue in a March meeting. Comments can be made to city councilors, or a public poll is available through the city’s Facebook page.
At issue is the rule under Title 6-2-3 that states it is unlawful for any owner/harborer to allow any dog or other animal to be within or upon city parks (Pioneer, Grangeville, Jaycee [Soroptimist]), which is a misdemeanor. The only exception is the east side of Lions Park, which was approved for use with dogs in 2015.
That the rule is generally ignored was not a surprise to the council.
“If we were to enforce it, it would need an officer stationed at the park all day, every day,” said Councilor Amy Farris. “For example, this afternoon, a lady gets out of her car at Schwab’s with her dog and stands by the sign that says no dogs in the park while her dog did his business. I don’t know how you’re going to enforce it. Every single day on my way to work, on my lunch break, on my way home, someone is in the park with their dogs.”
“It’s ridiculous to have one if no one is going to enforce it,” said Councilor Beryl Grant.
On enforcement, council discussion noted city police are already busy handling more important calls than to go after dogs in the parks. Mayor Wes Lester later noted if the council wanted enforcement, this would require a full-time animal control/ordinance officer, but “Unless you’re going to get $50-$60,000 a year in fines, I don’t know where you’re going to get the money (for this position.)”
“If we’re not going to enforce it, get rid of it,” said Councilor Dylan Canaday, “because we can’t pick and choose what we’re going to enforce.”
The issue recently surfaced last month when resident Bob Beckman sought council permission to have a camel in Pioneer Park as a kids’ activity during Border Days this year. He noted that at last year’s event, he saw 25 dogs in the park, one of which was brought by a vendor and was not friendly. Lester, playing devil’s advocate, said where parks opened to dog use, you will have people, “who are not animal lovers to begin with,” taking issue with dogs now being around at summer park concerts and where children are running around.
“It doesn’t stop them from doing it anyway,” Farris said. “People still bring dogs to the park, regardless.”
“Why not leave it the way it is?” questioned Councilor Scott Winkler. “People who want to honor the law will follow the law, and people who will break the law will break the law.” This was later echoed by Councilor Michael Peterson: “Just leave the signs up. If we catch them we catch them, if we don’t, we don’t.”
“I’d like to see one caught,” Grant said.
“I hate having an ordinance that if we’re not going to make it work, why have them?” Lester said.
Police Chief Joe Newman agreed that “if you’re not going to enforce it or can’t enforce it, I don’t think it’s a good idea to have the ordinance.” He suggested for compliance to have public education on dog use at the parks, such as cleaning up after them, so users know to be responsible to preserve that ability.
In addressing the issue, city attorney Adam Green took a philosophical approach to how the city should view this law.
“There are people who aren’t going to rob because robbing is wrong, and people who rob who don’t get caught, but that doesn’t mean you should make it OK because you can’t catch every robber,” Green said. “I think of the dog thing in the same sense.” He noted not every law can be enforced 24 hours a day, and the same would apply to this one. Not every violator is going to be caught, but having the law provides the city a tool for an obnoxious situation or person who, for example, is allowing their dog to defecate in the park every day.
“You need to decide whether you want dogs in the park or not,” he said. “If you are OK with dogs in the park, get rid of the law. If you don’t want dogs in the park, you have a law on no dogs in the park, and you can enforce it how you can, when you can.”
— David Rauzi, Idaho County Free Press (Grangeville), Wednesday
Trident submits formal proposal to Dept. of Lands
A land exchange application that would swap Trident Holdings for more than 20,000 acres of state endowment land around McCall was submitted last week to the Idaho Department of Lands.
The Boise-based company submitted a 73-page application last Monday that would swap a total of 20,250 acres of state land around Payette Lake for timberlands in northern Idaho.
The lands department cannot process Trident’s application until a moratorium on leasing, sales and exchanges of state lands around McCall is lifted.
The state land board is expected to lift the moratorium once an internal long-term management plan for 5,473 acres of state land around McCall is completed, which could be as soon as March or April.
“The (plan) will be the lens through which IDL will review all opportunities and applications,” said Sharia Arledge, a spokesperson for the lands department.
Public hearings and comment periods are not required as part of the consideration process, but the land board could incorporate them, Arledge said.
Trident’s application does not include about 83 acres of state land in the Pilgrim Cove subdivision or about 7,000 acres south of Little Payette Lake.
Both tracts were included in previous proposals aired publicly by Trident, but the company decided to remove them due to public comments, Trident founder Alec Williams said.
“As we continue to take feedback from locals, the plan is evolving,” Williams said.
Trident would trade privately owned timberlands in northern Idaho in exchange for the McCall lands, which currently do not earn the state enough money as timberlands.
The northern Idaho timberlands are specified in Trident’s application, but the company blacked out 47 pages containing maps and descriptions of the lands to be traded to the state.
“Otherwise, somebody might propose the exact same application to the state ... without all the different larger public goals we’re working toward,” Williams said.
A decision on whether to pursue the land exchange with Trident will come from the land board, which is made up of the state’s top elected officials and headed by Gov. Brad Little.
If the land board opts to enter negotiations with Trident, all parcels included in the exchange would be independently appraised to ensure the trade is fair.
“An exchange must be value for value, and it is possible for IDL to counter and negotiate,” Arledge said.
The land board halted leasing and sales of state land in McCall in June when it directed the lands department to draft a long-term management plan for the lands.
That direction followed a previous land exchange plan submitted by Trident, which withdrew its original proposal in July amid public backlash.
A preview of the updated plan released by Trident in November says about 10 percent of the lands, or about 2,000 acres, would be developed to pay for conservation and public access preservation of the remaining 18,000 acres.
Most of that development would happen along Warren Wagon Road and Eastside Drive around Payette Lake, but Williams said development would be driven by the community.
Up to 17,000 acres of the exchange lands could be donated to Ponderosa State Park, which would increase the park from 1,500 acres now to about 19,000 acres.
— Drew Dodson, The Star-News (McCall), Thursday
