By Shannon Fiecke, Staff Writer

One person has carried an ax handle for protection. Another
stows a gun in his garage.

Their neighborhood of lakeshore homes off Townline Avenue may appear idyllic, but residents say they have lived for years in fear of a neighborhood dog with a history of attacking other animals, chasing children and biting passersby.

Last year, residents complained to township officials that
neighbor Joe Saba’s dogs often roamed the Lake O’Dowd peninsula, terrorizing
the neighborhood.

Louisville Township supervisors were equally concerned, and last fall, even considered a leash ordinance in order
to combat the problem on Lakeview Circle. (Currently, there is no rule that dogs must be leashed while outside of the home).

The township has asked the county for help, but nothing can be done.

The younger of the dogs is no longer at the Saba residence, but the remaining dog has a history of aggression.

A detective assigned to the township researched complaints and the Scott County Sheriff’s Office prepared a case for the dog to be designated as potentially dangerous, but the County Attorney’s Office had determined such action couldn’t be taken because Scott County lacked a dangerous-dog ordinance.

The county had relied on state law governing dangerous dogs, but a 2006 Court of Appeals decision determined the statute wasn’t enforceable unless a local ordinance was also in place, with procedures as well as the opportunity for an owner to appeal a dangerous-dog designation.

Last month, the County Board approved procedures allowing the county to designate township dogs with a history of aggression as “potentially dangerous” or “dangerous.” However, the policy can’t be applied retroactively
to the Louisville case.

The ordinance doesn’t govern cities, which need to have their
own policies in place for dealing with dangerous dogs. (Shakopee has a policy on the books.)

The ordinance isn’t a new rule, but codifies previous policy,
while creating an appeals process, said sheriff’s Capt. Greg Muelken.

“It just gives us the ability to enforce the statute that’s
always been in place,” he said.

The county contracts with Four Paws Animal Control, which is
responsible for issuing the paperwork and notifying animal owners if it deems an animal potentially dangerous or dangerous.

The ordinance

Unless the designation is successfully appealed to the county, a “potentially dangerous” dog would be required to have a microchip implanted, allowing it to be identified.

A “dangerous” dog would need a microchip as well, but also be
tagged as dangerous and kept in a secure structure. An annual fee is required with the dangerous-dog registration and the owner would need liability insurance or be bonded in case the animal injures someone.

Designation is to be made on a case-by-case basis, with the
possibility that an animal may be ordered euthanized in severe cases.

A dog would likely be labeled as “potentially dangerous” for
milder incidents, like if a dog nipped someone, said Assistant County Attorney Kathleen Tracy, while it may be deemed “dangerous” if it causes serious injury or if the owner is not making efforts to control the dog.

Tracy said the county wanted the option of a “potentially
dangerous” designation for cases without serious injury to give animal owners a chance to resolve the problem before facing stringent requirements.

Owners can annually request the county to consider revoking a
designation if an animal’s behavior improves.

Louisville situation

 

The county responds to a number of dog bites annually: In 2006, there were 11, and in 2007, 23.

However, with bites often the result of circumstances like a dog
snapping while playing with a child, Muelken said he doesn’t think there’s a
large problem of aggressive dogs in the county.

There are no “dangerous” dogs currently listed with the county
auditor, and Muelken said he only recalls one case of a dangerous-designated dog in the county, but isn’t sure whether it lived in a city or township.

A dog lover himself, Muelken said the county isn’t out to “get
dogs,” but needs a policy in place to handle aggressive dogs that gives owners the opportunity to appeal.

With its townships varying in population density, Muelken said
he doesn’t see the county pursuing other dog regulations, such as rules governing leashes or barking.

The new dangerous-dog ordinance comes too late for Louisville.
Although it can’t be applied retroactively, if there is another issue with the dog there, the county could point to the past to bolster a case for designation, Muelken said.

Saba’s neighbors said two dogs (a mother and her pup) caused the problems, but the younger one is no longer at the residence.

It’s unclear what breed of animal the remaining dog is.

Township Clerk LuAnne Lemke said the owner is away a lot and the dog does its own thing, to the point that she’s heard people carry weapons in the neighborhood.

“This dog is fierce,” she said. “No one should have to live in
fear in their own home and neighborhood.”

Neither Joe Saba nor family members returned messages left at his home and business by the Valley News. A call answered Tuesday by someone at the home was disconnected.

Deputies have visited the house repeatedly, Muelken said, with county records showing four related dog incidents at the Saba residence in 2007 and two in 2008.

Of these calls, there was one incident of nip that didn’t break
the skin, while the others involved chasing or aggressive behavior, like barking or snarling, Muelken said.

The township had been trying to get the county to address the
issue for some time, but it came to a head about two months ago, when a neighborhood girl was chased after getting off the school bus. Her family had had enough and called police.

The girl’s mother said she has sympathy for the Sabas, but feels the dog is a danger.

At least two Louisville residents acknowledge being bitten by
one of Saba’s dogs within the last few years.

Tom Ebner said two dogs broke through an underground electronic fence one morning while he was walking by. Ebner said he was terrified as the dogs circled him, jumping up and growling at him. One bit him in the arm, leaving two puncture wounds, neither very serious.

Saba apologized and paid for Ebner’s medical bills.

To his credit, Saba has tried to control his dogs, Ebner said,
but the electronic fence wasn’t strong enough.

Ebner said he was satisfied with Saba’s response and considers the incident closed.

“There is no rancor between us,” Ebner said.

Still, Ebner was left so shaken, he no longer walks into the
circle.

Ebner isn’t sure which dog bit him.

A different incident happened with the older dog about three
years ago, when a man was attacked while riding his bike. The dog jumped in front of him and bit his leg, leaving a slight scar.

“It was a chomp, not just a nip,” he said.

Because the man, who has asked not to be identified, knew the family, he didn’t report the incident to police, but has since allowed neighbors to pass information on to authorities.

The man, who is a physician, said he cleaned and cared for the
wound himself. Because it was a deep bite, he had to watch for infection.

The Sabas apologized and pledged to get their dog better
disciplined, he said. But having heard from Saba’s neighbors that the dog still runs loose, the man said he no longer bikes in the circle.

Others have reported being cornered, knocked down or chased by Saba’s dogs

Neighbor Perry Mulcrone was on the township board when it
considered a leash law. He thinks the new ordinance is a good measure that gives authorities recourse for addressing uncontrolled animals.

Mulcrone had a personal experience with one of the dogs, but
feels the situation is much improved, with Sabas taking corrective measures on their own.

He said the Sabas are “very nice people” who love their dog
Angel very much.

One time Angel got loose it knocked down one of Mulcrone’s
daughter’s friends, but it was intercepted by another dog.

Mulcrone said it appears much of Angel’s behavior at the time
stemmed from being overprotective for her puppy.

The Sabas no longer have the puppy and Angel has calmed down, Mulcrone said, although he still considers it an unpredictable animal needing control.

Mulcrone said he was told the family would be erecting a pen for the dog.

Other neighbors are less sympathetic.

One neighbor said he has been cornered by one of Saba’s dogs, his own dog has been attacked (it was so scared, it ran into a glass door) and his children have been chased. Once, his kids’ friends were over and they ran through the screen door to get away.

The man, who asked not to be identified, thinks the dog should
be euthanized, and said he’s frustrated the county can’t even get it classified as dangerous.

“The dog is a loaded gun, it’s just a matter of time,” he said. “Who keeps a dog like that? It boggles my
mind.”

The man thinks the Sabas have now installed a kennel, but he
said the dog has still been out.

Some neighbors have gotten to the point where they are prepared to shoot the animal.

“I don’t want to ever be in a position to shoot it,” one
neighbor said. “But I would, and I would be a hero around here.”

The township clerk said it’s important that people report
problems with a dog, even small bites, so a record is in place if an animal becomes a habitual problem.

“People need to report and communicate if these things happen,” Lemke said. “Their hands are tied unless reports are made.”

Shannon Fiecke can be reached at (952) 345-6679 or sfiecke@swpub.com.