Flower Mound Town Council Reviews Dangerous Dog Ordinance Updates and Enforcement Procedures

The Flower Mound Town Council convened on August 18, 2025, to address several key agenda items, including a review of the town's dangerous dog ordinance and discussions on board member appointments.

The meeting began with a discussion regarding the composition of the Smart Growth Commission. Council members debated the necessity of having industry representation on the commission, ultimately deciding to proceed with a model that allows for all three members to come from the same industry, as permitted by law. The council agreed to add a delegate option for members who may wish to appoint a replacement.

Following this, the council entered a closed session at 7:05 PM, reconvening at 8:09 PM without any actions resulting from the closed discussions. The focus then shifted to the dangerous dog ordinance, presented by Blake Manuel, the management analyst. This review was prompted by a request from the council during a previous meeting.

Manuel outlined the current ordinance, which is based on Texas state law, detailing the definition of a dangerous dog and the responsibilities of their owners. The ordinance allows local governments to impose stricter regulations, which Flower Mound has done by including provisions for attacks on animals, not just humans. Since the last update in 2019, there have been 11 cases, with only eight dogs declared dangerous.

The council discussed the process for determining whether a dog is dangerous, which involves filing a report, an investigation by animal control, and a court hearing. If a dog is deemed dangerous, the owner must comply with specific requirements, including obtaining liability insurance and ensuring secure enclosures. Non-compliance can lead to penalties, including fines and potential euthanization of the animal.

Council members expressed concerns about the enforcement of the ordinance, particularly regarding the return of dangerous dogs to owners and the potential for those dogs to return to the town after being taken out. The discussion highlighted the need for clear definitions and processes to ensure public safety.

The meeting concluded with a consensus on the need for further exploration of the ordinance, particularly regarding the differentiation between attacks on humans and animals. Council members emphasized the importance of addressing dangerous behavior in dogs before any incidents occur, suggesting that separate ordinances may be necessary for animal-on-animal attacks.

Overall, the meeting underscored the council's commitment to public safety and the ongoing evaluation of local ordinances to ensure they meet the community's needs. Further discussions and potential amendments to the dangerous dog ordinance are anticipated in future meetings.