Residents describe repeated attacks by neighboring dog in Elm Acres; council adjourns to closed session on possible litigation

Several Elm Acres residents told the Fond Du Lac City Council on Jan. 8, 2025, that a neighbor’s dog has attacked people and pets repeatedly and urged the city to act; the council then voted to adjourn to a closed session to consult with legal counsel about possible litigation and a public nuisance at Elm Acres Drive.

The comments came during the audience-comment period, where residents recounted a series of incidents dating to at least Aug. 10, 2024. "Duke, the Campbell's dog was savagely attacking my dog, Bailey," said Nancy Reilbeck Thomas. She told the council the owner, Dawn Campbell, “sat on the ground in the yard instructing my husband, Jim, to let Duke take her,” and later replied “good” when told of Bailey’s death.

Other residents characterized the dog as an ongoing threat to the neighborhood. "We are afraid. We are hostages of our neighborhood," said Peggy Chicheck, who described an episode in which the dog charged neighbors and dragged a person five feet before the owner grabbed the leash. Chad Mongeon, who said he has four children, said the neighborhood’s circular cul-de-sac is their children’s primary play area and described a near-miss in which a babysitter and a 4-year-old were charged by the dog.

John Oberg said he has raised the issue in prior meetings and called the situation “a tragedy” for the neighborhood. Jim Thomas, whose dog Bailey was killed, told the council members that he has received taunts from the neighbor since the attack and pressed elected officials to enforce municipal codes to protect residents and pets.

After public comment, the council took formal action to move into closed session "to confer with legal counsel regarding possible litigation" related to a public nuisance at Elm Acres Drive. The motion to adjourn to closed session was made by Councilmember Schusser and seconded by Councilmember Mullen; the council then adjourned for closed session and indicated Police Chief Goldstein would attend.

Discussion vs. decision: the residents’ remarks were part of the public comment record (not council debate). The council’s only formal public action recorded in the open meeting was a motion to adjourn into closed session to consult legal counsel about possible litigation and a public-nuisance matter; no council vote on removal, ordinance change, or other remedies was taken in open session.

The council did not provide a timeline or public next steps in the open record; the transcript shows the body adjourned to closed session and planned to reconvene after roughly five minutes.

Votes at the meeting included the closed-session motion (mover: Schusser; second: Mullen) and then the adjournment into closed session; the transcript does not record an open-session roll-call tally for that motion.