Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Dangerous Dogs Maldonado topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Owners agree to sign over two dogs after repeated running-at-large reports, commission reminds of prior $2,500 fine
Summary
The commission revisited two dogs previously declared dangerous after new reports of running at large and cat attacks. Staff confirmed prior fines; the owners indicated willingness to sign the dogs over to animal control, and staff said surrender paperwork is available at the shelter.
The Evansville Animal Control and Education Commission revisited enforcement for two dogs — identified in the hearing as Apollo and Princess — that had previously been declared dangerous after new reports that the animals were running at large and involved in attacks on neighborhood cats.
The matter drew testimony from neighbors who said their pets were killed or injured and from the dogs’ family, who acknowledged previous escapes but disputed some of the attack reports.
Why it matters: The dogs had already been the subject of prior commission action. Under the municipal code, dogs declared dangerous face restrictions on ownership and transfer; animal-control staff said a prior fine of $2,500 had been imposed the previous month for subsequent violations.
Neighbors described repeated incidents. Britney Jackson testified that one cat that the household had treated after being attacked remained lame a month later: "She still, to this day, a month later, still has problems jumping up on furniture, and ... she still limps and still very sore." Colette Purcell said she had video of a cat (named Mountain) being injured and reported that the family’s cat Brutus had been killed in December 2024; she told the commission that two dogs — Apollo and Princess — were implicated and that those dogs had been seen running through yards.
Owners Kevin and Margarito (Margarito identified himself during the hearing) acknowledged at the meeting that the dogs had escaped once when a gate was left open by a family member and disputed that their animals were responsible for every reported incident. Kevin said the dogs have not been loose since the gate incident and described locking and containment measures the family had used.
The commission reminded the family that a $2,500 fine had been imposed at last month’s meeting for further violations after the dogs were declared dangerous. Commission staff said legal paperwork to implement the prior fine was being finalized.
Owners’ response and next steps: During the hearing the family said they did not want to return the dogs to their custody if the commission would not allow them to keep them safely. The Maldonados indicated willingness to sign the animals over to animal control. An animal control staff member told the family that the necessary surrender paperwork was at the shelter and that, once surrendered, the city would not re-adopt declared dangerous dogs; euthanasia is an available outcome under the municipal code if no adequate precautions are deemed sufficient to prevent risk. The commission discussed other remedial options — fines, containment requirements, and euthanasia as a last resort — and asked staff to follow up on documentation and the owners’ stated intent.
Ending: The Maldonado family indicated they would sign surrender paperwork at the shelter after the meeting. The commission instructed staff to proceed with enforcement-related paperwork and to confirm the fine documentation; no new formal ban or additional fine was recorded at this session beyond what had been ordered previously.
