Several Papillion residents urged the City Council on Nov. 4 to strengthen local animal-control rules after a string of recent dog attacks.

At public comment, Mike Erdman, who serves on the planning commission but spoke as a private citizen, described two attacks in the prior month and said the city’s current processes leave victims with limited rights. "We need to define the process of surrender, for surrendering after an attack," Erdman said, arguing that victims need clearer options and that the city should broaden the definition of a "reckless owner." He provided the council written proposals on (1) victim rights, (2) defining potentially dangerous dogs, and (3) expanding the definition of reckless ownership.

Jody Sutton described a separate, older attack that she said left her dog with "87 wounds" and required surgeries and long-term care. Sutton said the owner ran a kennel from his home and that, after the attack, she relied on the owner’s homeowner insurance for initial vet bills but has continued to face emotional and financial effects. "We have to live with this every single day," Sutton said, describing ongoing anxiety for her and her pet.

Other speakers included Mitzi DeTavenir, who said her dog was killed in July and criticized low customary fines in Papillion (she said fines are often about $50 per count), and Lisa Fox, a volunteer with Town and Country Animal Rescue, who urged the council to avoid breed-specific legislation and to focus enforcement on negligent owners.

City officials cautioned that the council could not conduct a back-and-forth on an item not on the posted agenda, but they offered to provide follow-up. The mayor and the city attorney said they would be available after the meeting to meet with speakers and explain the process and the role of the public safety committee.

During council comments, Councilmember Lundberg asked staff to move the matter forward and develop a draft ordinance for public hearing and vote. The mayor said the subject would likely be sent to the public safety committee for drafting and further discussion.

No ordinance was introduced or voted on at the Nov. 4 meeting; the council’s next step, as stated at the meeting, is drafting and committee consideration before any public hearing or formal vote.