Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the House Bill 247 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Delaware County warns HB 247 could burden dog wardens, courts with new designation process
Summary
Delaware County's deputy county administrator urged changes to House Bill 247, saying proposed Revised Code changes (RC 955.11–.23, .6) risk excessive court filings, introduce punitive penalties for dog wardens, and may misclassify dogs that cause injury without direct contact.
Eric Hostetler, deputy county administrator and general counsel for the Delaware County Board of Commissioners, testified before the House Public Safety Committee that House Bill 247 contains several provisions that would benefit from amendment.
Hostetler said RC 955.11 should specify a standardized written transfer-of-ownership form to be used statewide to avoid inconsistent practices. He criticized a proposed criminal penalty in RC 955.12 for dog wardens who knowingly fail to perform duties, saying existing civil remedies (mandamus, removal, discipline) already address nonperformance and criminal penalties could chill hiring.
On definitions, Hostetler raised particular concern with RC 955.22, which he said would treat a dog that causes serious injury without direct physical contact as a nuisance dog rather than dangerous or vicious. He described a recent Delaware County incident in which a dog chased a cyclist, causing a crash and a fractured hip, where it was unclear whether the dog made direct contact with the rider. Hostetler recommended allowing courts flexibility to consider fact-specific evidence rather than a strict physical-contact rule.
Hostetler also warned that RC 955.23's new designation process — which would require dog wardens to file designations with the court — would substantially increase court filings and administrative burden. He suggested retaining an administrative determination step with judicial enforcement only if contested, or an administrative default enforcement mechanism, to reduce unnecessary hearings and conserve prosecutorial and judicial resources.
Hostetler asked that the 24-hour notice-posting requirement in RC 955.6 be relaxed to a more reasonable timing, and that the bill clarify whether "officer" includes dog wardens and assistant dog wardens. During questions, Vice Chair Miller said the intent behind some language was to capture injuries that occur without direct contact; Hostetler suggested courts should retain discretion to weigh the circumstances and the resulting injuries.
Representative Plummer raised concerns about inconsistent responsibilities among dog wardens, humane societies and police and a lack of funding and capacity in some counties. Hostetler agreed funding constraints — including limited authority to raise revenue for dog warden operations — are a key obstacle to broader enforcement and training.
The chair concluded the third hearing on HB 247; no vote was taken at the hearing.
