Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Owner appeals euthanasia order for Benton City dog 'Jack' after attack; hearing officer sets written‑closing deadline
Summary
At a Benton City appeal hearing, witnesses described a September attack by a pit bull named Jack and recounted earlier incidents dating to 2021. Animal‑control staff and a trainer discussed relocation and behavior‑testing options; the hearing officer set written closing statements due by 5 p.m. on Friday the 13th.
Get email alerts on the Animal Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A Benton City hearing examiner heard testimony from city animal‑control staff, a deputy and several neighbors about whether a pit bull named Jack should be euthanized after an attack that prompted impoundment.
Hearing examiner Tonnie Carer opened the proceeding, identified the parties and witnesses and said the City of Benton City would present first. City staff described a prior October 2023 dangerous‑dog declaration and said Jack was impounded on Sept. 9 after the dog was found to be out of compliance with permit requirements.
The city’s animal‑control officer told the examiner she had tried to work with the owner, provided documentation that had permitted Jack to return earlier, and pursued—but had not secured—relocation options with receiving jurisdictions. She said relocation requires the owner’s initiation and that receiving jurisdictions review the initial report and may either uphold or decline the dangerous‑dog designation.
An eyewitness, Richard Momas, described escorting a child and a family dog, Danny Blue, along a path in Hillview Mobile Home Park when a brown pit bull he identified as Jack emerged from between parked vehicles and attacked Danny Blue. Momas said he used a mop to break contact and that Jack later sat on the porch of the residence he identified as the dog’s home. "The Pitbull locked, as it's referred to, when they’re biting," Momas testified.
Crystal L. Dodge, who identified herself as a nearby resident and a school‑district employee, said her child was injured and traumatized by the attack and that she and family members sought veterinary care for Danny Blue. "My kid will not walk the park anymore," Dodge said, describing ongoing effects on the child.
Selena Hamilton, office manager for Hillview Mobile Home Park, confirmed the park had recorded prior complaints and that Jack had been declared dangerous in 2023. Pat Hamilton, the park’s maintenance manager, testified he was bitten by the same dog in 2021 and said the injury required surgical repair.
Deputy Perez of the Benton County Sheriff's Office said she responded to the call, collected photographs and documented witness interviews in a report. Counsel raised hearsay objections to portions of the report that summarized third‑party statements; the examiner limited testimony to witnesses’ personal knowledge where appropriate.
Appellant Cassie Bam testified she had corresponded after the impound and said she was not fully aware of any strict timeframe to appeal the 2023 declaration. She and city staff discussed whether and how she had attempted to rehome or relocate Jack following impoundment.
William Lambert, owner of Dancing Tree Rehabilitative Dog Training, testified he trains and evaluates dogs and said he had offered to perform a behavior evaluation that could inform relocation or placement. Lambert said that once a dog is declared "dangerous" under local code, behavioral testing to lift the declaration is not available in some jurisdictions, and that relocation depends on whether a receiving jurisdiction is willing to accept the animal. "I'm not out to euthanize Jack," Lambert said, describing his interest in securing a safe placement when possible.
City staff and the examiner clarified a legal distinction the record discussed: a "potentially dangerous" dog may be eligible for behavior testing such as the K9 Good Citizen assessment; a dog that kills another animal or inflicts a human injury requiring a suture is typically designated "dangerous," in which case the code may not permit post‑declaration behavior testing to remove the permit.
The hearing officer told parties she understood settlement negotiations were underway and set a procedural deadline: written closing statements are due by 5:00 p.m. on Friday the 13th, to be emailed to the examiner (with the clerk copied). She said that if settlement is not reported, she would review written submissions and issue a written decision shortly afterward.
The hearing recessed pending the parties’ filings and the examiner’s written ruling.

