Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public Safety committee upholds police chief, orders removal after dog attack
Summary
The Manitowoc Public Safety Committee on July 13 upheld the police chief’s determination that a pit bull named Teddy is a prohibited dangerous animal after witness testimony about a May 23 attack that injured a woman and her dog; the committee voted unanimously to proceed with removal paperwork.
The Manitowoc Public Safety Committee on July 13 voted unanimously to uphold Police Chief John Musial’s determination that a pit bull named Teddy meets the city’s standard for a “prohibited dangerous animal” and to proceed with paperwork to remove the animal from the city.
Chief John Musial told the committee that investigators reviewed photographs, Ring doorbell video and witness statements from the May 23, 2026 incident at 512 Reid Avenue and concluded the dog inflicted serious injury on a domesticated animal and caused bodily harm to a person while off the owner’s property. "Based off the severity of this unprovoked attack, I do not believe the city of Manitowoc can reasonably accept the risk of a similar incident occurring to another person or another animal," Musial said.
Two neighborhood witnesses described the attack in detail. Cindy Hogan recounted rushing to the scene at about 7 p.m., seeing the pit bull repeatedly bite and "reattach" to the golden retriever and the owner, and helping hold the injured dog inside her house while she provided wound care. "It was the most ongoing, vicious attack I've ever seen," Hogan said.
Denise Sheehan said she came out carrying a steel security bar and struck the pit bull repeatedly to force it to release the golden retriever. She said she and Hogan held the dog by its collar until officers and the dog's owners arrived.
The contesting party, who identified himself as the dog's owner, told the committee Teddy is eight years old and has no prior incidents in five years living in the neighborhood. The owner said veterinarians he consulted described the encounter as one of the kinds of situations that can occur when dogs meet and argued removal was disproportionate for a first incident.
Committee discussion focused on the facts presented and the city's statutory criteria for a prohibited dangerous animal. A committee member who moved to uphold the chief's recommendation cited the duration and severity of the attack and said the decision was based on the statutory language presented by the chief.
By voice vote the committee upheld the city’s determination and the chair directed staff to complete the removal paperwork. The committee did not record individual roll-call votes in the transcript; the decision was announced as unanimous.
Next steps: the committee signed paperwork related to the removal order and the city will follow the administrative process set out in the municipal code and the appeals procedure already in motion.
