FREEBURG — Freeburg resident Matt Johnson attended the August trustees meeting to protest the classification of his Golden Retriever “Luna” as a dangerous dog. Mayor Darryl Haller explained that Johnson had not been at the July meeting because he had texted him the wrong date. 

Haller told colleagues he had received a phone call from resident Joe Poettgen noting he had been walking near the Johnson house, and the dog had come out of her yard and ran toward him, snarling and barking. Poettgen stood his ground and yelled at the dog, and it went back into its yard. Haller went on to explain that he and his wife walk in the same neighborhood every night and do not use the city sidewalk because the dogs bark and are territorial of their yards. Haller said a resident had reported to him that the dog had gotten out of its yard through the invisible fence barrier and was called back into the yard by the owners.

“It’s the same as what I said last month,” Haller said. “We are here to follow the ordinance. We make the ordinances, but we also have to follow them.”

“I would like to ask what evidence you have that this transaction actually happened?” Johnson asked. 

“Joe Poettgen has lived in the city over 60 years, maybe 70 years,” Haller replied. “There is no reason for him to lie. I don’t have a video of it, but I don’t want the evidence to be some kid’s face gnawed off. There’s not one ounce of me that doesn’t believe what he told me.”

“I can tell you my dogs don’t leave the yard,” Johnson said.

“They can’t leave your yard?” Haller asked. “They just have to jump the invisible fence.”

“And I’m telling you they do not go past their barrier,” Johnson said.

“I understand that they know where the barrier is, but they can cross it when they want to,” Haller said.

“I can say that I went by there with the dogs outside and tried to entice them across (the invisible fence), and I couldn’t get them to cross,” said Trustee Shane Zimmer.

“I’ve got video of him doing it,” Johnson said.

“I can tell you that we don’t walk the sidewalk anymore because of the dogs,” Haller said. “Those dogs don’t like me and my wife. They’re not vicious, but they let me know I’m not supposed to be there. Everybody walks on the other side of the street. People shouldn’t have to worry about their safety because of the dogs.”

“Before the last meeting, you were told that we moved the (invisible) fence back,” Johnson interjected.

“I understand, but once your dog was classified as a dangerous dog, there is no negotiation,” Haller said.

“So, what did my dog do that violated the ordinance?” Johnson asked.

“He chased an elderly man on the road,” Haller repeated.

“Besides his word, do you have any other corroboration of this?” Johnson asked.

“No,” Haller said. “I have his word, and his word is good enough for me. You’re telling me the dog has never gotten on the street? I know three times that I’ve heard from people (who have said the dog was out). The problem is no one wants their name in the paper. The rules are the rules. We can sit here and read (the ordinance) word for word if you want.”

Johnson again repeated that his dogs stay inside the invisible fence. “If I’m not mistaken, don’t you use an electric (invisible) fence too?” he added.

“I do, but my dogs have never gotten out of their fence and chased anybody,” Haller answered. “If they did, I would be in the same boat you are. There is no difference between my dogs and your dogs. The rules are the rules for everybody. We don’t pick on anybody. If your dogs are on the street, chasing people, they are going to be considered dangerous dogs, and they are going to follow the rules for dangerous dogs (as outlined in the ordinance).”

Resident Kelly Falter asked why other dogs have not been held up to the same standard, singling out a dog that Paul Stratman had owned that had killed another dog and routinely got out of its invisible fence.

“Not one person has told me about it,’ Haller said.

“Invisible fences are not fail-safe, I get that, if the batteries are not taken care of, or the dog doesn’t feel it or just doesn’t care,” Falter said. “Should invisible fences even be allowed?”

“You can read the ordinance,” Haller said. “Your dog needs to stay in your yard. If the invisible fence keeps it in your yard, then I would say so be it.”

“I know these two dogs, and I’m not saying they didn’t do that, but I know dogs, and I just don’t think she would attack anyone,” Falter said. “I’m not here for Matt and Nicki; I’m here for the dogs. I’m here because I know what they can and can’t do and I think deeming her vicious …”

“I didn’t say vicious,” Haller said. “I said dangerous.”

“But it says right here (in the ordinance) you have the right to take them away,” Falter said. “I will rescue her. Please do that before … whatever.”

“We don’t have a problem if they follow the rules,” Haller insisted. 

“They did move back the fence to try to save them and try to appease everyone,” Falter said. “I agree putting (the invisible fence) next to the sidewalk was probably not a good idea. I just don’t want anything to happen to her because she is such a sweetheart.”

“Nobody wants to hurt the dog,” Haller said. “We’re not going to kill it or do anything like that. What we are here to do is protect the citizens from getting hurt. If the dog gets back out and mauls a kid, they are not going to come to you; they are going to come to the city and say, ‘you had an ordinance, and you failed to take care of your ordinance, so now we’re suing your ass.’”

“There is no disputing that,” Falter said. “I’ve had to euthanize many dangerous dogs, and it’s never good, but I know aggressive dogs, and I know non-aggressive dogs. Are you asking them to build a fence?”

“I’m asking them to follow the ordinance,” Haller repeated. “I have no intentions of hurting that dog in any form or fashion. I just want the rules to be followed, so no one in this town gets hurt. If the rules aren’t followed, we may have to do something different. We’re not picking on you. Your male dog, he barks, but he never did anything. He’s not in the same class. He doesn’t have any restrictions.”

“Yeah, she barks,” Johnson said. “She sounds like she’s ready to get into them, but the only thing she is trying to get into is attention. There is nothing dangerous about that dog.”

Haller then read the section of the ordinance pertaining to dangerous dogs, item #6: “Any dog which, when unprovoked, chases or approaches a person upon the streets, sidewalks, or any public grounds, or private property other than the property of the dog owner, in a menacing fashion or apparent attitude of attack, regardless or whether or not a person is injured by said dog.”

“I didn’t write the ordinance; we just have to follow it,” Haller said. “If we don’t like the ordinance, we can change it, but at this time, this is what the ordinance says.”

“He’s just worried about it, without a burden of proof,” Zimmer said.

“Shane, I don’t even want to hear that because I am not going to have blood on my hands from a little kid or somebody hurt when I had the opportunity to take care of it,” Haller said.

“So, it is guilty regardless, without any evidence,” Johnson said.

“It’s your word against his, but why would (Poettgen) want to lie,” Haller said, adding that another individual told him the dog had jumped out at her as she walked past the property.

Johnson repeated that his dog had never left his property and that he had moved the invisible fence back 10 feet to appease people. He also noted that he had put up cameras on his property.

“It says in the ordinance what you have to do if your dog is deemed dangerous,” Haller said. “It doesn’t say move your fence back 10 feet.”

Haller referred Johnson and Falter to the ordinance, which outlines 10 steps to be taken when a dog is deemed dangerous. The actions that would apply to Luna would include wearing a bright orange collar with a large brightly-colored metal tag that deems the dog as dangerous, notification to the city if the dog gets loose or if the dog is given or sold to another owner, the dog must be secured in a pen when it is outside, a sign should be displayed in the property owner’s yard to show that a dangerous dog is on the property, and the dog must be muzzled and on a leash and in control of a responsible person if it is off the owner’s property.

“I didn’t know any of this,” Falter said. “These ordinances should be public.”

“It’s on the website,” Zimmer said.

Falter commented that she felt the situation was more tense and hostile than necessary.

Haller said that he frequently reads stories about dogs that had bitten people in the paper. 

“If you have a chance to do something beforehand, you should do it,” Haller said. “If you see something, you knock it in the head. You take care of it. I made a statement in the paper last month. We don’t let dogs run loose in town. If you don’t want to follow the rules of the city, move out of the city. I’m not mad; I’m just trying to get through a tough situation.”

After Johnson and Falter left the meeting, a discussion on the issue with the dog continued among trustees.

“I have a fourth witness that (said the) dog was out of its fence in case that needs to be said,” Trustee Jamie Kaesik said.

“If someone is going to make a complaint, it needs to be a statement,” Zimmer said.

“There isn’t a problem with him (Poettgen) making a statement,” Haller said. “I’ll let you hear the voicemail he left me.”

Haller then played a message from his phone that he identified as from Poettgen: “Hey Darryl! Thanks. It is a pleasure to walk up and down the sidewalk now, and other people have commented how nice it is because of the dogs. Thanks again.”

“I don’t doubt a word he said,” Haller said.

“My biggest issue is how much of this is he said/she said and how much it leaves us open to ridicule,” Zimmer said.

“(Poettgen) trusts us to do the right thing,” Haller said. “I don’t like it, but it’s what we have to do.”

Zimmer continued to explain that it was hard to find the truth in the matter.

Haller turned to Kaesik and asked her if she had walked the same street and had any problems.

“I’ve never had the dog come onto the street, but as a dog owner, I feel it is irresponsible to have an aggressive dog on your property (like that),” Kaesik said. “No one on the sidewalk should feel threatened.”

“Did you feel threatened?” Haller asked.

“Hell, yeah,” Kaesik answered. “(Johnson) doesn’t want to change, so of course, he’s going to deny everything.” 

Kaesik explained that she worked in a plastic surgeon’s office and that they took care of a lot of faces from dog bites.

“There’s dog owners that love their dogs and (the dogs) bite their baby’s face,” Kaesik said. “You can’t predict what a dog is going to do. It doesn’t matter how much you love them or how long you’ve had them.”

“They just have to follow the rules, and we won’t have any problems,” Haller said.

In other business, trustees approved the purchase of an Enorossi Sickle Bar Mower from Diamond R Equipment for $5,100. Public Works Director Doug Hamacher had priced out the same sickle mower with Lauf Equipment for $5,395. The piece of equipment that is commonly used to cut hay will be used to cut deep ditches around Freeburg. Hamacher has borrowed a similar piece of equipment from the city of Vienna in years past before their sickle mower broke and was unable to be repaired.

• Trustees approved Feeler’s Tree Service coming to the village to work on several dead trees and trees with dead limbs. Hamacher will also have them address several tree limbs and brush overhanging the lagoon.

• Hamacher will also check with JCI Industries in Jefferson City on whether the village’s sewer pump can be repaired or if Freeburg needs to order a new one to have as a backup.

•Haller mentioned that on Wednesday, Aug. 13, there would be an active shooter drill at the school.

“They’ve been doing it across different schools in the area,” Haller said. “It is good training for the teachers.”

• Missouri University of Science & Technology in Rolla has several engineering students that would like to partner with Maries County, the city of Vienna, and Freeburg to do some engineering reports.

“It’s just training, so the school is not charging us,” Haller said.

He plans to put them in touch with Hamacher and look at some of the projects they have been discussing over the last several years.

“If we could help the students out, that would be great and maybe get some free advice,” Haller said.

• Bartlett & West has completed the engineering study on the sewer system, but trustees did not have time to review it before the meeting. Hamacher reported that Bartlett & West had tested the wastewater for E. coli and used a flow meter to monitor influx. Twenty-five manholes were also inspected and mapped. The engineering report will be paid for in part by a Missouri Department of Natural Resources grant.

• Village Attorney Albert Crump will be retiring at the end of August. Freeburg will start getting quotes from other lawyers to serve in the same capacity. Haller warned that trustees might have “sticker shock” as they start looking for a new attorney.

• Trustees approved the following monthly bills: general revenue ($5,230.08), sewer ($2,438.92), and water ($1,976.59).

• Freeburg had the following account balances: sewer system checking ($29,848.97), general revenue checking ($32,235.01), general revenue money market ($385,757.03), sewer money market ($247,054.90), purchasing ($615.36), and American Rescue Plan Act ($42,366.82).

• The village of Freeburg had the following account balances for their water department: water revenue ($32,975.72), replacement ($3,485.75), and money market ($644,662.04).

• The next meeting is scheduled for Sept. 12 at 6:30 p.m.