Over a period of six months, Eugene police officers cited 15 people � two of them twice � for violations of the downtown dog ban, an expired ordinance that police officers and others said improved safety downtown but was difficult to enforce.

Fourteen of the people cited during the ban�s duration from April through October were homeless, according to The Register-Guard�s review of municipal court records. The final person didn�t provide a home address to police, and his address couldn�t be independently verified.

Before approving the ban in March, city councilors heard from supporters who said the ban would improve safety downtown as well as from critics who said it discriminated against homeless people, many of whom loiter in the area with dogs.

Sgt. Julie Smith, who supervises the downtown patrol, said her team�s enforcement was equitable. She said each of the 15 people who had been flouting the ban had been warned one or more times previously � a finding partially verified by police department data reviewed by The Register-Guard.

Smith said the number of citations reflects a high level of voluntary compliance to the ban and a �very small number of individuals who weren�t compliant.�

Smith said the dog ban was difficult to enforce, but, echoing comments she said she heard from two of her veteran officers, she said �it was one of the most effective ordinances � on the books to make downtown safer.�

A couple of city councilors as well as homeless people and their advocates have charged that the ban is criminalizing homelessness.

Troy Kronquest, a 54-year-old homeless man who was cited in June, said it was apparent to him from his daily observations downtown that police officers were wielding the dog ban disproportionately against homeless people.

�They never said one word to those people, ever,� he said of people who weren�t homeless. �If you were homeless � or looked like you were homeless � they�d tell you to get the hell out of here or we�re going to give you a ticket.�

The data reviewed by the newspaper shows that police officers did stop people who live and work inside and outside the boundaries of the dog ban.

City officials will present the data they collected on the performance of the initiatives to make downtown safer and more welcoming, including the dog ban, during a meeting Monday. Several city councilors said they wanted to hear those findings before they considered whether to reinstitute the dog ban at some point.

Of 69 dog owners stopped by police, 37 were homeless

The downtown dog ban, which expired Nov. 1, was the most controversial of the summertime downtown initiatives.

The ban, which police officers began to enforce on April 13, prohibited dogs in a 12-block area of downtown. Exempt from the ban were licensed dogs owned by people who live or work in the area; dogs that work as K-9 officers; dogs that assist a person with a disability; and dogs that remained inside vehicles.

The police department said the number of animal-related complaints downtown decreased 24 percent from the previous year. It said there were 52 complaints between April 13 to Sept. 30, compared with 68 in the same period in 2016.

Records requested by The Register-Guard show police officers logged 69 stops to talk to people with dogs in the area through Sept. 30. Smith said the final number of stops before the ban�s expiration was more than 80.

During those stops, police officers logged the date, time and location of the stop; the person�s name; and their home address. They also provided brief narrative of the stop, including a description of the dog in some cases.

Of the 69 stops, 37 of the people were homeless, 17 lived outside the ban�s boundary, 10 lived or worked inside the boundary (and therefore exempt), three were visitors to Eugene, and two had unknown addresses.

Smith had said before the ban took effect that officers would focus on educating dog owners about the ban and issue warnings before citing violators. Police handed out brochures explaining the ban or referred people to the city�s website with more information about it. The city also installed signs to alert people.

Police officers cited violators of the ban a total of 17 times, municipal court records show. Two people were cited twice.

Officers wrote �transient� or �no home� in the address field of 13 citations.

Two citations included addresses in Arkansas and for the White Bird Clinic, which offers a variety of services to homeless people.

The address field was blank in two citations. One of those people, Kronquest, confirmed that he was homeless. The person issued the other citation couldn�t be located.

Records reviewed by the newspaper show eight of the 15 people cited had been warned at least once previously.

The Register-Guard presented its findings to the police department last week. Police spokeswoman Melinda McLaughlin said she reviewed the narratives that police officers wrote in each report after issuing the citation. In every case, the report noted the person cited had been warned one or more times previously of violating the dog ban, she said. The Register-Guard didn�t request the police reports written for each of the citations.

Smith provided reasons why warnings didn�t show up in the newspaper�s review of the records. First, an officer might have given a warning to a dog owner in the midst of another call and not logged it.

Smith said officers also might not have logged a stop if the person refused to give a name. In that case, the officer could arrest the person for investigation of �interfering with a peace officer,� a misdemeanor. A person commits that offense if he or she �intentionally acts in a manner that prevents, or attempts to prevent, a peace officer � from performing the lawful duties of the officer.�

Smith said she didn�t want her officers making arrests or potentially having to use force to enforce the dog ban, which is viewed as a minor infraction.

Officers did, however, exchange among themselves information about the appearance of the handlers and their dogs so they could identify those who�d received prior warnings, Smith said.

Police officers issued $100 fines with the citations. The person cited either could pay the fine or appear in court.

In all but two cases, the person cited neither appeared in court nor paid the fine, records show. The court added $61 to the fine for the failure to appear.

The first person who did appear entered a not guilty plea and was issued a $50 fine. It�s unclear if he paid it.

The second person entered a not guilty plea, and his case was continued to a later date. He was struck and killed by a train hours later (see accompanying story). His case was dismissed.

Smith noted that the dog ban was challenging to enforce, in part because some people � whether homeless or housed � responded with hostility to being stopped.

�When you start talking to people about their animals, then the emotional component is thrust right there,� she said. �Some of the contacts were not pleasant. It was not fun to get cussed out � all summer long.�

Officer Bo Rankin, a member of department�s downtown patrol, said another frustration was that everyone claimed their dog was a service animal.

Smith had said that before the ban took effect, that claim would not preclude an officer from writing a citation.

Both Smith and Rankin said the ordinance improved safety downtown because it reduced the overall dog population. Smith said the remaining dogs were handled by responsible owners who picked up after their pets and prevented them from jumping on people.

Downtown merchants saw fewer dog problems

Nicole Desch, president of Downtown Eugene Merchants, said the dog ban generally had a positive effect over the summer.

Desch, who owns Heritage Dry Goods, a downtown store, cautioned that it was difficult to attribute the improvement to just one project because of the numerous summertime initiatives. Other initiatives downtown included an increased police presence, more programs and events in public spaces, and expanded social service outreach to chronic offenders.

But she said customers tracked less dog feces into merchants� stores; visitors felt more comfortable bringing their children downtown; and downtown workers were more likely to walk their dogs in the area.

She disputed the contention that the aim of the dog ban was to drive out the homeless.

�I really feel it�s a density issue,� she said, due to a large number of people and dogs located in a compact area.

She voiced support for reinstating the ban and suggested some changes. She said the area should be expanded to include the Hilton Eugene and the Home2 Suites hotel, both of which allow dogs, if guests pay a one-time fee so their visitors legally can walk their dogs downtown. City officials also should look at expanding the boundary into surrounding neighborhoods so their residents would be exempt from a future ban, she said.

The Downtown Stakeholders Group generally has been supportive of the dog ban.

�We weren�t really going to put forward an advocacy strategy or plan until we heard what they (city officials) had to say at the council meeting (Monday),� said Brittany Quick Warner, chief executive officer of the Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce.

The stakeholders group includes the chamber, the downtown merchants group, the Downtown Neighborhood Association and the Technology Association of Oregon.

Quick Warner said downtown business employees and owners felt less threatened by a dog or groups of dogs on street corners or in alley for the ban�s duration.

Other residents claim police that officers have unfairly targeted the homeless.

Eugene resident Mel Hite told city councilors shortly before the ban�s expiration that police officers were stopping and ticketing dogs controlled by the homeless and ignoring dogs controlled by �housed owners.�

�It appears this is doggy racism based on the class of the person holding the leash,� she said at the time.

Kronquest was cited for violating the dog ban on June 13. He had been warned the prior day after a police officer found his dog, whom Kronquest said has since died, tied to a cart outside the Starbucks, police records show. Kronquest said a police officer had issued another warning outside the Buy 2 convenience store at the corner of Broadway and Olive Street.

Kronquest said he was cited at the Park Blocks, along the ban area�s northern boundary, while getting his dog some water.

Kronquest said he spent a lot of time downtown and it was �obvious� police officer were wielding the dog ban against homeless people.

He said there was a �good-looking couple� with a dog at the Park Blocks at the time he was cited and the police officer did nothing.

Dog scuffles reported during and after ban

There have been reports of dog attacks or close calls during the dog ban and after it expired.

Smith said about a week before the dog ban expired, a resident flagged her down to report a �vicious dog attack� at Broadway and Olive that occurred a couple days earlier. The resident told Smith that the victim didn�t want police contacted, she said.

Earlier this month, an off-leash dog attacked another dog as a man was walking at Eighth Avenue and Lincoln Street. The dog suffered minor injuries, Smith said.

Desch, the downtown business owner, said a customer was walking last week with her two children, ages 3 and 5, when a dog lunged at them.

On Tuesday afternoon, Rankin went to Kesey Square after a dog reportedly bit a passing pedestrian. The bite did not break the skin, the officer said. The dog�s owner, Harrison Thompson, 19, was cited for dog at large, according to a police summary of the incident. The dog was leashed but not under the owner�s complete control, as required by city code.

Rankin then left the scene, but minutes later was called back to a report that the same dog bit someone else.

A 41-year-old woman had been walking by the dog when he reportedly lunged at her face, bit her on the arm, tore her jacket and broke the skin, according to Rankin and the police summary.

Thompson was cited for dog at large for a second time, and an animal welfare officer impounded the canine as a potentially dangerous dog. Thompson told a reporter and photographer from The Register-Guard, who were reporting downtown on the dog ban but who were not present when the dog bites reportedly happened, that he was a traveler from Utah.

Both victims declined to press charges.

Jake Struzyk, a traveler from Minnesota who was with Thompson, said he saw the dog jump on both people but disputed that the animal bit anyone. �I did not see him open his month,� he said.

Thompson said the dog was abused and had been given to him recently. He said the dog, named Hyde, was starting to get more comfortable around people and hadn�t acted aggressively toward him.

After Hyde was taken away, Ben Keating, a 19-year-old traveler from Georgia, began talking to the two men and learned that the dog had been impounded.

He told a reporter he�d heard of the dog ban and was against it.

�It�s just discriminatory and mean,� he said. �It�s so sad.�

An emotional Thompson said he planned to retrieve Hyde from the shelter and continue to work to improve the dog�s behavior. Under the city code, Thompson would have to go through a number of steps to redeem Hyde, including paying fees and agreeing to comply with regulations. For example, Thompson could be required to muzzle the dog when on a leash.

�It�s not like the world has ended,� he said, collecting his belongings and wrapping them in a large blue tarp that he slung over his shoulder. �I�ve just lost my best friend for a few weeks.�

Follow Christian Hill on Twitter @RGchill . Email christian.hill@registerguard.com .