A proposal to strengthen state laws regarding vicious dogs will reach another milestone today following weeks of overwhelming public support.
House Bill 2058, co-introduced by Puna Rep. Greggor Ilagan, would establish new criminal penalties for owners of dangerous dogs, following two highly publicized fatal dog attacks on the Big Island over the last several years.
In particular, the measure would establish a legal definition for “dangerous dog” — “any dog that, without provocation, causes a bit injury to a person or another animal” — and make failing to control a dangerous dog that kills a human a Class C felony charge, punishable by up to five years in prison.
The bill also establishes lesser misdemeanor penalties for owners of dogs that injure a person or kill another animal.
Ilagan said the measure is a long time coming, considering the number of vicious dog reports in his district.
“I was going to introduce this bill last year, but we decided to push for a bill at the county level instead,” Ilagan said. “But after we passed the county law, the police found they don’t have the jurisdiction to enforce this at the county level. … I think last year, (the City and County of Honolulu) had the same idea, but they ran into the same problem.”
The Hawaii County bill was passed following the 2021 mauling death of 85-year-old Hawaiian Paradise Park resident Dolores Oskins by three unrestrained dogs, but the first people to be prosecuted under that bill had their charges dismissed in late 2023.
Ilagan said his measure should supersede the county law if passed and would establish a structure by which authorities can actually enforce the law.
HB 2058 also allows law enforcement officers to seize and impound an animal if there is probable cause to consider it an imminent threat. If the animal’s owner does not claim the dog within five days, the animal would be considered abandoned.
Animal Control could choose to euthanize a dangerous or suffering dog impounded through this process.
The measure has been overwhelmingly popular during its progress through the Legislature this year, with hundreds of residents submitting oral and written testimony urging action against conditions that have become increasingly dangerous in rural areas.
Shannon Matson, a Puna resident whose father, Bob Northrop, was killed by four loose dogs in Ocean View last year, has been a vocal proponent of the bill, although she noted that the measure cannot be applied retroactively to bring justice for her father.
“This bill will not benefit our family directly,” Matson said during a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday. “But we do want to see our communities safer and for people in the future to be able to get justice for their family members. … So far, we have found that the current laws are not enforceable.”
“When I tell people what happened, most are shocked,” wrote Stephanie Northrop, ex-wife of Bob Northrop. “When I tell them that the only ones who paid a price were the dogs and not the owners, they can’t believe it. I doubt that anyone in our family will ever ever forget this date. … I only wish the bill was even stronger. It will not bring my ex-husband or my daughter’s father back, but it is a start to the healing process.”
“I no longer feel safe to take walks on the street in our beautiful community,” wrote Ocean View resident Alexis Kerver. “These dangerous and loose dogs have threatened the safety and well-being of our entire Ocean View community.”
The Office of the Public Defender was one of the only dissenting voices against the measure, submitting a letter on March 14 opposing the proposal. That letter argued that the bill allows too much discretion to individual Animal Control officers and “permits an unfounded accusation to be made against an owner and a dog, without any evidence.”
The public defender’s office also suggested that a Class C felony for negligent owners is too severe, comparing the charges to those imposed after an intentional assault: “Unlike charges which base the penalty on the severity of injury, (assault charges) are based on intentional and knowing conduct. Here, the offense is based on a negligent statement of mind that does not reflect the same level of intentional conduct.”
The House Judiciary Committee will discuss the measure today at 10 a.m. Meanwhile, a companion bill, Senate Bill 2692, has been referred to House committees, but no hearings have been scheduled.
Email Michael Brestovansky at mbrestovansky@hawaiitribune-herald.com.
