Denver and their taxpayers stay losing

The city of Denver has lost in court, again.

The great folks over at the Game Dog Guardian (who are having quite a week this week) are reporting that Denver has once again lost in the courts regarding their breed ban.

This time, Denver's motion to dismiss a court case because they are claiming that there were no material facts regarding whether their breed ban was rationally related to a legitimate government purpose.

The courts denied their request. 

Even more interesting about the court's decision is that the city's 'expert' witness cited two different studies to substantiate his position that pit bulls are more likely to bite than other types of dogs. However, one of the studies is the 2000 report by the Center for Disease Control.  However, one of the writers of the CDC report, Randall Lockwood, has testified that the city's expert has 'misused' the study and noted that the information in the report cannot be used to determine that certain types of dogs are dangerous.

So the city of Denver must continue paying legal fees to defend their ordinance in court.  This of course is in addition to a legal settlement they paid back in March, and 2 other pending lawsuits regarding violation of the ADA Guidelines on people who have 'pit bulls' as service dogs.

The city continues to pay for lawsuits regarding the city's breed ban -- and continue to try to find reasons to try to avoid following the ADA guidelines - -all at the increasingly high cost of the city's taxpayers.  Maybe the city could use some of the money paying out their defense of this law to try to cover their $160 million budget shortfall. 

The city continues to flail about in support of their breed ban. It seems as if there are quite a few politicians (and a city attorney) in the area that have based a lot of their political career on the hysteria about pit bulls that seem to be willing to pay whatever tax dollars are necessary to defend the ban - -in spite of the mounting costs and evidence that they are wrong. 

There is more in the judge's decision -- and you can catch it all over at the Game Dog Guardian.   But none of it bodes well for the city of Denver -- and the taxpayers who are paying for it.

Comments

[J.M.]

You really have to wonder why Taxpayers aren`t rioting in the streets over this misuse of their tax dollars.
Do they not continue see this as their money after they have paid their taxes?

[Lisa in OH]

Fantastic news!

[kmk]

Denver keeps beating that dead horse and beating that dead horse. And it still won't get up!

:-)

[EmilyS]

sadly, kim, neither will the hundreds/thousands of innocent dogs that Denver kills every year for the crime of being called a "pit bull"

[SocialMange]

The city attorney should be running for his/her life from Denver's mayor and councillors, for continuing to take instructions to carry on these ridiculous defenses.
Taxpayers in Denver should get mailings on how much this politically-motivated nonsense is costing them.

[EmilyS]

I haven't seen any serious polling in Denver on the subject of their breed ban. Right now the only evidence is that the citizens support it.. at least they keep returning the same hate-filled councilmembers to office.

[Brent]

One of the biggest problems in Denver is that between the media and the politicians, they have been led to believe they have been doing the right thing. And because 'pit bulls' have been illegal there for so long, the citizens there have few opportunities to actually see positive examples of these types of dogs....and with no positive examples, they're negative stereotypes just end up being reinforced more than challenged.