Jacksonville Beach City Council voted unanimously Monday to give the city manager authority to deny, suspend, or revoke membership at Paws Dog Park for people investigated for or convicted of an animal cruelty offense, adopting the measure on second reading after weeks of debate over how far the city should go in policing conduct at the park.
Council member Sandy Golding raised the issue during an April council briefing after learning that a person accused of animal cruelty at an Atlantic Beach dog park had lost membership there. Golding reviewed Jacksonville Beach's code and found no comparable provision for Paws Dog Park, and council directed City Attorney David Migut to draft new language. Council approved Ordinance No. 2026-8239 on first reading Aug. 3.
The ordinance adds a new subsection to Chapter 20, Section 20-15 of the city's Code of Ordinances letting the city manager, or a designee, immediately deny, suspend, or revoke a person's membership and park-access privileges if that person has been convicted of an animal cruelty offense or is under investigation for one. It defines "animal cruelty offense" as any violation of Chapter 828 of the Florida Statutes, or a substantially similar offense under another state's or federal law. The authority is in addition to, and does not limit, any other removal or revocation authority elsewhere in the city code.
Anyone barred can seek reinstatement through a written request to the city manager, who has discretion to grant it. Reinstatement is contingent on completing an animal cruelty prevention and education course. A person who enters or remains at the park after a denial, suspension, or revocation may be removed and faces possible arrest and prosecution for criminal trespass.
Golding said during Monday's meeting that the catalyst was a video showing a man violently hitting his dog at the Atlantic Beach park.
"I wouldn't want to have to say it's okay for this person to continue to come to the park," Golding said.
Council members Greg Sutton and Dan Jansen questioned during the second reading whether suspending someone based on an investigation, rather than a conviction, could invite a constitutional challenge. Migut told council due process requirements scale with what's at stake, and that losing dog park access does not carry the weight of incarceration or another serious deprivation of rights. He noted the reinstatement path already built into the ordinance.
Council member John Wagner proposed an amendment adding the word "temporary" before "suspend" and "suspension" in the ordinance's enforcement language, a compromise addressing the due-process concerns while preserving the city manager's authority to act during an active investigation. The amendment passed 7-0, and the ordinance passed as amended by the same margin.
City Manager Mike Staffopoulos asked Migut to confirm that a suspension imposed during an investigation could be lifted, and membership reinstated, if the investigation did not substantiate the allegation. Migut confirmed that reading of the ordinance.
Council member Bill Horn, who unsuccessfully sought broader language at an earlier reading, said he backed the final version, noting dog park access is a privilege rather than a legal right.
"You don't have a constitutional right to go to the dog park," Horn said.
