SCARBOROUGH – Acceptance of a final report was far from the final word on Scarborough’s ongoing dog debate Wednesday, Feb. 19, as the Town Council agreed to hold at least one more workshop session before implementing any suggestions of the ad hoc Animal Control Advisory Committee.

A date and time for that workshop was not set following an initial 90-minute workshop, during which time councilors could not agree on dates and times when dogs should be leashed on municipal beaches. Although the council was unanimous in praising the ad hoc committee, which labored for more than 25 hours in nine meetings since Dec. 27, it voted during the regular meeting immediately following the workshop to merely “accept” its report, striking an agenda phrase calling on the town to “start the process for implementing its recommendations.”

“I’m just thinking it’s going to take some time to work through this and try to get it right,” said Sullivan.

However, the council is up against at April 1 deadline, the start date for a leash law demanded by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in an agreement adopted by the council on Oct. 2. That contract knocks a $12,000 fine, assessed by the feds following the killing of a plover chick by a dog on Pine Point Beach in July, down to $500 in exchange for a host of concessions, including an agreement to ban unleashed dogs from town beaches from April 1 to Aug. 30.

At the same Oct. 2 meeting at which it accepted the federal mitigation deal, the Town Council ventured far beyond the Fish and Wildlife guidelines, voting instead to ban dogs from running off leash on any public property, anywhere in town, year round. Voters overturned that ordinance amendment in a special election Dec. 3, with 73 percent of a near-record turnout against the change. That reset the rules to what had been on the books since 2004, which restricted dog access to beaches only between 9 a.m. and sunset, from June 15 to Sept. 15, allowing them to run free if under voice control at other times. That led to council creation of the ad hoc committee, on hopes of reaching a compromise.

The committee proposal split the plover nesting season into sections, requiring dogs to be leashed at all times on municipal beaches, on leads no longer than 8 feet in length, from April 1 to May 14. Then, from May 15 until the Tuesday after Labor Day, dogs could run free from sunrise to 9 a.m. when under voice control, would be banned entirely between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., and could be walked on a leash from sunrise to 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. to sunset.

However, individual beaches could be “released” on or after July 15 if no plover nests have been detected, or once 40 days have passed since the last plover hatched. Beach release would apply only to public shores, such as Higgins, Pine Point and Ferry beaches. Scarborough Beach State Park and the private Western Beach, from which dogs are banned year round, would retain their own rules.

The committee advisement also included the first “off-season” limits on dogs in Scarborough, allowing dogs to run free from the Tuesday after Labor Day until March 31, except for the hours between 11 a.m. and 2 p.m., when they must be leashed.

For Councilor Jessica Holbrook, the proposal seemed unnecessarily complex, with the possibility of different rules on different beaches at different times during the busy tourist season.

“I think it needs to be shorter and simpler,” she said. “When we make rules we should make them so the average person of average intelligence on a daily basis knows, it’s in-season, or it’s off-season. I want solid dates, I don’t want wishy-washy dates.”

Meanwhile, Sullivan and Councilor Kate St. Clair, the staunchest supporters of the Oct. 2 town-wide rule, performed a 180-degree turn.

“I have no problem saying it has a lot to do with that [Dec. 3] vote, but I can’t support something that doesn’t have any off-leash time every day for these people,” said St. Clair.

“We heard over and over again, don’t let U.S. Fish and Wildlife tell us what to do,” said Sullivan. “Right now, we’re pitted between our citizens and U.S. Fish and Wildlife. That’s a bad place to be. I don’t like it. But the last thing I want to see is this town turned upside down and everybody all upset and going through this whole thing again. That just turns my stomach.”

The council did not move on a recommendation by Councilor Bill Donovan – who sat on the ad hoc committee, otherwise comprised in equal part of dog owners and plover advocates – to adopt aspects of the report beyond the leash law. It also rejected St. Clair’s idea to send the report on to the Town Council’s three-person Ordinance Committee, due to time constraints.

“The ordinance committee may spend a lot of time on something that doesn’t pass muster with the whole council,” said Town Manager Tom Hall, advising against the referral.

Holbrook also addressed a concern raised in a Feb. 17 letter from Mast Street resident Julie Hannon. Noting landmark case law, which found that beachfront property owners own all the way to the low-water line while the public has rights to “fishing, fowling and navigation” only in the area between the mean low- and high-water marks, Hannon concluded the rights of those homeowners might be violated by any attempt to enforce the committee recommendation. Citing the property mapping software on the town website, Holbrook said she discovered that much shorefront thought to be town beaches are actually state-owned land.

“If the state of Maine has an issue and wants to do something, they own it. They’re more than free to do whatever they want,” she said.

However, Councilor Jean-Marie Caterina, a Realtor by trade, advised against putting too much stock into that theory.

“I never use tax maps to figure out where boundaries are. That’s a fool’s mission,” she said. “What you need is deeds and titles.”

The council did show wide support from some other recommendations in the report, including a tag program that would fund enforcement of beach rules by requiring dog owners pay for the right to run their dogs off leash during permitted hours. However, that, too, was set aside for another day.

Of the 40-odd audience members, many seemed to be pleased with the council’s reaction to the report.

Holmes Road resident Liam Somers, previously one of the council’s most outspoken critics, declared himself to be “very encouraged.” Even so, the council ignored his request that Donovan recuse himself from voting to accept the report, given a perceived conflict of interest as one of its authors.

Among members of the ad hoc committee, reaction was mixed, at least among those on the plover side of the table.

Committee member Noah Perlut said, with the report complete, the council was free to act on it, or not, as it saw fit.

“I think we as a committee worked hard, but our charge was not to change the ordinance, it was to offer the council something to consider,” he said. “I wish them the best of luck to decide what they think is best for the town.”

On the other side, Lucy LaCasse said she felt questions raised from the council missed the mark, falling far afield of the substantive issues vital to plover protection.

“It’s a little frustrating,” she said. “It feels like, ‘Why did we bother?”’

As Scarborough Town Councilor Kate St. Clair looks on during a council workshop Wednesday, Feb. 19, Councilor Bill Donovan makes a point about final report of the town’s ad hoc Animal Control Advisory Committee, on which he served.