We first drafted and proposed a Dog Tethering Law to the Clinton County Legislature in the form of an official Resolution back in October of 2024. The law was a collaboration created by the Champlain Town Supervisor, a Champlain town council member, and I.

When we were denied a public hearing in October 2024 we altered the law a bit and proposed the below law on June 6, 2025. We made a few minor changes to the original law including adding a Hunting Dog Exemption, while requiring the owner to also be home when the dog is tethered. (For both the dog and the community’s safety.) A Judge, a few attorneys, a DCO, a few Sheriff’s deputies and a few community members all helped write the law. NONE OF THE LEGISLATORS WERE INVOLVED AT ALL.

Please keep in mind when you review the below law, that it is important to go in to enough detail that there’s no room for interpretation, and certain wording is required in order to get the law past the county attorney. Much of the wording within the law was taken directly from other Dog Tethering laws around the State.

This is very much the same law now in place in the Town of Champlain and the Village of Rouses Point.

I asked all the Clinton County Legislators for feedback prior to writing the law. I even created a survey where they could say I’m okay with this line, and not okay with that line. No one responded.

I sent an email to all the legislators with the law attached asking if anyone had any questions or concerns. No one responded.

I called all the legislators asking if I could answer any questions about the law. No one responded with questions.

All of the legislators had my phone number and Patty Waldron’s number if they wanted to discuss any parts of the law- none of the legislators complained of any issues.

The legislators all had the law for 3-months before the June 6, 2025 vote. All of the legislators had ample time to ask any questions they may have had.

NOBODY HAD ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS UNTIL WE ARRIVED FOR THE RESOLUTION VOTE.

THIS IS NOT HOW YOU WRITE A LAW. We literally cannot get any feedback whatsoever from any of the legislators. It took months to write the below law and there are literally a million ways a Dog Tethering Law can be written. So we are supposed to guess what the legislators will accept. Then many of them don’t even read the law proposal and they’ll admit it. I guess I would say it’s very easy to criticize a law when you have absolutely no “skin in the game” or time invested in writing the law.

Note: I don’t have an issue with all the legislators. I have an issue with the ones who didn’t raise any concerns, had the law for 3-months, then at the resolution vote suddenly had questions. I also don’t think it’s right to vote down a law but not give a reason, especially when so many people worked so hard to write the law.

Had the legislators been willing to sit in a room and discuss what they like or dislike it would have helped us a lot. Really it’s just common courtesy. 97% of what’s in the law should be considered common sense dog ownership 101. A few of the legislators are just against a law and they won’t say why.

We tried to negotiate with the legislators, and if there had been communication we could have. We want to stop 24/7 dog tethering and tethering in extreme weather, but none of the legislators will communicate or help us write the law in any way.

We are banned from addressing the legislature in any regular session meeting, most legislators won’t return calls, or e-mails, and if we draft another law we will essentially just be “throwing a dart at a dartboard and hoping it sticks.” There has been no common courtesy whatsoever and a lot of people’s time has been wasted all because many members of our legislature don’t want to do anything, except keep a seat warm.

I hope people will remember all of this when it’s election time. Elect candidates who represent you and what you believe in. Get to really know them, because many are not who they appear to be. Even if they shake your hand and smile….