Dothan’s District 4 commissioner, John Craig, is learning that the problem with public service is, well, the public. Residents elect folks to represent their interests at city hall. Commissioner Craig maintains that he votes the way his constituents want him to vote.

We’ve yet to figure out how he knows what each of the thousands of residents in his district want. It’s not as though he’s a congenial listener. Although he is barely six months into his public service, the new commissioner was appointed to lead a citizen committee to review a proposed animal ordinance for the city of Dothan. It was a glaringly poor choice, as Craig had been the commissioner to suggest that cats be somehow contained by their owners.

The idea was to hold a series of public hearings in which the committee would go over the proposal. Members would hear from citizens, debate the points of the controversial proposal and make recommendations to change the document.

The commissioner would have benefitted from a crash course in facilitation. Some committee members have reported that many suggestions have not been warmly received and that the review has been less a debate to shape policy recommendations than a recitation of an overreaching, reactionary draft of potential law.

Future meetings have been postponed while another draft of the ordinance is written. And Craig has apparently grown weary of the people’s input. Following the March 31 meeting, Craig muzzled public comments for future meetings, saying that remarks from the floor delay the process. There is no “process” that cries for delay like this one does.

The city of Dothan already has an animal control ordinance that addresses the meat of the proposal and, if enforced, would significantly reduce instances of animals running loose and causing trouble.

Therein lies the rub. Animal control is woefully understaffed and underfunded, and the animal shelter would not be able to operate adequately without the help of volunteers. The proposed ordinance was among a number of changes that followed numerous complaints by volunteers who asked the commission to upgrade the shelter and increase staffing.

The proposed ordinance, with its ill-defined terminology and irrational expectations, will create a whole new class of canine and feline “criminals,” but there are no plans to shore up the animal control division to enforce a new law.

By shutting out public comment and discouraging suggestions, Craig is wasting the valuable time of the residents who generously agreed to serve on his committee.

He and the city attorney will write the final draft of the ordinance, he says, and put it before the city commission for approval. Considering his apparent dislike for household animals, and his obvious disregard for the opinions of others, Craig’s leadership on this matter promises to be a dismal failure.

Fortunately for the city’s pet owners, failure is exactly what the proposed animal ordinance deserves.