Spokane Valley Hearing Examiner Pro Tem Meeting: Dangerous Dog Appeal (SCRAPS Case 90033) – October 8, 2026

The Spokane Valley Hearing Examiner Pro Tem, Jay Istone, convened an administrative appeal hearing on October 8, 2026, at 1:02 PM (resuming at 1:19 PM after a brief pause) to consider the appeal of a dangerous dog determination issued by Spokane County Regional Animal Protection Services (SCRAPS) under job number 90033. The hearing involved two dogs—Papa (owned by appellant Shade Kilgalen) and Tarek/Tariq (owned by appellant Kate Case Gulam Sarwar)—and an incident on August 8, 2026, where turkeys were killed or injured on property near 4900 block of N McDonald Rd, Spokane Valley. The hearing examiner will issue a written decision within 15 days.

Hearing Overview

• Date & Time: October 8, 2026; originally set for 1:00 PM, started at 1:02 PM, paused until 1:19 PM for late arrival of appellant Kilgalen, then proceeded with evidence and arguments.
• Parties Present:
  • Appellants: Shade Kilgalen and Kate Case Gulam Sarwar (both present).
  • SCRAPS: Represented by Officer Chris Miller.
  • Witnesses for SCRAPS: Officer Chelsea MacArthur (responding animal control officer) and Ben Wick (property owner/complainant).
• Legal Standard: SCRAPS bears the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence to show the dogs are dangerous under Spokane Valley Municipal Code.

Evidence Presented by SCRAPS

• Officer Chelsea MacArthur testified:
  • Responded to an emergency complaint from Danica Wick at approximately 7:30 AM on August 8, 2026.
  • Found two dogs running at large in the vicinity; the complainant positively identified them as the dogs involved in the turkey attack.
  • Impounded the dogs as strays; both owners arrived shortly after to reclaim them.
  • Issued a misdemeanor citation to Mr. Gulam Sarwar for the dog being at large and causing injury/death to an animal; issued infractions to Mr. Kilgalen.
  • Noted that Tarek had a prior potentially dangerous dog designation (case 85869) for a previous incident involving chickens, and both owners acknowledged that Papa was also involved in that earlier incident but was not caught.
• Ben Wick (property owner) testified:
  • At approximately 6:37 AM, heard a disturbance near turkey pens, saw two dogs inside the pen, ran outside, and scared them off.
  • Found three turkeys injured; one died shortly after, a second died later, and a third had minor injuries.
  • The turkeys were broad-breasted white show turkeys raised by children for the interstate fair; the pen was fully enclosed with wire top and gate.
  • Identified both dogs from photographs shown by Officer Miller—citing distinctive markings (white stripe on chest, facial markings) that he remembered from when the dogs looked at him during the incident.
• Exhibits: SCRAPS submitted a 96-page file (exhibits A–K) including photographs of the dogs at large, intake photos, and microchip records; also submitted a 26-page file from prior case 85869 involving Tarek.

Testimony from Appellants

• Shade Kilgalen (testified under oath):
  • Denied telling Officer MacArthur that Papa was involved in the prior incident with Tarek; said that claim was never made or proven.
  • Argued that the fact the turkeys were prize show birds belonging to children should not be used against the dogs, as dogs cannot know that.
  • Disputed Officer MacArthur’s statement that coffee shop workers had encountered the dogs before; said the dogs had never been in that area.
• Kate Case Gulam Sarwar (declined to testify, citing potential pending criminal case; hearing examiner advised him of the right to remain silent).

Closing Arguments

• Ms. Bose (appearing on behalf of both appellants for closing argument):
  • Argued that no proper notice of intent was delivered to the appellants, violating due process.
  • Contended that SCRAPS failed to prove the dogs were responsible for the turkey deaths—no witness saw the dogs actually attacking, the turkeys could have been dead already, and the dog description (brown and white) did not match Mr. Gulam Sarwar’s black-and-white dog.
  • Criticized the identification process, noting that the witness described the dog while viewing a photo on screen, which was unfair.
  • Raised discovery issues, stating the case file provided to Mr. Gulam Sarwar was incomplete, which could prejudice his criminal defense.
  • Asked for the dangerous dog determination to be dismissed and for all charges to be withdrawn.
• Officer Miller (for SCRAPS):
  • Responded that both appellants received full copies of the case file—Mr. Gulam Sarwar picked up a copy in person, and Mr. Kilgalen was mailed one.
  • Emphasized that the dogs were found running at large in the immediate vicinity shortly after the incident, the witness positively identified them, and the turkeys were injured with one dying.
  • Noted that Tarek’s prior potentially dangerous dog designation (case 85869) was final as no appeal was filed, and that the current incident (off-property severe injury/death to an animal) supports a dangerous dog declaration for both dogs.

Key Outcomes

• No immediate decision: Hearing Examiner Istone will issue a written decision within 15 days of the hearing (by October 23, 2026). The decision may accept, reject, or modify the dangerous dog determination for each dog.
• Right to appeal: Any party may appeal the hearing examiner’s decision to Spokane County Superior Court within 20 days of receiving the written decision, under RCW 7.16.
• Pending criminal charges: Mr. Gulam Sarwar faces a misdemeanor citation; Mr. Kilgalen faces infractions—these are separate from the administrative dangerous dog determination.
• Discovery issue raised: Ms. Bose alleged incomplete discovery; SCRAPS asserted full files were provided.