HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-22-2007
COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS OF THE
COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF JEFFERSONVILLE, INDIANA
January 22, 2007
The Common Council of the City of Jeffersonville, Indiana met in regular session
in Room 101, City Hall, 500 Quartermaster Court, Jeffersonville, Indiana, at 7:30 P.M.
on Monday January 22, 2007.
Mayor Rob Waiz, with Clerk Treasurer Peggy Wilder at the desk, called the
meeting to order. Also present were City Attorney Les Merkley and Deputy Clerk
Barbara Hollis. Mayor Waiz welcomed all in attendance, asking all those present to stand
as Councilperson Grooms gave the invocation. Mayor Waiz then asked all those present
to join him in the pledge of allegiance to the flag.
The roll was called and those present were; Councilpersons John Perkins, Ed
Zastawny, Keith Fetz, Connie Sellers, Barbara Wilson, Phil McCauley, and Ron Grooms.
Absent: None.
Following discussion, Councilperson Zastawny made the motion to remove
agenda items #13, #16, and #17, adding a Resolution regarding volunteers at the Animal
Shelter, a confirming Resolution from the workshop and two Resolutions to advertise for
an additional appropriation, second by Councilperson Perkins, passing on a vote of7-0.
Mayor Waiz presented the minutes for consideration by the Council.
Councilperson Wilson made the motion to approve the minutes of January 8, 2007, (7:30
P.M.) as presented, second by Councilperson Sellers, passing on a vote of7-0.
Clerk Treasurer Wilder presented the claim list for consideration by the Council,
explaining three additional claims. Councilperson Perkins made the motion to approve
the claims and the three additional, moving the cell phone claim from the Clerk
Treasurer's budget to the Common Council, second by Council President Fetz, passing
on a vote of7-0.
DEP ARTMENT HEAD REPORTS:
Council President Fetz will have a couple of department head reports at each
meeting in the future.
2
January 22, 2007
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Mayor Waiz announced public comment is limited to three minutes per speaker
and fifteen minutes for all comments.
Ms. Patricia Roehm presented proof of Clark County payments to the Animal
Shelter. She then read a prepared statement regarding the Animal Shelter (attached) and
presented a letter from Ms. Jane Rose (attached).
Ms. Bethany Mull, read a letter regarding the Animal Shelter.
Mr. Mike Campbell asked the Council if they believed in democracy, fairness,
and that all are created equal. Mr. Campbell asks why won't the sewer rate go up if
reductions are given to those annexed. He feels the annexation laws are some of the
worst written.
Mr. Grant Oakes had asked about beds for the animals at the Animal Shelter, as
he has been concerned about the comfort of the dogs. Animal Shelter Director has
informed Mr. Oakes the beds have been ordered. He thanks all those who have given
input. He hopes all will work together. Mr. Oakes noted Director Wilder is doing a good
job.
Mr. Brian Christoff stated he has put together and been involved with animal
rescue leagues. It is his sincerest hope the Council will look at the 50 13C requirement.
Ms. Stacy Harris noted Chi Chi (Vernita Cornett) has an overwhelming task. She
is part-time and cannot do it all. The Shelter staff has a stressful job.
Ms. Margaret Morton, a member of the Animal Shelter Advisory Board, said she
does approve of the proposed Ordinance. The Shelter is a good one.
Ms. Jennifer Blackwell, a Mother of an autistic 8-year old has adopted a dog. She
feels children should be involved. There needs to be rules for animals and people. She
asks the Council to look at the Ordinance so that all can win.
Mr. Grant Morton, a member of the Drainage Board, asks the Council not to vote
on the second and third readings of the Drainage Board Ordinance. He would like to sit
down and help rewrite the Ordinance. He wishes all could work together to solve
problems and bring in boards to work together.
COUNCIL COMMENTS:
3
January 22, 2007
Councilperson Perkins said the speaker was correct that some cities have paid
their share of the Animal Shelter. The City has been trying to get increases in the shares
paid. The City Council has stopped laboratories from buying animals from the Shelter,
defined cruelty to animals, and controlled pet stores. Councilperson Perkins said he does
understand democracy. We live in a representative democracy. Indiana is not a
referendum State. A poll taken favored annexation 2.5 to 1.
Counci1person McCauley also noted this is a representative government. Fairness
has two sides. County residents use many City services including Parks. Annexation has
not been taken up for popularity.
Counci1person Grooms said he has the highest regard for Mr. Grant Morton,
explaining the Board was created in 1997. The Drainage Board Ordinance in place has
not kept up with responsibilities and needs to be brought up to date. He appreciates Mr.
Morton's comments and the time he has served. Councilperson Grooms hopes he
remains on the Board.
AGENDA ITEMS:
Councilperson Sellers noted she is not angry, and she is not upset. All volunteers
are welcome at the Animal Shelter. Councilperson Sellers then reads Resolution No.
2007-R-1, A Resolution A Resolution Establishing And Assigning Duties And
Responsibilities For Volunteers At The Josephine B. Ogle Animal Shelter.
Councilperson Sellers noted not all donations received through Ms. Cornett have been
cash. In-kind donations amount to $358,000. She reviewed the work done by Ms.
Cornett. The problem with some volunteers is off-site adoptions. All funds for animals
at the Shelter are subject to State audits. Clerk Treasurer Wilder noted it is extremely
important that each and every animal is accounted for. City Attorney Merkley said it is
important to keep track of each animal as it could open the City to lawsuits.
Councilperson Sellers made the motion to pass Resolution 2007-R-1, second by
Councilperson Perkins. Counci1person McCauley appreciates comments made by Mr.
Christoff regarding 5013C and Mr. Morton regarding boards. He suggests the delete the
501 3 C status and consider changing the wording to organizations approved by the
Animal Shelter Board. Clerk Treasurer Wilder noted the State Board Of Accounts is
very particular. She would like to make sure the 5013C is not an issue. Councilperson
4
January 22,2007
Sellers wants to know why other Shelters use the 50l3C requirement. Councilperson
Zastawny feels Councilperson McCauley's suggestion is reasonable. Councilperson
Perkins made the motion to amend #2 from 50l3C to "'an organization approved by the
Animal Shelter Advisory Board, second by Councilperson McCauley. Councilperson
Wilson noted the Animal Shelter Advisory Board has been an excellent Board. She feels
the more they are involved the better it would be. Councilperson Grooms asked
Volunteer Mull ifthis would be satisfactory. Ms. Mull stated it would be workable. The
motion to amend passed on a vote of 7-0. The vote to pass Resolution No. 2007-R-I
passed on a vote of7-0.
Councilperson Perkins read the changes to Ordinance No. 2007-0R-I, An
Ordinance Amending Ordinance 97-0R-73 And Repealing Ordinance 97-0R-74.
Councilperson Perkins then made the motion to pass Ordinance No. 2007-0R-I on the
second and third readings, second by Councilperson Grooms, passing on a vote of 7-0.
Councilperson Zastawny feels this brings continuity to the Board. Councilperson
Grooms made the motion to approve the list of appointments to the Drainage Board
(attached), second by Councilperson Perkins, passing on a vote of7-0.
City Attorney Merkley explained Resolution No. 2007-R-2, A Resolution To
Advertise For An Additional Appropriation (Edit Fund - $50,000). Councilperson
Perkins made the motion to pass Ordinance No. 2007-R-2, second by Councilperson
Grooms. Councilperson Grooms is uncomfortable with the amount. Councilperson
Perkins explained this is a start up amount, he expects other communities to contribute.
The motion to pass Resolution No. 2007-R-2 passed on a vote of 6-1. Councilperson
Grooms voted against passage.
City Attorney Merkley explained Resolution No. 2007-R-3, A Resolution Of
Intent To Issue Economic Development Revenue Bonds. Council President Fetz made
the motion to pass Resolution No. 2007-R-3, passing on a vote of7-0.
Clerk Treasurer Wilder explained the need for passage of Resolution No. 2007-R-
4, A Resolution To Advertise For An Additional Appropriation (General Fund - City
Hall Budget). Councilperson Perkins made the motion to pass Resolution No. 2007-R-4,
second by Council President Fetz, passing on a vote of7-0.
5
January 22, 2007
Clerk Treasurer Wilder explained the need for passage of Resolution No. 2007-R-
5, A Resolution To Advertise For An Additional Appropriation (EDIT Fund - $20,000).
Councilperson Perkins made the motion to pass Resolution No. 2007-R-5, second by
Councilperson Sellers, passing on a vote of7-0.
Ms. Sharon Marra, Clark County Solid Waste Management District Director,
appeared before the Council requesting passage of Resolution No. 2007-R-6, An
Interlocal Joint Cooperation Agreement Concerning The Implementation Of Curbside
Recycling Programs In Cities, Towns, And Designated Areas Of The Clark County Solid
Waste Management District. Ms. Marra asks that Jeffersonville step up to keep this
model program in the State moving forward. She reviewed the benefits of curbside
recycling, explaining at least two communities must agree to continue. Councilperson
Perkins polled the Clarksville Town Board and found they are 5-2 against, noting the
landfill needs business. Councilperson Zastawny asked if the fee to the residents would
go up? Ms. Marra stated, "not this year". Councilperson Grooms noted the $34 fee paid
goes to the total budget that supports more than curbside recycling. Councilperson
McCauley said he could support the program this year but cannot go beyond the year at
this point. He feels the City should not obligate Councils of the future. City Attorney
Merkley explained that can be done with interlocal agreements. Following all discussion,
Councilperson McCauley made the motion to accept the agreement for the City Of
Jeffersonville for one year if the $34 fee remains, second by Councilperson Grooms,
passing on a vote of 6-1. Councilperson Perkins voted against passage.
COMMITTEE, AND COUNCIL COMMENTS:
Councilperson McCauley announced the next meeting on annexation will be
February 15,2007 at 7:00 P.M., location to be announced.
Councilperson Grooms thanks all regarding Recycling. Street Commissioner Ron
Ellis will give a report at the next meeting. Agent Larry Linn will be on the next
workshop agenda. He thanks Police Officers Settles and Grimes for their attendance
tonight.
Councilperson Perkins announced some Gaming Authority members have been
contacted. All he can say at this point is there is movement.
6
January 22,2007
Councilperson Zastawny thanks all Board members and volunteers, noting
changes do have to be made. He invites all to an Optimist Club fundraiser February 3,
2007 at St. Augustine Parish Hall from 7:30 A.M. to noon.
Council President Fetz asked Ethics Board Member Rachel Browne to give a
report. Ms. Browne explained the group is moving forward to hold a workshop for
candidates. Some of the wording needs to be defined. The requirements are now on the
City website at ethicsboard@cityofieff.net. The next meeting is scheduled for February
13,2007 at 7:00 P.M.
CLERK TREASURER COMMENTS:
Clerk Treasurer Wilder reviewed the network access.
MAYOR COMMENTS:
Mayor Waiz appreciates the input, asking
As there was no further business to co
cil, the meeting was
adjourned 9:20 P.M.
/'
~ST:
(.. ~~~ft ~s.tft.--
PEGGY WI~ ER, CLERK AND TREASURER
10/05/2006 00:07
2856468
JEFF
PAGE 01/02
'"
THE CITY OF JEFFERSONVILLE
DEPARTMEN1 OF LAW
Jeffersonville City Hall
600 Quartermaster Coult
Jeffersonville, Indiana 47130
(812) 285-6491
(812) 285-6492
fax (812) 285-6468
Leslie D. Merkley
City Attorney
Sharon L King
Paralegal
Facsimile Cover Sheet
PLEASE DELIVER THE FOllOWING PAGES TO:
Date:
october 5, 2006
Fax Phone:
Margie (Jenkins
285-6366
Name:
Subject:
Sharon
Animal Shelter Invoice
From:
Total numbelr of pages, ineluding cover letter: 2
Thanks, Sh~lron
CONFIDENTIALiTY NOTICE
The materials in this facsimfle transmission ara private. and confldentlal and are the property of the sender. The
Information contained in the material Is privileged and is intended only for the use of the indlvldual(s) named above. If you
are not the intended recipient. be advised that any unauthorlzed disclosure: copying. distribution or the taking of any
action in reliance on the conl8nts of this material Is strictly prohibited. If you have received this facsimile transmission In
error. please notify uslmmedlatslv by lelGf)hone to arrange for retl,lm of tl'Ie fmwarded documents to us.
IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES, PLEASE CALL (812) 285-6492 AS
SOON AS PC.SSIBLE. .
1~/05/2006 00:07
2856468
JEFF
PAGE 02/02
. ClTV OF
OffICE OF THE MAVOR
The Hono~ahl" Robert L. Waiz, Jr.
MIIYl)f
812 . 2.85 - 64110 .,ff!ce
812 - 285 - 6403:i>:
www.Ci.~(.IlJefF"nc[
Jeffersonville City Hall
"500 Q\I~l'ferm:L~rer Court
Jeffersonville, '"ndj~na 47150
October 5, 2006
Clark County Commissioners
Second Floor
Jeffersonville County Building
501 E. Court Avenue
Jeffersonville, IN 47130
PURSUANT TO THE ANIMAL SHELTER INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT the
quarterly paynlE:nt is $16,537.50.
January, February, March 2005 Payment Received
$16,537.50
April thru December 2005 the amount due is
$49,612.50
January thru December 2006 th.e amount due is
$66,150.00
TOTAL DUE:
$115,762.50
An eq,w opp<;>T.l;1.1nity employer.
.
/
':PreSGrlbed by Stale Board of Accounts
County Fonn No. 17 (Rev. 1996)
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE VOUCHER
CLARK COUNTY, INDIANA
.' ~n invoice or bill to ~ properly itemized must show: kind of service, where performed,-dates service rendered, by whom,
'rates per day, number of hours, rate per hour, number of units, price per unit, etc.
; _ " , ,', Payee: ,',.
.>\0, ~\e .Ar\\(\)al me.;\~ Purchase Order No.
. c90l \ A}i \ \ \ ()~('A\J<2- Terms
() <2-~C2c:f\\./~ \\e i ~0 Yl \ ?1 0 Date Due
Invoice Invoice Description
Date Number (or note attached invoice(s) or bill(s)) Amount
Cb\-trClL+S <$ \ t 5(\lod ~
I
-
Total ( 1b\\~/)W,~O
.
I hereby certify that the attached invoice(s), or bill(s), is (are) true and correct and that the materials or services
itemized thereon for which charge is made were ordered and r el ed except
UC'*J . ~~Q clOD\o ,~:> \
, DATE' , Signature' . ~d. Tffl~
I hereby certify that the attached invoice(s), or bill(s) , is (are) true and correct and I.have auditea same in aoePrdance
with Ie 5-11-10-2.
DATE
County Auditor
*041000014*
11/20/2006
6116a33601
.D
CJ
CJ
ru
......1.11
('-1Tl
nl.l1
......CJ
n.:T
nCJ
CJ
.D
FI.:T
('-CJ
ruO
cOO
nO
('-0
00
ITl
cO
ru
b.I
APPROVED 8V STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS FOR THE cLARK COUNTY .1995
TREASURER CLARK COUNTY,INDIANA
JEFFERSONVILLE. INDIANA 47130
11.338
~
This is a LEGAL COpy of
your check. You can use it
t h es ame wa y you wo u I d
use the or igi.nal check.
DATE
FUND
CHECK NUMBER
G89369 1110812006
Pay exactly Ona Hundred Flfleen TI1ou63I1d Seven Hundred Sbdy Two and 501100 dollars
$115.762.liO
!'AYTO
THE
ORDER
OF
J. B. OQle Animal Sheller
201 W1mn~ Lane
JelfersorM\le. IN 47130
Till,check wid llNO V""
alIBf_3.0I1/l.
. ""011"".
/~!~-4~'
~.yj~
U'oaqu,qll". .:O?loqOHOBI:
tt
t:
{'...
() i
() 0j
('-1 "-11.() {'...
CqCl()0
(J'l () () ()
,~. I ClI (\j
....'10.,..,11
Cei (w Ct.1 ~;'<
P'):1""'1~
......, ....""'1'
~
!
I
I
)
t
~
I
'I
.
'I
.8-
~
-'.
-,
,..
~'" -
~
J ~\;
0')-
~: ..
"oJ .
~o
~ ~..
~ '..,.~';
::
"
<:=::; C
:::::........~O
..~..~"'~
"_""""J''\,.J
':' ~.j-~
j
II .."". -.-,"",
t~ ;:::;:; r::;
~~ / 2':-a@!l:',)
6 3 ~::).; :....
III. :.;', ;:':.} ;:~
,,'-C~-
1\1. '~..i 0:.' "-',1
~:;:; .:.... 0
/
Printable
Page lof2
Subject
From
JB Ogle Animal Shelter
Jane Rose <indygprescue@sbcglobal.net>
Sunday,. January 21, 2007 11 :43
scsellers4@msn.com
Date
To
We have a Great Pyrenees Rescue and have rescued about 300+ great pyrenees in the past six years. We do have
501(c) 3 designation. Bethany Mull has contacted us in the past about great pyrenees in the shelter, and we have
taken four of them in the past two years. I'm thinking the listing for Rufus was the one you saw for $95.
We had a transport of four pyrs coming from Kentucky shelters the day Bethany called us about Rufus, and were able
to get him on the transport at the last minute, with the approval of Harry Wilder. Bethany paid the $15 fee for us that
Harry indicated was owed.. Upon receipt of Rufus we realized he was not a great pyreneeS. Since he was not a
purebred great pyrenees, I contacted Bethany to let her know I needed her help in finding him another rescue, which
was why she posted him on Petfinder. We were and are very full, and did not have room to take on an additional
dog who did not fit our placement criteria. Our rescue does not have a kennel, we are a foster based rescue who
have volunteers take the dogs into their homes until a home can be found. Rufus had a $95 adoption fee because
that was our actual cost in him:
$15- JB Ogle Shelter for Boarding per Harry
$5 - microchip
$20 - presurgical blood and heart worm tests
$40 - Neuter
$8 - wormer
$7 vaccines
Total: $95
This does not even include, if based on the shelter rate of $7.50 per day, an additional expense to house and feed
Rufus of $52.50, while he was in our care for seven days. So, I guess we 165t money on him.
Bethany was unable to get Rufus into another rescue, and we actually transferred him to Mixed Up Mutts, Inc. who
has program working with prison inmates in northem IN to obedience train dogs, helping the dogs and the inmates.
Mixed Up MUtts reimbursed us the $95 fees we had incurred for Rufus. After he is trained, they wiU adopt him out to
an approved home, and he will be a healthy, neutered,weU behaved, and a better pet for someone.
I can assure you rescuing dogs is not a money making endeavor- having personally lost $11,000 doing it the past two
years, but it is a work of love, and is very rewarding to see homeless dogs find good forever homes. Due to limited
resources and manpower (me and John LOL) we have focused on only helping great pyrenees.
Regarding your proposed ordinance -I don't have a problem paying to take a dog from a shelter, in fact, of the three
we have rescued besides Rufus at JB Ogle, we waited to have the vet the shelter works with spay or neuter them
before we got them and paid for their care.. However, I think you need to consider that there are many reputable
rescues who do not have 501(c) 3 status- it is expensive and labor intensive to apply, and they may not have the
funds to hire a lawyer to do so. We work with many shelters who let us take dogs urwetted at no charge or at their
cost in order to free up the kennel space for those dogs they may not be able to get into rescue. I would urge you to
contact other shelters around the State to see what policies they have in place in working with rescue groups.
Per the article I was forwarded, I'm not sure what Bethany's conversation was with the Mayor, but I can tell you in
the time we have been working with her, not Me employee of the shelter ever contacted us about a great pyrenees in
the shelter that could have gone to rescue. In my dealings with Bethany, she has only shown to me her genuine
concern and care about saving the animals, I do not see that she is working with rescues to make money on shelter
dogs. Many shelters have found volunteers to be there salvation in helping them increase their placement rates and
decrease their euthanasia rates. I hope you will not let her passion for the animals prevent her from continuing to
work with JB Ogle to save the animals in need there, until a more proactive role can be establishes in contacting
rescue groups about purebred dogs in need, and posting available animals for adoption.
https:l/commcenter.insightbb.com/popup.html
1/22/2007
Frintable
.Page 2. ot 2.
Reputable rescue groups carefully screen their adopters to make sure the animal is placed in an appropriate
home, and so it a win- win situation for both the dog and potential owner. We have expertise with specific breeds
that would be difficult for shelters to replicate. In an effort to place dogs rather than euthanize them, if a dog is not
placed appropriately it can increase shelter return rates, or even result in unnecessary death for the dog based on
carelessness of the owner or unfamiliarity with the characteristics of the breed.. Rescue groups, ifthey have room in
their programs, relieve some of the pressures shelters experience in managing the abandoned dogs in their care.
Our standard adoption fee is $250 - we rarely do not have that expense in one after having them vetted, and although
we may not have that in every dog, we have more than that in some dogs- $600- $800 or even $2000, based on their
health needs when we take them in. We also have to cover medical supplies,liability insurance, supplies, food,
advertising, etc. You can visit our website if you'd like to find out mare information about our rescue - www.igpr.org.
I hope you are doing well, it seems you have been very successful in local politics as you are now a member of the
City Council in Jeffersonville. John and I both loved living in Jeffersonville, not only for the charm of the city itself,
but becal!se of the many wonderful people like yourself we met while lived there.
Please contact me if I can provide you any additional information or resourCe5-
Jane Rose
Indy Great Pyrenees Rescue, Inc.
Indianapolis,lN
317-251-3179
Why Rescue?
"If you consider that we cannot save them all, and what difference does one make, you ought to know the joy of the
one who is saved."
..Jim Willis
https:llcommcenter.insightbb.com/popup.html
1/22/2007
T
. Printable
C LD~ [)AoJ'QQ O~n~ () .
J~ . ~.QscviL
Subject Second Chance Rescue saved 40 in 2006 (approx)
From <dbs@insightbb.com>
Date Monday, January 22, 2007 1 :46
Cc LChichi <vcornett1@earthUnk.net>,LConnieSellers <scself.ers4@msn.com>
aSherryDeweese <sherry.a.dewees@census.gov>,aTrish <troehm@hughes.net>,BauerAnneHenryviUe
<2800acs@netscape.com>, BethKazinsky <mybubblebug@gmail.com>,BJenBlackwell Volunteer
<jenblackwelJ@insightbb.com>,"BKelly, Kelly" <ksketly@ups.com>, "BMcNeil, Kim"
<KLMcNeil9598@aol.com>,BShirleyAvon <shirleywithavon@yahoo.com>,BStacyHarris
<tn.vols@sbcglobal.net>, "BTobaban, Dawn" <ktobaben@ups.com>,Deanna
<ddumstorf@gcs.k12.in.us>, Greer <gccollie1016@sbcgloba/.net>,L Barbara Wilson
<barbwilson128@aol.com>,L Edward Zastawny <eddiez2000@insightbb.com>,L John Perkins
<jperkins@cityofjeff.net>,LJohn Perkins <jperkins@cityofjeff.net>,L Keith Fetz <Fetz3@sbcglobal.net>,L
Philip McCauley <philmccauley@insightbb.com>,L Ron Grooms <r.grooms@insightbb.com>,Larry
Thomas Evening News <larry. thomas@newsandtribune.com>,"LDouglas, Ann" <anndouglas@tds.net>
Page 1 of2
Bee
this is what Eren Barrett with Second Chance who has saved a TON of Ogle animals( at least 40 in 2006 alone)
wrote to me about what someone from the shelter informed her.
no more saving animals for them...snd they took on average 3-5 animals a week from Ogle, and that was since I Just
found out about them in the t e adopt out of PetSmart in Indianapolis and at a Veterinary Clinic.
Hey Bethany, the Ogle shelter called and told Tammy (our director) that we couldn't pull anymore dogs unless
we gave them proof of our 50103 notification. Unfortunately we don't have an original sincethe legal holder is actually
in FL. So we can't pull anymore until we get get our own seperate 501c3 which win take months. Why are they doing
his?
Sorry ,
Eren Barrett
Second Chance Rescue
Indianapolis, Indiana
h 317 -362~0000
c 317-650-0067
renk68@yahoo.com
5.e cor0
n~
seiter animals die!"
Bethany Mull
email: dbs@insightbb.com
There are 45 cats and dogs for every person born.
Only 1 out of 10 dogs born ever get a home.
Onry 1 out of 12 cats born ever find a home.
800 dogs & cats are KILLED each HOUR in the U.S, because there are not enough homes for them.
SPAY and NEUTER!
www.petfinder.com
PLEASE don't BUY when SHELTER pets die.
Adopt to Save a LIFE!
.......~......"-".b..."'""'."-.~..~....,.,..-=-=-~"'.,.,.__~.,.,..,..,...~-......._-......"-""'"'-........,.,~........._..,'""""'.......~_..."-~~"'.,.-",..-....:......."."'........._........,.....:""'....-.,"'<,.,"'.,.:...........-==.~..,..""....:..,.,.'.,=_-.:-..........."....--=,.,...M'."'''':=''''''''''''''''''''''-~.~'''''''''''__-''''''''''''"'_'''"',,,,~,,,-,,,,-,,,~-,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,-,,,,",,,,-=,,,,,,,,""........---=~....,..,.~....
-- Original Message --
From "Ms. Eren" <erenk68@yahoo.com>
Date Sun, 21 Jan 2007 09:50:36 -0800 (PST)
To dbs@insightbb.com
Subject Re: PLEASE Disregard my previous letter!!MY CORRECT DRAFT to the Evening News! Sorry
https:/Icommcenter.insightbb.com/popup.html
1/22/2007
Printable
Page lof2
6TcJ-~~
~~ +-\o--\"\.5
From
Re: PLEASE Disregard
my previous Ietter!!MY
CORRECT DRAFT to the
Evening Newsl Sorry
tn.vols@sbcglobaLnet
Sunday, January 21, 2007
9:51 .
dbs@insightbb.com
Subject
Date
To
v-\
~\~
~
Your response was r~ally good!
If you need an example of a specific dog that was listed on the website
when the article ran. Allie was listed at $125 but has $150 worth of vet
bills, $45 of special food and $35 pull fee. Currently getting over an
infection she has had since coming from Ogle, the infection started
with the spaying, the vet thought the first round of antibiotics took care
of it. She continued to have skin problems so I bought special food (2
bags - $45) and shampoo, nothing got better. She started having
greenish discharge so we went back to the vet Friday for urine
analysis, antibiotics & steroids. She is also now housetrained, crate
trained, socialized with other animals and people, uses doggie doors
and starting on basic commands. This progress courd never occur at
the eal! increases her chance .
'-- >
Also concerning Chi Chi, when I first wanted to volunteer I emailed her
twice and never received a response, only when I emailed you did
someone get back to me about helping. Also when I emailed her ideas
about the Greentree Mall (adoptions or at least photos of the animal
she said t needed to find enough volunteers to work it and if I cou
contact Sandy at the mall (she had spoken with her previously) t t
she would be helpful.
Stacy
- Original Message -
From: dbs@insightbb.com
Sent: Sunday, January 21 , 2007 12:59 AM
Subject: PLEASE Disregard my previous letter!!MY CORRECT
DRAFT to the Evening News! Sorry
Sorry...l the previous letter was accidently sent....it was my ROUGH DRAFT
for you to read in the previous emaiJ.
This is the response to Larry Thomas and the Evening News that I meant to
send to you!
[am also going to ask to read this at the Town Hall meeting on Monday night
at 7 pm after Connie Sellers introduces this new "ordinance."
Bethany Mull
https:/lcommcenter.insightbb.com/popup.html
1/2212007
I.
Page 1 of 1
Mr. Thomas
I have read your article involving the situation with JB Ogle animal shelter and the council. While your reporting of
the situation is very clear and detailed, I found most of the issues being discussed disturbing. I volunteer for a
well known non for profit animal rescue in Louisville, Kentucky. I have been an animal rescue volunteerfofa few
years and have worked specifically with Bethany Mull and other JB Ogle employees and/or volunteers on several
occasions. As volunteers, we are not in the "business" of "selling" dogs. It is despicable that someone could
classify that part of our adoption process that way. A typical scenario of how we receive a dog from a shelter is
the dog will be either turned over to us at a reduced rate, or some shelters will turn them over for no fee. At this
point, there is much work to be done. Many of the dogs have to be vetted and then they have to be housebroken,
leash trained, socialized, and made suitable for adoption. Before they become suitable for adoption, a rescue can
be out considerable expenses for vetting and some times boarding. Some dogs also receive obedience training
before they can be adopted. Each case is different and depends on the dog and it's adoptability once we receive
it. Once the dog is adoptable, there is a process that an applicant must go through in order to be considered an
approved adaptor. For all reputable rescues, this process would definitely be considered more thorough and
more stringent than the process of going into a shelter and adopting a dog. The adoption process will include a
fee and the fee is usually standard though some rescues may charge more for the adoption of a full blooded dog.
The fee covers the spay/neuter of the pet, up to date shots, and some time micro chipping. Many many times,
this fee does not cover the amount of money the rescue has in the pet. In some cases, the amount of money to
make some pets adoptable can be exceed hundreds, if not thousands of dollars. Secondary to covering the
expense of getting the dog adoptable (again, many times the expense is never fully covered), a fee is necessary
to show that the family or individual wanting to adopt from a rescue is capable of showing financial responsibility
in caring for a pet.
It is utterly disgusting that Connie Sellers can throw out a quote saying that she is "concerned" about animals
being sold. I know many many animal rescuers and you can only imagine how selfless, tireless, and impassioned
their efforts are. It takes many volunteers working together to save some of these pets from being euthanized. A
volunteer does not do this for profit or glory. They do it solely for the pet who has no voice and no way to .
advocate for itself and they do everything possible to ensure that each pet is placed in the home that is the best fit
for it. I can also attest that Bethany Mull is one of the most tireless and hard working rescuers I've ever met and I
seriously doubt that many people could make the sacrifices that she selflessly does on a very consistent basis. I
wonder if Ms Sellers herself was capable of such commitment and sacrifice.
It is also true that some shelters do not want their euthanize rates made know. Maybe that is the real story. I can
assure you that based on what I have seen in the last few years, the JB Ogle euthanize rate (which is already
high) would have been unconscionable had it not been for the massive efforts of Mrs. Mull and the large network
of reputabie rescues that she works with. For anyone to shed any negative light on someone who's work has
been beyond amazing, is utterly repugnant and if this is being done for political gain or as a personal vendetta,
then shame shame shame on the people involved! This should only be about taking responsibility for the many
pets that have no home and the many more that are put to death. Nothing or no one should stand in the way of
anyone's responsible efforts to help solve these problems.
Regards
Joseph Bliss Jr
Louisville, KY
https://commcenter.insightbb.com/popup.html?nopop
1/22/2007
January 22,2007
Tonight we are here because ofa proposed ordinance aimed at shelter volunteers. This ordinance was written
because I have angered Ms. Sellers and ChiChi Cornett greatly. I am not sure how my rescue efforts, to date
that have saved almost 800+ animals in almost 5 years of volunteering, has made them so furious. One person
has stated that my passion for saving animals hasbeen too hands on and seen as pushy, but I assure you that I
am the only person in such time that has been able to stay with Ogle, despite having to deal with changing
moods, procedures, and some extremely rude staff members. I have stayed for the animals because they have
no voice and need help. Without my rescue efforts that total approximately 25 hours or more a week, the death
rate at Ogle would have been already greater than it is. I assure you that every time I step into Ogle, I am
friendly, upbeat, and speak encouragingly to employees, even though some see me as a pain blc I am there so
frequently. In an effort to keep positive relations with shelter staff, I often bring in doughnuts, candy bars, and
other treats to staff
The Evening News, Saturday published an article in which Connie Sellers accused Trish Roehm and me of not
following established rules. The problem with such a statement is that there are NO rules in wish for us to
follow! How can we be accused of not following rules not yet established, according to Ms. Sellers own
statement. Quote: "This ordinance specifically is to establish rules for volunteers." Simple guidelines for us to
follow would be helpful and cut down on any confusion that could potentially arise since already established
procedures are subject to change arbitrarily.
Ogle takes in thousands, yes thousands, of animals every year. Harry Wilder, Director, can provide you with
the exact numbers of animals entering Ogle Shelter. However, numbers aren't released publicly, since doing
indicates the adoption to euthanasia rate is approximately 80%. For every 10 animals that go into shelter, only
2 live. Clearly, there are simply just too many animals and not enough adoptions. That is why Animal Rescue
Groups are so important! Hundreds of animals have been SAVED from death at Ogle by Groups such as Pals
for Paws, (Kokomo Indiana), Second Chance Rescue (Indianapolis), etc. These rescues have taken Ogle
animab whose time is up. All have EXTENSIVE adoption applications that is far beyond Ogle's 1/3 page
application. Most have 2-5 page WRITTEN applications, and require a home visit.
In 2006 I drove over 3000 miles to get adoptable animals out of Ogle to rescues. I also have compiled a
database of no-kill, well respected rescue organizations that currently total 40-50 animal rescue groups. These
rescues, when their space allows, take in adoptable Ogle animals when their time is up. One of the things Ms.
Sellers is trying to pass tonight is that all rescues saving Ogle animals must have 501 3 c non-profit status. You
do not have to have non-profit status to be a reputable shelter, as such status cost hundreds of dollars in attorney
and accounting fees. Again. you do not have to have legal non-profit status to be a reputable rescue! Rescue
Group Second Chance out of Indianapolis was called Saturday by Connie or Chichi and told that if they could
not produce a 5013 c non-profit status, they could no longer pull animals. They had planned this week to save
4 animals whose time is up. Second Chance takes approx 3-5 animals a week from Ogle. Also last week, we
were able to get a Rottweiler whose time had ended into Amy's K9 All Breed Rescue. It's spay/neuter adoption
form was drawn up, photos emailed, and transport set up. Today, that Rottwieler languishes at Ogle blc
Connie/Chichi are demanding to see their not for profit status. So tonight, it sits, even after it should have been
released last Thursday for it's transport an in a foster home. I ask, how can rescue groups be told of this new
ordinance if it hasn't even been passed yet?
Ms. Cornett is a knowledgeable dog trainer, but has never been involved with animal rescue or animal
transporting while at Ogle. Since coming on the scene, she has never once called a rescue, emailed pictures to
a rescue, or set up payment or transport to a rescue, except for this weekend in which rescues were called and
told that without non-profit status, they can no longer save any Ogle animals. All of which needs to be done in
an effective and timely manner. To my knowledge, Ms. Sellers has never done those things either. Those are
all things that Trish and I do. I have 5 years worth of working relationships with well respected rescue groups
within a 700 mile radius of Ogle.
~,
As for the claims that there have been animals posted on JB Ogle's Petfinder site that were not JB Ogle animals,
this is true. As an animal rescue volunteers we regularly meet people who find stray animals or know of people
who need to find new homes for their pets. We listed several pets on petfinder that fall into this category. As a
courtesy, we have also listed animals on Ogle's site for other organizations that do not have a petfinder.com
account. Before the Evening News article ran on January 20th, 2007, we had not been told this was a problem!
Ifthere is a possible liability to listing other animals for rescues who do not have a petfinder.com site, they will
no longer be listed.
We wonder could Ogle staff take a picture of each animal that enters, make a description tags listing breed,
gender, age, personality, etc., so potential adopters know what kind of animal each is? Those are things we do
on Saturdays, and 2-3 times weekly. Tags personalize each animal, instead of just being a kennel ill number.
Be is as it may, we would eagerly welcome new volunteers to help us make tags, take pictures for petfinder,
play, bathe, socialize and help set up transport to rescues! The only volunteers who are ever there on a regular,
consistent basis are Trish and I, friends or students we bring to help us.
On a happy note, Mayor Waiz listened and acted upon the concerns that were expressed to him! Thankfully,
the Mayor is acting on these concerns and therefore making life more tolerable for the animals that find
themselves at the shelter. Finally, dog beds are being ordered, so that animals do not have to lay on the cold,
wet concrete floor; new lighting was installed so that the back kennel area animals are more visible; animals
will receive a high quality, consistent diet of Science Diet, at no cost to the shelter, since Science Diet donates
:free food to shelter)s; and lastly that the dog kennels be repainted so that animals show up in pictures clearly
instead of brown muck covered walls.
We are asking this council to reject this ordinance so that animals can be rescued in a timely manner, and that
rescue groups do not have to pay more than the $35 they currently pay to get animals out of Ogle. In addition,
many reputable groups do not have non-profit status, blc of the money and time involved to get such status.
Please think of the animals in need before making your decision. Thank you. Please do not cause more animals
to die unnecessarily because of Ms. Sellers anger towards Trish or me. Thank you.
Sincerely, Bethany and Patricia Roehm
Ii
The No Kill Advocate
A No Kill nation is within our reach
Issue #1 2007
The Nation's Best Director
Charlottesville, VA animal control director
receives the No Kill Advocacy Center's
Director of the Year award for 2006
Susanne Kogut has been named
the nation's Animal Shelter
Director of the Year for 2006.
Under her tenacious leadership,
Charlottesville, VA finished the year
saving 92 percent of all dogs and cats,
regardless of whether they were
classified as "adopta ble" or
"unadoptable," were cute and cuddly
or old and infirm, friendly, feral, or
any other categories shelters often
use to sweep animals under the rug.
Not Kogut. Under her care, 92 percent
of all incoming animals were saved.
In April 2005, Kogut-an attorney who
did not have prior experience running
an animal shelter-took over as head
of the Charlottesville-Albemarle SPCA,
an agency which contracts for animal
control sheltering in Charlottesville,
Virginia.
Historically, the Charlottesville SPCA
was the subject of relentless public
criticism for what many in the rescue
community saw as poor customer
service, inadequate care of animals,
and unnecessary killing. By hiring a
new director who embraced the No Kill
paradigm, they finished 2005, Kogut's
first year, saving 87 percent of dogs
and 67 percent of cats.
Overall, five million dogs and cats are
killed annually in U.s. shelters. Most
Susanne Kogut, the nation's best animal shelter
director in 2006 has achieved success at the most
important job a shelter has-saving lives.
directors are killing 60-70 percent of
cats and roughly half of all dogs. But
Kogut isn't like most directors. She
embodies the spirit of No Kill which is
always demanding and achieving
improvement. And in 2006, she
achieved more by saving 92 percent
overall, better than any other
community in the nation.
Animal Shelter Director of the Year
award criteria. What does it take to be
named the nation's best by the only
national organization dedicated to a
No Kill nation and staffed by experts
who have achieved No Kill success
themselves? Nathan J. Winograd, the
director of the No Kill Advocacy
Center, explains:
While other national groups give awards
to shelter leaders even in the face of
killing the majority of animals in their care
or failing to put in place progressive
programs like Trap-Neuter-Return for feral
cats, the No Kill Advocacy Center's award
has one major criteria: success at the
most important job a shelter has-saving
"Congratulations Susanne. And thank you for further proving what a shelter
can accomplish when it truly dedicates itself to the No Kill endeavor. "
I;
lives. Since Directors who continue to kill
the bulk of the animals can only be
classified as "failing," they are not eligible
to receive recognition. We do not reward
failure. And because Kogut saved 92
percent of all animals at an open door
animal control shelter in the South, the
simple fact is that she has virtually no
equal nationwide. This year's choice was
one of the easiest decisions we have had
to make.
Do you have what it takes to work
with the nation's best? Susanne Kogut
wants you! The Charlottesville-
Albemarle SPCA seeks a highly
motivated, upbeat, enthusiastic
individual to lead its volun teer efforts.
Ready for a. challenge? Have a passi on
to save homeless animals? Join the
Charlottesville-Albemarle SPCA, a No
Kill open admission facility saving
thousands of animals each year. Send
resume and cover letter to: Susanne
Kogut, Executive Director at
director@caspca.org.
NHS Takes a Bold Leap
By a unanimous decree from the Board of
Directors, the Nevada Humane Society
(NHS) embraced the U.S. No Kill
Declaration (www.nokilldeclaration.orq),
turned to the director of the No Kill
Advocacy Center for help, and hired
Bonney Brown as their new executive
director.
VADA ..
E. SOCIETY
" Any animal, any time." That is
the new policy for Washoe
County, both at animal
control and the private Nevada
Humane Society for working with
legitimate private rescue groups who
want to take animals into their
lifesaving adoption programs, thanks
to a directive from NHS' new
executive director, Bonney Brown.
In the past, NHS made it difficult and
in some cases impossible for rescue
groups to save animals otherwise
facing death. "It makes absolutely no
sense for a shelter to deny any animal
to a rescue group or to put up
bureaucratic barriers to do so," said
Brown. "Because there is no shortage
of animals needing to be saved,
rescue groups can now take any
animal, any time, including highly
adoptable puppies and kittens."
These groups can help save pure
breeds and mixed breeds. Th ey return
feral cats to their habitats, and
provide kittens and puppies with a
much needed second chance. They
alleviate overcrowding, provide
medical and behavior rehabilitation,
and reduce costs to taxpayers. They
are, in short, the difference between
success and failure, life and death.
So why do some shelters still refuse or
limit rescue group access to animals
on death row?
In the 1990s, the nation's largest
animal welfare organization was still
telling shelters not to transfer animals
to rescue groups citing vague
concerns like "transport stress,"
"cherry picki ng," and "need for shelter
animal diversity"-concepts that would
be ludicrous, if the end result weren't
so disturbing (i.e., an animal's
needless death.)
@ 2007. All Rights Reserved
- 2 -
Kittens and puppies, dogs and cats, and critters of all
shapes and sizes get a second chance under the
Nevada Humane Society's bold new policy for
working with legitimate rescue groups: "anyanimal,
any time. H
And while this national agency has
since changed its tu ne, they still
suggest formal training, "home" visits
and other obstacles to partnering with
rescue groups. These hurdles are
premised on a historical distrust of the
No Kill rescue community and result in
animals being killed.
In an environment of 5,000,000
animals killed in shelters nationally,
there is hardly a shortage of
"adoptable" animals and if a rescue
group is willing to take custody and
care of the animal, rare is the
circumstance in which they should be
denied.
Rescue groups can be a shelter's best
customers and should be treated as
such. Many shelters with outdated
rescue policies have lost the support
@ 2007. All Rights Reserved
of these groups, which increases costs
and reduces the number of animals
who are saved. And no one should
tolerate that.
While that policy change occurred on
Brown's first day of taking the helm, it
wasn't the only one. A series of
programmatic changes included tough
new protocols for taking an animal's
life, eliminating the automatic kill ing
of animals for treatable conditions
such as ringworm, and eliminating
under-performing staff. In ten days on
the job, ten people were terminated,
resigned or quit under Brown's
command.
Do you have what it takes to work
with a progressive shelter working to
create a No Kill community? The
Nevada Humane Society wants you!
The NHS is looking for innovative and
dynamic individuals who bring skills,
enthusiasm, and accountability to
animal sheltering. The following
positions are now open:
. Shelter veterinarian for high
volume spay/neuter, animal
care and rehabilitation, and
shelter medicine rotations.
. Licensed veterinary technician
for spay/neuter clinic,
vaccination clinic, and shelter
medicine rotation.
. Community programs manager
to oversee rescue transfers,
volunteer and foster care
efforts, offsite adoptions, and
more.
. Director of operations to
manage all aspects of the
shelter.
Please do not contact NHS directly.
For more information or to apply,
contact Nathan Winograd at
winograd@nokillsolutions.com.
- 3 -
Ii
No Kill Success in 2006
The No Kill Advocacy Center
announces No Kill success in
2006.
Philadelphia, PA. In 2004, a series of
articles in the Philadelphia Daily News
depicted the Philadelphia Animal Care
and Control Association (PACCA) as a
"house of horrors." At the time,
almost 9 out of 10 animals who
entered the shelter were killed
,
arguably one of the worst lifesaving
records in the United States. In 2005
,
the City of Philadelphia asked No Kill
Advocacy Center director Nathan J.
Winograd to do a complete
assessment of shelter operations and
make recommendations to improve
program and service delivery with a
goal of creating a No Kill Philadelphia.
Since the implementation of the
recommendations, PACCA has
announced that the save rate for dogs
and cats is the highest in the city's
history. Less dogs and cats are being
killed in Philadelphia than ever before,
with 65% of all cats currently being
saved.
Charlottesville, VA. Until April 2005,
the Charlottesville-Albemarle SPCA, an
open door animal control shelter in the
South, was the target of criticism for
what some in the rescue community
saw as unnecessary killing. In 2005,
all that changed. A new director
embraced our philosophy and
programs, asked us to help train their
staff and make recommendations on
policies. Only one year later, the
agency finished the year saving 92%
of all dogs and cats, a level of success
unmatched by any other community in
the nation.
The municipal Philadelphia Animal Care & Control
Association is now the safest shelter to be a Pit Bull
in Philadelphia thanks to its progressive outlook and
lifesaving programs.
Rancho Cucamonga, CA. Before taking
over operations of its own shelter, the
City of Rancho Cucamonga, CA animal
control contractor was the subject of
mounting criticism for how animals
were cared for and how many were
killed at the animal shelter. The No Kill
Advocacy Center's director was hired
to help lead the transition. Since
taking over operations, deaths for
dogs and cats are at all time lows. Of
particular note, for the same period as
2005, the save rate for dogs has
increased to 81%, the save rate for
cats has increased to 57%, and the
save rate for other animals (rabbits,
hamsters, gerbils, etc.) has increased
from a paltry 27% to 70%.
By thoroughly integrating principles of
accountability into shelter operations,
there have been tremendous
lifesaving gains. Each of these
communities show what a shelter can
achieve when it adopts the No Kill
philosophy of accountability, moves
beyond the traditional excuses for
killing, and implements the programs
and services which have been proven
to save lives.
@ 2007. All Rights Reserved
- 4 -
I,
While the work in these communities
is not yet finished and homeless
animals remain at risk, as more
lifesaving elements of the No Kill
equation are implemented, homeless
animals in these communities can now
optimistically look to the future-a
future that promises them a new
beginning, instead of the end of the
line.
How did they do it? By embracing the
programs and services of the No Kill
Advocacy Center's No Kill Equation!
For more information, go to
www.nokillsolutions.com/pdf/equation .
pdf. '
Vote for No Pet Left Behind
Reader's Digest is holding an election
to determine who it will name as its
Hero of the Year. Cast your vote for
Nathan and the animals as Reader's
Digest Hero of the Year, by going to
wWW.rd.com and clicking on "People"
and then "Everyday Heroes. "
" Millions of healthy animals are
killed every year in shelters;
Nathan Winograd wants that
number reduced to zero." -From No Pet
Left Behind by Janet Kinosian in the
November 2006 issue of Reader's
Di est.
@ 2007. All Rights Reserved
Because of his
ground-breaking
work, Reader's
Digest magazine
ca lied ou r
director, Nathan
J. Winograd, a
hero in its
November 2006
issue. You can
read it online by
going to
www.rd.com
and clicking on "People" and then
"Everyday Heroes."
For more information, go to
www.nokilladvocacycenter.org and
click on "What's New."
The No Kill Equation
Two decades ago, the concept of a
No Kill coli1mu nity was little
more than a dream. Today the
humane movement is poised to make
it a reality-to meet the challenge of
building a truly humane society. And
the first step is a decision, a
commitment to reject killing as the
primary shelter population
management tool. No Kill starts as an
act of will. The next step involves
putting in place the infrastructure to
save lives.
Following a commitment to No Kill is
the need for accountability.
Accountability means having clear
definitions, a lifesaving plan, and
charting successes and failures. Clear
protocols should be established, and
staff properly trained to ensure that
each and every animal is given a fair
evaluation and a chance for placement
or treatment. But accountability also
allows, indeed requires, flexibility. Too
many shelters lose sight of this
principle, staying rig id with shelter
protocols, believing these are
engraved in stone. They are not.
Protocols are important because they
ensure accountability from staff. But
protocols without flexibility can have
the opposite effect: stifling innovation,
causing lives to be needlessly lost, and
allowing shelter employees who fail to
save lives to hide behind a paper trail.
The decision to end an animal's life is
an extremely serious one, and should
always be treated as such. No matter
- 5 -
how many animals a shelter kills, each
and every animal is an individual, and
each deserves individual
consideration.
And finally, to meet the challenge that
No Kill entails, shelter leadership
needs to get the commun ity excited,
to energize people for the task at
hand. Byworking with people,
implementing lifesaving programs,
and treatin g each life as preciou s, a
shelter can transform a community.
The mandatory programs and services
include:
1. Feral Cat TNR Program
Many animal control agencies in
communities throughout the United
States are embracing Trap, Neuter,
Return programs (TNR) to improve
animal welfare, reduce death rates,
and meet obligations to public welfare
and neighborhood tranquility
demanded by governments. In San
Francisco, for example, the program
was very successful, resulting in less
impounds, less killing and reduced
public complaints. In Tompkins
County, an agreement with county
officials and the rabies control division
of the health department provided for
TNR as an acceptable complaint,
nuisance and rabies abatement
procedure. In specific cases, the
health department paid the Tompkins
Cou nty SPCA to perfo rm TN R.
II. High-Volume, Low-Cost
Spay/Neuter
Spay/neuter is the cornerstone of a
successfu I lifesaving effort. Low cost,
high volume spay/neuter will quickly
lead to fewer animals entering the
shelter system, allowing more
resources to be allocated toward
saving lives.
@ 2007. All Rights Reserved
In the 1970s, the City of Los Angeles
was the first to provide municipally
funded spaying and neutering for low-
income pet owners in the United
States. A city study found that for
every dollar it was investing in the
program, Los Angeles taxpayers were
saving $10 in animal control costs due
to reductions in animal intakes and
fewer field calls. Indeed, Los Angeles
shelters were taking in half the
number of animals after just the first
decade of the program and killing
rates in the city dropped to the lowest
third per capita in the United States.
This result is consistent with results in
San Francisco and elsewhere.
Research shows that investment in
programs. balancing animal "care" and
"control" can provide not only
immediate public health and public
relations benefits but also long-term
- 6 -
Ii
financial savings to a ju risdiction.
According to the International
City/County Management Association,
"An effective animal control program
not only saves cities and counties on
present costs-by protecting citizens
from dangerous dogs, for example-
but also helps reduce the costs of
animal control in the future. A city
that impounds and euthanizes 4,000
animals in 2001... but does not
promote spaying and neutering will
probably still euthanize at least 4,000
animals a year in 2010. A city that...
[institutes a subsidized spay/neuter
program] will likely euthanize
significantly fewer animals in 2010
and save on a host of other animal-
related costs as well."
III. Rescue Groups
An adoption or transfer to a rescue
group frees up scarce cage and kennel
space, reduces expenses for feeding,
cleaning, killing and carcass disposal,
and improves a commu nity's rate of
lifesaving. Getting an animal out of
the shelter and into an appropriate
placement is importantand rescue
groups, as a general rule, can screen
adopters as well or better th an many
shelters. In an environment of
5,000,000 dogs and cats killed in
shelters annually, there will rarely be
a shortage of adoptable animals and if
a rescue group is willing to take
custody and care of the animal, rare is
the circumstance in which they should
be denied.
IV. Foster Care
Foster care is crucial to No Kill.
Without it, saving lives is
compromised. It is a low cost, and
often no cost, way of increasing a
shelter's capacity, improving public
relations, increasing a shelter's public
image, rehabilitating sick and injured
or behaviorally challenged animals,
and saving lives.
At some point in time, nearly every
animal shelter feels the pinch of not
having enough space. A volunteer
foster program can be an ideal low-
cost way to greatly increase the
number of lives a shelter can save
while at the same time providing an
opportunity for community members
to volunteer. Not only does a foster
program maximize the number of
animals rescued, it allows an
organization to care for animals who
would be difficult to care for in a
shelter environment-orphaned or
feral kittens, sick or injured animals,
or dogs needing one-on-one behavior
rehabilitation. For animals who may
need a break from the shelter
environment, foster care provides a
comfortable home setting that keeps
animals happy and healthy.
V. Comprehensive Adoption Programs
Adoptions are vital to an agency's
lifesaving mission. The quantity and
quality of shelter adoptions is in
shelter management's hands, making
lifesaving a direct function of shelter
policies and practice.
@ 2007. All Rights Reserved
- 7 -
.------------,7.'~-'---1
As one commentator put it, "if each
pet lives 10 years, on average, and
the number of homes grows at the
same rate that homes are lost through
deaths and other attrition, then
replacement homes would become
available each year for more than
twice as many dogs and slightly more
cats than enter shelters. Since the
inventory of pet-owning homes is
growing, not just holding even,
adoption could in theory replace all
population control killing right now-if
the animals and potential adopters
were better introduced."
In fact, studies show people get their
dogs from shelters only 15% of the
time overall, and less than 10% of the
time for cats. If shelters bette r
promoted their animals and had
adoption programs responsive to the
needs of the community, they could
increase the number of homes
available and replace population
control killing with adoptions. In other
words, shelter killing is more a
function of market share, than "public
irresponsibility." Contrary to
conventional wisdom, shelters can
adopt their way out of killing.
VI. Pet Retention
While some of the reasons animals are
surrendered to shelters are
unavoidable, others can be
prevented-but only if shelters are
willing to work with people to help
them solve their problems. Saving all
healthy and treatable pets requires
communities to develop innovative
strategies for keeping people and their
companion animals together. And the
more a community sees its shelter(s)
as a place to turn for advice and
assista nce, the easier this job will be.
Animal control agencies can maintain
"libraries" of pet care and behavior
@ 2007. All Rights Reserved
I,
fact sheets in the shelter and on a
website. Articles in local papers, radio
and television spots all provide
opportunities to feature topics like
solving Iitterbox avoidance and
excessive barking. Other pet retention
programs include free in-home dog
behavior problem-solving by
volunteers, low-cost dog training, pet
friendly rental programs, dog walker
referrals, and pet behavior classes.
VII. Medical and Behavior
Rehabilitation
A shelter begins helping treatable
animals by closely analyzing statistics.
How many animals entering a shelter
are treatable? What types of injuries
and illnesses are most common? The
answers to th,ese questions will
determine what types of rehabilitation
programs are needed and how to
effectively allocate resources. For
example, one community may have
many underage kittens in its shelters.
Another may have substantial
numbers of cats with upper
respiratory infections, or dogs with
kennel cough. Yet another may find
that a large portion of treatables are
dogs with behavior problems. Each
will need a different lifesaving
program.
Thes,e can include creating a fund
dedicated solely to medical and
- 8 -
behavioral rehabilitation. Such a fund
lets the public direct their donations
and allows a shelter to demonstrate
what they are doing to help
treatables. In addition, the shelter can
establish relationships to have local
veterinarians come to the shelter to
do rotations. These veterinarians can
supplement the work of a staff
veterinarian and veterinary
technicians and help diagnose
animals, give vaccinations, and
administer medication and treatment.
A relationship with a veterinary
college can allow veterinary students
to volunteer at the shelter on a
regular basis, providing the students
with real life on-the-job training, while
shelter animals receive high-quality
care under the direction of the
veterinary college faculty. Finally, it is
impossible to overstate the
importance of a foster program for
underaged kittens and puppies,
undersocialized animals, and those
recovering from medical treatment.
VIII. Public Relations/Community
Involvement
Rebuilding a relationship with the
community starts with redefining
oneself as a "pet rescue" agency. The
community must see improvement at
the shelter, and improvements in the
area of lifesaving. Public contact with
the agency must in c1ude good
customer service, more adoptions,
and tangible commitments to give the
shelter the tools it needs to do the job
humanely. Public contact, however, is
not necessarily a face-to-face
encounter. The public has contact with
an agency by reading about it in the
newspaper, seeing volunteers
adopting animals at a local shopping
mall, or hearing the Executive Director
promoting spay/neuter on the radio. It
means public relations and community
@ 2007. All Rights Reserved
I,
education.
The importance of good public
relations cannot be overstated. Good,
consistent public relations are the key
to getting more money, more
volunteers, more adoptions, and more
community goodwill. Indeed, if
lifesaving is considered the
destination, public relations are the
vehicle which will get a shelter there.
Without it, the shelter will always be
struggling with animals, finances, and
community recognition.
Increasing adoptions, maximizing
donations, recruiting volunteers and
partnering with community agencies
comes down to one thing: increasing
the shelter's exposure. And that
means consistent marketing and
public relations. Public relations and
marketing are the foundation of all a
shelter's activities and their success.
To do all these things well, the shelter
must be in the public eye.
Indeed, a survey of more than 200
animal control agencies, conducted by
a graduate student at the University of
Pennsylvania College of Veterinary
Medicine, found that "community
engagement" was one of the key
factors in those agencies who have
managed to reduce killing and
increase lifesaving. One agency noted
that "public buy-in is crucial for long-
term improvements" placing primary
importance on "the need to view
community outreach and public
engagement as integral to the
agency's overall purpose and
programs rather than simply as an
add-on accomplished with a few public
service announcements..."
IX. Volunteers
Volunteers are a dedicated "army of
compassion" and the backbone of a
- 9 -
successful No Kill effort. There is
never enough staff, never enough
dollars to hire more staff, and always
more needs than paid human
resources. That is where volunteers
come in and make the difference
between success and failure and, for
the animals, life and death.
In San Francisco, a community of
approximately 800,000 people,
volunteers spend over 110,000 hours
at the shelter each year. Assuming the
prevailing hourly wage, payroll taxes
and benefits, it would cost the San
Francisco SPCA over $1 mill ion dollars
annually to provide those services. In
Tompkin~ County, a community of
about 100,000 people, volunteers
spend over 12,500 hours walking
dogs, grooming cats, helping with
adoptions, and doing routine but
necessary office work, at a cost
savings of approximately $85,000 if
the SPCA were to pay fo r those
services at the entry level hourly rate.
The purpose of a volunteer program is
to help a shelter help the animals. It is
crucial to have procedures and goals
in mind as part of the program. In
Tompkins County, for example, the
agency required all dogs available for
adoption to get out of kennel
socialization four times per day. This
could not be accomplished by staff
alone and therefore volunteers were
recruited, trained and scheduled for
specific shifts that would allow the
agency to meet those goals. It
became quickly apparent that having
volunteers come in whenever they
wanted did not serve those goals and
so all volunteers were given
instructions and a specific schedule.
X. A Compassionate Director
The final element of the No Kill
equation is the most important of all,
C9 2007. All Rights Reserved
without which aU other elements are
thwarted-a hard working,
compassionate animal control or
shelter director not content to
regurgitate tired cliches or hide behind
the myth of "too many animals, not
enough homes." Unfortunately, this
one is also oftentimes the hardest one
to demand and find.
But it is clear-as better than a decade
of success in San Francisco, Tompkins
County, and now elsewhere
demonstrates-th at No Kill is simp Iy
not achievable without rigorous
implementation of each and every one
of these programs and services. It is
up to us in the humane movement to
demand them of our local shelters,
and no longer to settle for illusory
excuses and smokescreens shelters
often put up in order to avoid
implementing them.
- 10 -
I!
From: "Merrick, Amy" <Merrick.A@insightcom.com>
Subject: J.B. Ogle
Date: January 22, 2007 9:40:31 AM EST
To: "Chi Chi Cornett (E-mail)..<vcornett1@earthlink.net>
Chi Chi, I got your call about the J.B. Ogle PSA with Paul Hornung. Since
July, the spot has run approximately 5700 times on the Insight
Communications Cross Channel System. If you were paying for the airtime
the rate per spot would be $60. That comes out to $342,000 worth of airtime
for your PSA. Thanks, Amy
Amy M. Merrick
Production Specialist!
Producer Animal Answers Live
INSIGHT COMMUNICATIONS
4701 Commerce Crossings Drive
Louisville, KY 40229
(502) 357-4293
e-mail: merrick.a@insight-com.com
We can't solve problems by using the kind of thinking we used when we
created them.
Albert Einstein
I!
Paul HornuniJ. Enterprises} Inc.
INVOICE:
PUBLIC SERVICE COMMERCIAL FOR:
J.B. OGLE ANIMAL SHELTER
JEFFERSONVILLE, INDIANA
PAUL HORNUNG FEE: $15,000.00
Waterfront Plaza · 325 West Main St. · Suite 1116 · Louisfli/(el KentucklJ 40202
Phone 502-583-9000 · Fax 502-583-8814
Ii
/
1~(.6
I--Io-&;
/--1 ()-tY!
1-/0/0/
!~/{)-( .
!//tJ--0
l-;Of)g'
1---1 C?~ol
-----.'...
10/111 ,,tit
,~/;
~.~1
L, .' .........
(?Ji~f4( J2~'j.
. "-,._-~
'7?!t &d,
~/h3
~4p~
~"'1r2- ~.~ ~..
-----
~ _Jli~l-: ~.
..----" .._------_.~
;. d.J- ~
. p. O~II~ /JJAlfe-
;2.. (Jy~'1Y( ~r~ ---.-.
4-, ge1-0?{~
~ ~tlr~J-- ~-
t , V~br r4!~
~I "ittl b~~
Qz-
1 ( . t/tJ(J~'
iJJ/~
~~/.E
---- ;1~(~{ ~ ~
CITY OF JEFFERSONVILLE COMMON COUNCIL
Mondav Januarv 22, 2007
Public Comment Sign In
, NamE Q-.b-G~1lI Subject
I()lCa /2. L)~D42.~l-ek
/ ~~ ---V~~ /4rt1mJ)
J I ......
/ i / . /'.. -
cf1.T:bmoJ ~hJv-J Y ~~ /OfJ-/{ C;P-LJ~
I .,
...:V (!lIte f1'(j1ell
~~p~~\Y:J
J1~oJu
15hw.- U,v~'L
/
.J~~\O\\ ~\f'\S"\D -
". S-+A~J -\-\CA~(L\ s
I
J C rJ OA-( I- 1 cnf-dY\.
,j~(\(%<-- ~~ ~ck.vVc-q
~Vle.?A ~Vlr(cV6Itl~
~~;/"/1 /{Jr1.~
r/ UM (JlllJJk
~illl(~/ 05't: / 'S Je#;"
-L~~ S~v\Y~
OC()\<" S~~\k~
~ ~9-ljh~
Oti-c
/ C;;:;11.1'f Y11'Oo... f..,rJ
o A 0 ) I'-"',va.! t9-. L>() 7 -- Oil. .- I