Loading...
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