LAGUNA HILLS ANIMAL SERVICES FOR WORSE OR BETTER?
*** Please click on "OLDER POSTS" just below this blog to see 15 important questions and more information about this issue in a much shorter blog below this one.
Text from the 1-12-16 Laguna Hills City Council Meeting re: Orange
County Animal Shelter Issues - Discussion of Planned New Orange County
Animal Shelter and the Original 10 acres in Tustin Base Reuse
Plan
Steve Franks, Director of Orange County Community Resources
under which the Animal Shelter services fall said:
South County Community College District agreed to swap their 10 acre
parcel for the County's 10 acre parcel in 2012 and the City of Tustin approved.
The land swap was then delayed due to the "Vaper Intrusion Plume." The County's
original 10 acre parcel has been delayed due to a disagreement between Navy and
State Dept. of Toxic Substance Control re. testing that needs to be done on that
"plume" area. The County and South Orange County then signed a notice of
intent in December 2015 for the County to enter into a ground lease to expedite the land from South County to
the County. 6.7 acres is going
to be owned by South Orange County with no restrictions on
development. It's outside the "plume" area and will be leased to the County, under a lease, the balance of
the property will be transferred under a sub-lease so the County will
essentially have control of the 10 acres. Terms and conditions of the Ground Lease have been agreed to by
the respective boards in closed session in Dec. of
2015. Lease documents are being mutually
drafted and we expect to execute them in March of this year
(2016) The County completed the conceptual design work this past Fall and
construction expected to be initiated in June or July of this year with
completion in Sept. of 2017.
**The Laguna Hills City Staff Report appears to have
mentioned only "swapping not leasing" the land for the shelter which
Steve Franks said would continue to be owned by So. OC Comm. college
District? So, assuming that with any land lease agreements there may
be costs to the County for those leases and that any lease or lease
related costs would very likely be passed on to the contract cities. Also, in
the future, there could be larger expenses to buy or continue to lease land that
the County apparently does not own but on which the County Shelter will be
built? This could result in additional expense that should be included in the
city's costs for animal care services from the County and in the cost
differential between the County and Mission Viejo services.
It is expected that a design bid contract will be awarded to one
of approximately 20 interested parties on April 5 of this year. There is a plan
to establish a design review advisory group once the design contract is in place
to provide input from contract city partners and rescue groups and county
advocates and they would address specific design elements for the new facility.
Additionally we are bringing on a shelter consultant in February of 2016 to
address size of staffing needs for the new shelter and to review current
procedures relative to best practices in sheltering. **No
name of, or specific qualifications of, this consultant were mentioned.
We are currently working on terms and conditions for agreements
and distribution of contract city maximum financial obligations and
participation agreements with the new shelter with the city negotiating
sub-committee which includes (Laguna Hills Assistant City Manager) Don White
from Laguna Hills. Intention is to have a final agreement with the
cities in January to share with city councils of
contract cities and those cities that have expressed interest in contracting
with us moving forward at a new shelter. The target date
for a commitment is April, 2016 of this year to allow for final design
work related to the size of the shelter needed for the number of cities that
will be contracting
**Related to this information that the
number of cities that are going to continue with the county have not yet been
confirmed, the amount of money that the City of Laguna Hills will have to pay to
the county for their new shelter has also not yet been confirmed.
If contract cities do not continue with the county it is expected that they
will have to have alternate services in place by the time the new shelter opens
in Sept. of 2017, because the plan is to close our current shelter in Orange.
Franks stressed that - We recognize that the decision to participate in our new
shelter is a local decision and we respect desires of each city and intent of
each city. We encourage interested cities to research and explore their options
ASAP should they wish to do so.
Moving on the Grand Jury Performance Audit Recommendations: One of the recommendations was to increase the authority of the Chief Veterinarian in OC
Animal Care Operations and as such, this past Spring, we appointed Dr.
Hawkins as Director of OC Animal Care and she also serves as the Chief
Veterinarian of the Shelter. He noted that Dr. Hawkins has a bachelor's degree
in Zoology and a doctor of Veterinary Medicine from the UC Davis School of
Veterinary Medicine. She's been a practicing Veterinarian since 2001 in the
public and private sector, She's a faculty lecturer at CalPoly Pomona, she is a
contributing writer to Pet Health Zone Web Link, she's currently on CA.
Veterinary Medical Assoc. House of Delegates and on the So.CA.Vets Assoc. Board
of Trustees, has served as President, Treasurer and Vice President of the
Saddleback/Capistrano Valley So. CA. Veterinary Medical Assoc. Active member in
good standing with the AVMA, DVMA, SCVMA
** It's great to know that Dr. Hawkins is a
qualified Veterinarian and has been interested enough to join multiple
Veterinary based organizations, but what's missing from all of this background
information about Dr. Hawkins is any kind of previous experience with turning
such a problematic animal shelter around. The essential experience of having
at least significantly participated in turning a bad shelter around is something
many of us have requested from the County for a new Shelter Director since 2005
and so far this request has always been ignored. An additional requirement we would like to see for this
position is proof of excellent managerial skills in addition to genuine
compassion for animals.
Mayor Kogerman - Who would
be appointing the design review advisory group
members?
Steve Franks - We would be asking for City Representatives
from partnering cities.
Mayor Barbara Kogerman - When is the Shelter consultant
going to be brought on.
Steve Franks - In February of this year to help with
staffing and shelter policies.
Again, No qualifications for
this person were noted?
Council Member Dore Gilbert - When do you
anticipate Graoundbreaking?
Steve Franks - In June of this year.
Mayor Pro-Tem - Don Sedgewick - Asked about getting a
commitment from the City prior to the design work because cities may want to
know what this place is going to look like before they commit.
Steve Franks - We have shared some conceptual design work
with you. It's difficult when you don't know the exact size. In February or
March we'll have some more definitive documents. **Above
Steve Franks stated - Intention is to
have a final agreement with the cities in January (this month), but the target date for a commitment is
stated above to be April 2016 of this year.
Council Member Carruth - Will cities be able to impact
policy at a new shelter such as with specifically mandated spay and neuter
programs?
Steve Franks - That would be an issue that we'd have to
address separately and would have to go to the Board of Supervisors who have not
expressed any interest yet in a mandatory neuter and spay program.
Dr. Jennifer Hawkins Director of OC Animal Shelter at LHCC
Meeting
said she was speaking about 10 Grand Jury Recommendations but
did not mention to which of the two 2015 Grand Jury Report on the County Shelter
she was referring.
** See two 2015 Grand Jury Reports about the County Animal Shelter at
After checking both 2015 Grand Jury Reports, about the County
Animal Shelter, we found that Dr Hawkins was speaking about the 2nd 2015 Grand
Jury Report entitled - If Animals Could Talk About the Orange County Animal Shelter that was published on 6-7-15 and
did have 10 Recommendations.
** The 1st 2015 Grand Jury Report about the County Animal Shelter entitled
The Orange County Animal Shelter: the Facility, The Function, the Future was
published on 5-21-15 and had 4 recommendations.
** The 2015 County Audit of the Orange County
Animal Shelter had 34 recommendations plus a few more very significant problems
at the end of the report that were not numbered.
1. Grand Jury Finding - Serious Morale Issues at the
Shelter, Dr. Hawkins said they were chronic problems and
generally because of the type of work they do related to people who throw their
animal away animals, don't want to take care of them, abuse them, etc. and then
surrender them to the shelter staff that needs to give them so much medical and
personal attention. Plus there is so much negative attention via social media,
etc. including cyber bullying of the staff. However the Grand Jury
Report clearly stated that many of the serious morale issues were attributed to
"Poor Management Practices and Lack Of Effective Leadership." Dr.
Hawkins added that morale is slowly improving as staffing improves and as some
deferred maintenance issues are addressed under the new management team.
2. Grand Jury Finding - Trap, Neuter and
Release (TNR) Program results in delay in Spaying and neutering of adoptable
animals. Dr Hawkins response was that she disagrees totally on this one
because it's not the case. She added that there are days when they need more
animals to perform surgeries on and they have increased their spay and neuter
days to 5 per week. She added that they increase their spay and neuter days to 6
or 7 per week as needed for high volume times.
3. Grand Jury Finding - Feral Cats roam freely at animal
shelter and possibly contribute to animal and human exposure to zoonotic
disease.
Dr Hawkins responded that there are 3 feral cats that are spayed and
neutered, microchipped and vaccinated that are allowed to roam around the
shelter but are no risk to people or animals. Later on in this session Dr.
Hawkins also stated that these cats assist with rodent control at the shelter.
4. Grand Jury Finding - Animal Control Officers do not
have effective Equipment or appropriate Procedural Options to del with unique
emergencies in the field to tranquilize and euthanize animals in the
field. Dr Hawkins said CA. State Law still does not permit Animal
Control Officers (ACOs) to carry controlled substances so they are left with
uncontrolled substances which are more challenging to work with, but the do
transport animals back to the shelter is they require sedation or other
treatments. The ACOs do receive 6 months of training and they are hoping
that the State of CA. will soon accept the training and allow them to administer
controlled substances in the field.
5. Grand Jury Finding - The Current Shortage of Personnel
including Animal Control Officers, make it difficult for them to respond to
calls in a timely manner throughout such a large county, especially since there
is only one shelter to service all of Orange County. The County Audit of the
County Animal Shelter noted that a report completed in June 2014 stated that the
County staffing was 44% below industry standards. Dr Hawkins said
they have had a 20% vacancy rate for a couple of years now. ***The Financial Operational Advisory Board said they were okay
with decreasing that to about 10%, but it takes an extended
period of time to hire people and train them - 6 to 9 months, and it only takes
a moment for someone to leave, so they are trying to catch up here and they
hired 12 more Animal Control Officer trainees who are trying to complete their
training and studying 9 recruitments in other areas.
6. Grand Jury Finding - There is little
evidence that the Feral Free Program (Trap, Neuter, and Release Pgrm.) has been
successful in reducing the feral cat population which could be a contributing
factor to zoonotic disease. Dr Hawkins says they disagree with this
finding that includes Typhus in their disease findings because rates of Typhus
have only gone down since the implementation of this program, so she would like
to take credit for that. She also noted that Typhus is spread by fleas so all
their cats and have a topical flea product applied and they are vaccinated,
microchipped, spayed and neutered. She added that all cats are evaluated for
disposition as well as health and the ones that can be released after being
spayed and neutered are returned to the places from which they came.
7. Grand Jury Finding - Kennels hosed with dogs inside
increase the risk of disease. Dr Hawkins said the transfer doors that
are supposed to be in the middle of the cages are mostly broken or missing due
to lack of maintenance so they have hired 8 new staff members and lengthened
hours to allow for time to clean the cages in a more satisfactory way without
the dogs being in the cages during the cleaning. She added that they have also
repaired many of the transfer doors especially in lthe areas of aggressive
animals.
8. Grand Jury Finding - Water hoses seen running resulting
in wasted water.
Dr. Hawkins said they can't use hose nozzles because those aerosolize
bacteria so they have reduced water flow/pressure in the hoses.
9. Grand Jury Finding - Limited airflow and no air
conditioning in the cat trailers. The conditions in these trailers increase the
vulnerability to disease.
Dr. Hawkins said the cat isolation room was really a challenge but she
said that room has 100% air exchange in there now and the windows now actually
open to get fresh air. In answer to a question from Mayor Kogerman, Dr. Hawkins
stated that this trailer was refurbished about 2 months ago but not replaced.
In response to another question from Mayor Kogerman Dr. Hawkins admitted that
they have not yet seen a drop in the disease rate there, but she believes stress
for cats is a significant contributor to that disease problem.
10. Grand Jury Finding - There is a rodent infestation
creating additional risk of humans and animals contracting zoonotic diseases.
Dr. Hawkins said their location subjects them to an increased rodent
problem but they have a monthly contract with an exterminator and their 3
resident feral cats are assisting them as well.
An additional important Grand Jury Finding is - Multiple county
animal shelters are the standard throughout California counties of similar
geographic size and population. In the event of a shutdown at the OC Animal
Shelter because of quarantine, earthquake or other disaster, animal care
services in the unincorporated areas of OC and the contract cities would cease.
- The Counties written response to this is that they are actively
pursuing regional adoption centers that would be able to assist OC Animal Care
it the shelter is damaged in a disaster.
QUESTIONS from the Laguna Hills City Council Members
Mayor Barbara Kogerman noted that according to the
County's Performance Audit of the County Shelter, the shelter staff morale
problems were not related to members of the public and that sort of thing but to
problems with not being well trained, lack of communication with staff and staff
shortages. 50% of the staff rated the problem as number 1 on a scale of 10
related to staff satisfaction.
Dr. Hawkins responded that one of the Performance
Audit Recommendations was having a survey and they are doing that right now to
determine the engagement of the staff members. She said most of them were very
loyal to the program and they they have increased communication through giving
"All Hands Meetings" multiple times a year, staff indicates that things are
improving because they are hiring more people now, etc.
Mayor Barbara Kogerman mentioned the challenges of
finding resources noting that Don White, Assistant City Manager of Laguna Hills,
is on the Financial Operational Advisory Board (FOAB) to the County Shelter.
She noted that the staff shortage was an FOAB issue as was the action on feral
cats related to a limitation of staffing, etc. It seems that the FOAB is not
approving what you are asking for, and may have asked for earlier, to make some
changes. That's 18 cities who are contracting with the shelter. Is there
anything that's going to change the influence of the FOAB if they are
consistently voting against providing more resources for you to bring your staff
up to standards and so forth?
Dr. Hawkins responded The FOAB certainly has
concerns about what their cities are paying for. She said she believes they care
about the animals but also have to be responsive to their constituents. **We have learned that the FOAB is not directly
accountable to the public at all. They don't keep minutes of their meetings and
don't allow the public to attend their meetings. 6 members of the FOAB are
appointed by the OC City Manager's Association and the 7th member is appointed
by the County and they are accountable to the OC City Manager's Association.-
See below:
Definition of the Financial Operational Advisory Board from the
City of La Palma's contract with the Orange County Shelter
IV. Financial/Operational Advisory Board - The parties agree that there shall be a Financial/Operational Advisory
Board to advise COUNTY's Director of OC Animal Care on financial and operational
matters, to assess cost options, and to communicate with the Orange County City
Managers Association. The Financial/Operational Advisory Board shall be made
up of seven (7) members, six (6) members appointed by the Orange County City
Managers Association and one (1) member appointed by COUNTY. COUNTY may change
the membership configuration of the Financial/Operation Advisory Board upon
twelve (12) months written notification to CITY.
Dr Hawkins Continued - stating that they
try to engender more participation from the FOAB creatively through trying to
make sure the FOAB understands their needs. She said, recently they
have reporting to the FOAB regularly about what their needs are and the changes
they are making. She added that she thinks some of their (the FOAB
member's) jaws may be dropping related to what we are putting in our budget. We
have conveyed to them that these aren't things we're going to be asking their
permission for but more to advise them that this is coming. These are going to
be outside of the previously proposed budget. There are other things they want
to bounce around with the FOAB but as far as our actual needs we do our best to
convey to them that these are costs that need to be addressed. There are not
always happy with everything we are implementing.
Mayor Kogerman inquired - So the chain of Command
is essentially that it goes from you to the FOAB, they make a recommendation and
then it goes to the County Supervisors and they say the ultimate yes or no?
Dr Hawkins - That would depend on what we're
talking about such a bringing an behaviorist on board or something like that and
we think it's going cost this much money we let the cities know what it's
expected to cost. If it's a contract with cities that is above a threshold
that requires us to go to the Board to ask permission from the board then we do
that. Some things like maintenance that is required for animal care, such as the
cat isolation trailer refurbishment, we don't have to go to the board for that.
Mayor Kogerman - A concern is that, so far, there
has been no change in that structure that approves and recommends budget
requests and I'd like to see that because it seems like you have to beg and
don't always get the things that you need. I don't see that as an
ideal situation.
Dr Hawkins - addressed the 2015 County
Performance of the Orange County Animal Shelter by saying that she would
address any particular questions about that report but the report is largely
about metrics so she didn't want to bore the council with
34 recommendations.
** The Performance Audit of
Orange County Animal Care done by Philip Cheng, the Orange County Performance
Audit Director - Final Report on March 24, 2015 is a 108 page Document with
34 recommendations regarding problems at the County Shelter so we hope
that is not "boring" to the Shelter Director or to the cities that offer County
Shelter Services as the only option for their residents. This
audit states that Dr. Hawkins was appointed Interim
Director for the County Animal Shelter in November of 2014, yet this
Performance Audit, whose final report was dated March 24, 2015 noted many
serious problems and some particularly horrendous problems such as the one
on page 94 of the report (that was not mentioned in the
printed text of this report that was included in the Laguna Hills Staff Report
for the 1-12-16 LHCC Meeting) stating that the County
did not identify or weigh animals before euthanizing them and did not verify
death post euthanasia. This goes way beyond even deviant problems with
procedure, this is something so far beyond acceptable practices that it may or
may not be technically criminal but is certainly criminal related in the eyes
of all residents who care about how their pets are treated.
Mayor Pro-Tem Don Sedgwick asked Dr. Hawkins - How
long have you been with the Orange County Animal Shelter?
Dr. Hawkins answered I've been here a cumulative of
about 10 or 11 years. She said she had a stint here from 2001 to
2004 then returned back to general practice from 2004 to 2008 then has been here
at the County Shelter ever since. She added she was hired as
Interim Director in November of 2014 and hired full time as the Director in
April of 2015.
Mayor Pro-Tem Don Sedgewick asked, So putting aside
the Grand Jury Report what do you think needs to be improved and what do you
need to do to do it?
Dr. Hawkins - A great deal needs to be improved at
this facility but a lot of people want to focus on
euthanasia but "outsiders" don't understand that we euthanize animals
only for medical conditions or temperament challenges that are public safety
risks. She added that they weren't euthanizing animals for space or anything
else or any other reasons. *** This statement about euthanizing
pets only for medical or temperament is NOT CORRECT
according to the shelters own publication of it's yearly statistics.
In the year 2012, the County
Animal Shelter finally acknowledged that they do euthanize pets for
"TIME, SPACE" and "TOO YOUNG" and they
published the numbers for these in their own statistics under
Euthanasia by Reason. In LAGUNA HILLS in 2012 they acknowledged 1 cat killed for
Time and 22 kittens killed for Too Young. In
LAKE FOREST in 2012 they acknowledged 1 dog killed for Space and 3 cats
killed for Time, plus 31 kittens killed for Too Young. In larger cities, such as Garden Grove, the County Shelter acknowledged
that there were 10 dogs killed for Time/Space, plus 1 cat and 2 dogs
killed for Time and 2 dogs killed for Space plus 512 kittens
killed for Too Young. In 2013, without any explanation, the
County Shelter eliminated the categories of Euthanasia for Time and Space from
their published stats but continued to publish stats under Euthansia for "Too
Young".
Mayor Pro-Tem Don Sedgewick then asked if education
to the community was important.
Dr. Hawkins - responded education about what we do
and how to take better care of the animals and prevent them from entering the
system. Many people like to focus on how we can get as many out as possible and
it's good to get them adopted, but the way to decrease euthanasias is to reduce
the number of animals that enter the system in the first place. Also
improving accessibility to spay and neuter because animals that aren't spayed or
neutered are at higher rick of entering shelters. ** Dr Hawkins did not mention any specific examples of education
that they actually are doing in the community and where or how
often.
Mayor Pro-Tem Don Sedgewick asked - What changes
would you like to see and what type of budget increase is necessary, in your
opinion, to bring the shelter up to the standard where you think it needs to
be?
Dr. Hawkins - It's hard to postulate how much that would
be. We need to know what our staffing needs are, through using a consultant, to
get the job done. We'll need more staffing for a larger shelter and so forth.
Mayor Pro-Tem Don Sedgewick said - It seems that a 20% vacancy would require a
significant budget increase to bring that up to full staff.
Dr. Hawkins said "Absolutely", if we're
fully staff is that going to be enough be enough or do we need more than 140
positions. I think we need to fill the positions before we determine if we'll
need more. She added that if she could win the lottery and have her full staff
and have all of those budgetary items fulfilled they would have a successful
program.
Mayor Barbara Kogerman asked - Are you ramping up the
hiring now in anticipation of the new shelter?
Dr. Hawkins - We're ramping up now to t the very least
fill in this vacancy rate, but yes that's part of my interaction with the
consultant. What are our current needs and what do we need to be prepared
for that move.
Mayor Pro-Tem Don Sedgewickedgewick said You're
going in the right direction and I applaud you for it but asked if our current
cost would be expected to be increased if you achieve the level of staffing or
would that be done within the current budget restraints?
Dr. Hawkins - If we're able to get other communities to
help with the income or we spend more money in one area it's more of a balance
between where the money is spent rather than is more spent. It is yet to be
determined with maximizing those community outreach services and if they're able
to succeed in realizing decreased impounds we may need less care for animals in
our shelter if we make sure the community is getting the services they need.
Council Member Carruth asked - Why would you not advocate
with the County Board of Supervisors for a county wide spay and neuter
program because if you have fewer animals you'd be better able to provide for
the animals that are there?
Dr. Hawkins - The answer is not that simple unfortunately
because making spay and neuter mandatory doesn't insure that people will spay
and neuter. If the can't afford it they won't do it or they may stop licensing
their pets and there's also the cost of enforcement. She said there are many
questions related to people having access to spay and neuter in underserved
areas. She added that she used to work with a small animal veterinary care
practice in Laguna Hills and pet owners are great here but not all other areas
are so lucky.
Mayor Barbara Kogerman asked about Recommendations
2, 3 and 4 from the 34 recommendations from:
The Performance Audit of Orange
County Animal Care done by Philip Cheng, the Orange County Performance Audit
Director - Final report on March 24, 2015
Recommendation 2 is - OC
Animal Care management should periodically review kennel staffing levels and
schedules to ensure that it meets industry standards.
** This audit also stated that the County
Shelter's staffing was 44% below minimum
standards and that due to
capacity and staffing constraints animals brought to be surrendered by their
owners had to be turned away. It went on to state that the
shelter did not track the number of days that owners had to be turned away
but there were 97 out of 353 non holidays in 2013 when no animals were
surrendered to the OC Animal Shelter.(**The City staff
report left out this piece of information)
Dr. Hawkins responded - Recruitments are ongoing for Kennel attendants
levels 1 and 2 as well as for Vet Services staff members and we have 8 "extra
help" kennel attendants right now. We are looking to satisfy the kennel staffing
challenges and as I work with that consultant to get long term staffing
recommendations. She said that their incomes keep
going down but our population doesn't so we're looking at this down the road so our shelter
won't be over or under-booked or out of date within months of moving into
it.
Mayor Kogerman - How far
are you away from achieving industry staffing standards right now?
Dr. Hawkins - Industry standards are basically 15 min. per cage for each staff
member so would have to count numbers of animals we have now vs. staff members.
She said they have a low count of animals right now, only 125 dogs today and she
doesn't know how many cats but would say they are "approaching it" related to
staff levels. Have an average of about 18 kennel attendants right now and spread
over 7 days a week could probably could use about 22 or 23.
Mayor Kogerman - How long is the training period for one of
them?
Dr. Hawkins - Training period isn't terribly long - they have
to learn all the policies and procedures and the computer program so it's a
couple of weeks, not 6 months like it is for an Animal Control Officer.
Mayor Kogerman - If there's a shortage and you have volunteers
to do some of that work I understand the Employee's Union might prohibit
that. Is that still the case?
Dr. Hawkins said - Yes, that's right. That's still the case
and might not always be the case but it's something that needs to be evaluated.
Mayor Kogerman - Recommendation 8 - Animal Care management
should establish a policy to allow the public to begin the process of adopting
an animal prior to that animal being spayed or neutered. How are you doing on that policy?
Dr.Hawkins - Sometimes when we have a higher volume of
animals and we need to mover them out of our system and not make them wait an
extended period of time for a spay or neuter, such as in the summer, animals are
made available prior to being neutered or spayed. At times like now, when we
have fewer animals there aren't many spays and neuters to do. So we weigh each
day to see where we are and make a determination.
Mayor Kogerman - The recommended policy is to allow someone to
begin the process of adoption prior to neuter or spay so they are reserving that
animal and can be notified when it is ready to be picked up. Are you dog that
yet.
Dr. Hawkins - Not yet because that would mean a person going
home and coming back rather than adopting the animal and taking it home the same
day. As soon as an animal becomes available it will show on their web site and
we tell people that they should come the following day to adopt it. She said
they used to have that process but it was a problem because people would put
them on hold and then not take them, so that involved holding those animals for
a longer period of time.
Mayor Kogerman - Recommendation 14 - OC animal Care
management should develop approaches to enhance the cost effectiveness of the
canvassing program by utilizing Chameleon (an animal shelter computer
system). She noted that the canvassing done now by the County Shelter has about an
80% not home rate. Have there been any improvements in the process of
canvassing? How much canvassing do you do per year for each of the cities?
Dr. Hawkins - Don't have the average numbers but the schedule
is Monday though Saturday. No Sunday canvassing related to negative responses on
family days. Have seen an increased response to canvassing and are using
Chameleon Data Base 2 to access the information they get in the field.
Mayor Kogerman - There is data base issue with employees trained
on a data base that is a more suitable to animal shelter operations vs ones
that aren't quite as suitable related to canvassing and all sots of things
tracking the animals. Has that training improved?
Dr. Hawkins - We can't spare one person dedicated to do all
the training but have employees experts on Chameleon and they do training for
the staff.
Mayor Kogerman - When there is a shortage and you have certain
tasks you have to perform volunteers can't always perform those tasks because of
an MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) Is that being considered for a change
to provide more flexibility?
Dr. Hawkins - Not at this time.
Mayor Kogerman - Recommendations 11 + 14 through 21 of this
County Audit all addressing financing and problems with canvassing related to
cities not paying their share, when licensing hasn't been collected and it's in
arrears. I understand you recently forgave a large amount of money for
various cities for arrears they'd otherwise have had to pay?
Dr. Hawkins said No one's been forgiven for moneys in
arrears
Steve Franks, Director of Orange County Community Resources, interrupted to answer this question. Franks
said - The County Shelter moved from a
modified accrual basis to cash basis with respect to their collections and said
that when revenues were billed out and not collected and went through
collections processes some had to be eventually written off as bad debt and
that's what has been written off, however we are moving to a cash basis as of
Jan. 1 through an agreement with the cities so now we're recording revenue when
it comes in as cash. We are aggressively pursuing some of the bad debt so some
of it is written off and some is pursued through alternate means.
Mayor Kogerman - There's a low percentage on recovery of the bad
debts, so could we expect to get a surprise saying there's some large amount of
bad debt money that we'd have to pay or something like that?
Steve Franks - said No, we advised the cities of the
amount of bad debt that was pending and we collect on average, 95% of the bills
we send out, on a regular basis, but there's 5% that aren't coming in and that
is bad debt and that eventually has to be covered by other revenue sources.
Mayor Kogerman - Your new accounting system would create less of a surprise for a city?
Steve Franks - Yes there would be less of a surprise but less revenue in
hand at the time, because we won't be recording revenue that we have not yet
received.
** The Performance Audit of Orange County
Animal Care has an answer, from the County Shelter, to it's Recommendation # 20
stating that in FY 2015-16 a total of $450K of uncollected revenue will be
written off.
Mayor Kogerman - Next
question is about Recommendation # 29 - OC
Animal Care Management should establish regular training sessions on it's
enterprise software systems for all relevant employees, including all management
and administrative staff. The County Shelter's answer to this recommendation was
that this is pending the filling of key staff positions. So have
those positions been filled?
Dr. Hawkins - Some of those positions have been filled
and our training has increased exponentially. Previously staff that got training
intermittently, now half of the staff gets training in the morning and half gets
training in the afternoon once a week.
Mayor Kogerman - Questions remain regarding all of these
responses that it seems that the staffing shortages and not getting an adequate
response from the OCAC and everything being brought up to industry standards and
what's it going to cost. etc. Any ballpark cost ideas on what it's going to cost
and what we're spending now at OCAC (Orange County Animal Care)?
Steve Franks answered - What they are trying to do is
bring a consultant on board to help with staffing here and with the new shelter
so some issues are still pending. He said they do keep in mind that the contract
cities pay in the 90 to 95 % range so he believes in the cities' decision making
process to the extent that those share holders express concerns regarding their
financing. He tries to be duly respectful, but at the same time, there is
a certain standard that needs to be met, to raise that bar, and that is costing
the cities more money so we are advising them of certain things we do and other
things we are asking them for, but not trying to throw the bill at them all at
once.
Mayor Kogerman - Has there been any mind set change at
all that you can detect regarding being more willing to pay what it takes to
bring up the standard?
Steve Franks- I think the city partners have been very
willing to listen to what we have to say.
Mayor Kogerman - Willing to listen, okay. There are a
couple of Advisory Committees - The one we've been talking about is the FOAB
- Financial Operational Advisory Board. Is the ACOC - Animal Care Outreach
Committee still in effect?
Dr. Hawkins - answered that the ACOC is still in
effect.
Mayor Kogerman - There was another Advisory committee
that was disbanded. Is that still disbanded.
Dr. Hawkins said she believes that one morphed into the
Community Outreach Group - the ACCOC.*** RED FLAG ON THIS PLAY - The previous group
DOES NOT STILL EXIST TODAY related to the fact that it was a VOLUNTEER group of OC residents who were interested
in the quality of service for residents and pets from the OC Animal Shelter. That group was disbanded by a former Shelter Director who said it was "too
contentious." Only 2 Groups exist now and both of those
groups consist of all APPOINTED
members. The ACCOC (Animal Care Outreach Community) consists of 5 members who
are APPOINTED by the 5 County Supervisorial Districts and the FOAB (Financial
Operational Advisory Board) consists of 7 members (6 members APPOINTED but the
Orange county City Manager's Association and 1 member from the County.
Mayor Kogerman- There's a question about the
accuracy of the euthanasia numbers from OCAC resulting from OCAC including
animals that were admitted as already deceased being used as part of the number
of live animals from which the number of euthanized animals is subtracted. If
you take those numbers of previously deceased animals out of the equation the
percentages of euthanized animals stated here as 28% euthanized would
increase to 35% euthanized, so it would be more accurate to remove the already
deceased animals from the original total number of animals admitted to the
shelter when calculating the numbers of animals euthanized. So, do you still
count the numbers of animals that are already deceased upon admission in the
original numbers from which the euthanized animals are subtracted?
Dr. Hawkins - answered, Unfortunately
that is an artifact of the system. Hawkins agreed that only the number of live
animals should be counted but said that years ago the numbers of deceased
animals were included in that grid so the percentage of animals euthanized does
increase when the numbers of animals that were dead on admission are
subtracted. She added that in 2014 the numbers of animals
euthanized were reported to be 9% for dogs but if the already dead on admit
dogs and the owner requested euthansias for dogs the numbers of animals were
removed from that count the rate of euthanasia for dogs would have increased to
10.8%.
*** We know this can be confusing, and it's also NOT HONEST related to accurate comparisons with
euthanasia rates of other animal shelters that work so hard to actually save
more live animals and keep accurate euthanasia rates that are consistantly low.
Euhansia rates of animal shelters are kept to provide accurate information
related to how many live animals were saved and adopted out vs. how many live
animals were euthanized at any given animal shelter. Including animals that
were already dead on admission in the count serves no purpose other than to
artificially decrease the reported euthanasia rate of an animal shelter.
Please see our
example below for a clarification of this problem:
EXAMPLE:
100 animals were admitted to a shelter in one week but 25 of
those animals were already dead when they got to the shelter. In that same week
10 animals were euthanized at the shelter.
So, if you combine the numbers of already dead animals
plus live animals admitted you have:
100 animals admitted - 75 were live animals and 25 were
already dead
10 animals euthanized
so, it would appear that 10% of the shelter animals were
euthanized in one week
***but this is NOT
correct and Not honest, because 25 of
the original animals admitted were already dead when admitted to the shelter, so
could not be saved and adopted out or euthanized, and therefore could not be
honestly or accurately counted as "live animals that were not euthanized".
If a shelter wants to report accurate euthansia rates it would
subtract the 25 animals that were already dead on admit from the 100 animals
admitted then the correct number of live animals admitted would be:
75 live animals were admitted
10 live animals were euthanized
and the correct % of animals euthanized is
actually 13.33%
Mayor Kogerman- I understand if you are
bringing an older dog and just can't care for it anymore that the owners are
required to sign a form that agrees that the dog can be euthanized if
necessary. So the pet of everyone who signs that form is counted as owner
relinquished for euthanasia. Is that correct?
Dr. Hawkins - That is
not correct. If someone comes in for the sole purpose of requesting the service
of euthanasia they fill out a form saying that they want this animal euthanized
and they pay for that service. When anyone relinquishs an animal for the
purpose of adoption they sign a form stating that they are aware that any number
of things could happen if the animals condition declines or anything should
change and that it's possible that the animal could be
euthanized.
Mayor Kogerman - There are a lot of things
in the OC Auditor's Report's (**The audit report has 108
pages of concerns with 34 recommendations) plus there are two OC Grand
Jury Reports . The County Auditors report dated March of 2015, after you were
already there, has additional concerns. Recommendation #3
is - OC Animal Care should develop policies and procedures to allow for
scheduled owner surrenders to better manage shelter capacity. Are you working
on that?
Dr. Hawkins - we're working on that
through a divergence program we've implemented. We've joined with OC Shelter
501C3 partners who will collaborate with staff so that when a person comes to
the shelter to relinquish an animal, if they are willing to speak with one of
these partners, the partner could possibly address the issues a person is having
with a pet in the home in a effort to help remove existing barriers to allow
people to keep their animals. The partners can discuss Veterinary Services,
Training even construction issues related to building better fences, etc. We're
hoping to move towards having a managed intake where we can schedule
conversations with these people.
Mayor Kogerman - Also on euthanasia of
diseased animals there's a comment about a lot of animals coming in healthy and
then because of unhealthy conditions at the shelter, getting sick and there's a
real spike in euthanizations there. Do ppor conditions cause this, something
like when a patient goes into the hospital and gets sick? ** The County Audit states, that in 2014, 1,605 dogs and
cats were normal when they come to the shelter and later euthanized because of
medical conditions or contagious disease.
Dr. Hawkins - said
That's a challenge in shelter medicine overall. There's 2 parts to that, one is
accurately tracking the status of animals on arrival. The data on that is hard
to read. She added they are working on that. The other is that if
construction is happening at the shelter and other things can cause stress that
is especially a problem for cats. There are respiratory infections and many cats
have viruses already onboard and stress brings activates those viruses. Cats
don't do well in a shelter environment and they hope to improve the environment
in a new shelter.
Mayor Kogerman - There's a lot in the report
that requests needed help with tracking, statistics and requests for more
information to be part of the process, etc. Are you dealing with that as well?
Dr. Hawkins - The metrics of the
Chameleon system are challenging and the consultant says she can make
recommendations and says she can help implement those recommendations as
well.
Mayor Kogerman - On Field Services this
County Audit says there were 9 of 56 positions vacant and 8 of 31 Animal Control
Officers for a 26% vacancy. How are you doing on field service vacancies?
Dr. Hawkins - We just hired 12 new Animal
Control Officer Trainees. We had 8 new hires at the end of 2014, 4 or 5
throughout 2015 and at the end of 2015 another 12 (**that's
a total of 24 or 25 new hires for 56 vacant positions)
Mayor Kogerman- Regarding canvassing it
says here there is an average of 15,000 hours a year throughout the system for
canvassing(for 18 cities). Do you tend to focus on a few cities at a time and
it's based on a pro-rata thing, if we're 1.6 % of your budget does that mean we
get 1.6% of 15,000 hours or 240 hours a year? Do we pay for more if that seems
inadequate or how does that work?
Dr. Hawkins - said she'd have to look
directly at how much time is spent in each city and the revenues that are
generated from licensing from canvassing or other means for your City and what
gets credited back to your City.
Mayor Kogerman - In the past we have paid
for additional canvassing that was evidently not provided with our contract.
There's a lot on donations. Has that situation been changed, where someone
donates to the shelter and if it's not used by the end of the year it goes into
the General Fund. So you can't build up a Trust Fund - Has that situation
changed?
Dr. Hawkins - said It's improving, the
Auditor Controller's Office is allowing us to have an.... Steve Franks took over
and completed the answer to this question.
Steve Franks - At the end of
December the fund was actually established now so there is a separate donations
fund that exists and that we can track and that will carry over from year to
year.
Mayor Kogerman - There was a lot of
dissatisfaction with employee training but you feel that is vastly improve, is
that correct? And, you've reinstated the All Hands Meeings?
Dr. Hawkins - Correct.
Mayor Kogerman- thanked the Reps. from the
County Shelter and said the council now has to make a decision that they will
have to STICK WITH because we will be making a significant investment.
PUBLIC COMMENTS re. the Animal Shelter Issue
Fran Tardif, Laguna Hills - said she
believes the County Shelter is trying it's best to make positive changes and she
applauds their decreased euthanasia rate for the past few years, but they are
still a high kill shelter and that wil not change when they move to a better
facility. According to reports from our city the County Shelter kills about 32%
of our impounded animals. Almost half of those are cats and many of those are
killed because they are too young and without their mothers. Contrary to what
Dr. Hawkins has said imagine being too young to live. They aren't sick or
vicious, just too small and can't speak for themselves. We can speak for those
animals in better ways through good foster care, adoption programs, effective
spay and neuter programs,volunteer programs and donations for extended care. The
County has initiated some of these things, but these are programs that can be
beefed up in various ways. She said this takes work and the will to do it but
she knows there are people in this community that are willing to do that work.
Money is important, but not more important than the way we treat helpless,
innocent creatures who depend upon us for their lives. There's a new reality,
as more and more citizens are becoming aware of new standards of care they are
demanding more diligent and humane services for their cities. Laguna Beach is
an example and even Los Angeles is partnering with Best Friends Animal Society
to become a no kill city by 2017. If LA can do it why can't we attempt it?
This issue of improved animal treatment in our shelters is not likely to go
away. If not addressed now, I'm sure the city will be dealing with this down
the road. Circumstances have made this the right time to make a change. I'm
asking that all the council members keep an open mind and apply all your
leadership and creative activity to solve the turning point in favor of our
animals. The discussions with Mission Viejo are ongoing and I'm interested in
hearing about that and I hope that will work out. Also have you thought about the Irvine Animal Care Center and if you can explore that again?
Dr. Jim Gardner - said he is here just
as himself and not as a Council Member from Lake Forest. You are asking the
important question of what are you getting into so let me give you some ideas
about that. Orange County was recently sued by Sharon
Logan. They reached an agreement with her. She didn't go after any money but
subsequent to that they documented 2 cases of continued violation of the law. The only reason they haven't filed on that is they are waiting for 4 so they can
have a major punitive lawsuit against the County for continuing to violate
euthanasia procedures. So that's something you'll be getting into. I'm so happy
to hear Dr. Hawkins now saying that it's not right to include dead animals in
their intake as admissions. Only 5 months ago she was arguing with me that is
was okay. She says now (about their euthanasia rate that) the difference is 9.6
vs 10 and not that's not the real difference. The real difference is 9.6 vs
22.6, almost 3 times the difference. I've challenged Mr. Franks to dispute my
information. This has been going on for 6 weeks and he hasn't had the courtesy
of getting back to me with the challenging numbers although he keeps promising
that. The figures they're giving you for euthanasia are not true. The figures
they're giving you for compliance aren't true. When they compute the licensing
on compliance they use 2010 population data instead of 2014 population
data. This make thier licensing compliance looks like it's 52% in fact
it's 43%, about a 20% difference. So they're not complying as they'd
like you to believe but they are killing more than they'd like you to believe.
Their web site tells you that the data on rescues is that they've rescued 1,924
animals in 2014 but the Audit says it's 2,420. That's a 25% difference between
what their web site is telling you and what their audit is telling you. I'm
running out of time but I could spend as much time as they spent telling you all
the good things they plan to do, telling you as many things that they are doing
badly including killing 1000 puppies and kittens. It's a failed agency and the
fact that they are still considering building only a single shelter. It is
unknown throughout the entire country that anybody would consider building one
shelter like that instead of smaller shelters. This give you some idea of what a
failed agency it is.
** The 2015 OC Grand Jury Report
entitled "The Orange County Animal Shelter: The Facility, The Function, The
Future" states in it's Finding # F.4 - "Multiple county animal shelters are the
standard throughout California counties of similar geographic size and
population. In the event of shutdown at the OC Animal Shelter because of a
quarantine, earthquake or other disaster, animal care services in the
unincorporated areas of Orange county and the contract cities would cease."
Jean Bland,
Laguna Hills - I have questions
tonight, but first I want to say to Don White (Assistant City Manager) that I
found this report this year to be a balanced one. That's great, we've come a
long way from 2005 and I appreciate that. Also Channing, (City Manager) I found
your message to Mission Viejo to be very polite, we've come a long way too and I
really appreciate that. The Performance Audit of Orange County Animal
Care done by Philip Cheng, the Orange County Performance Audit Director - Final
Report on March 24, 2015 said that the County Shelter did not identify,
or weigh the animals before euthanizing them and did not verify death post
euthansia. It's very important to weight animals before euthanizing them so you
can know how much of the euthanization solution to give them and is important to
check to make sure they're dead. So that a horror to think about and maybe they
could explain that for us? Re. the 2 Advisory Committees, (to the County
Shelter) the ACCOC (Animal Care Community Outreach) and the FOAB (Financial
Operational Advisory Board) that Don White (LH Assistant City Manager) has been
a part of for at least 7 years both consist of APPOINTED Members so I'm
wondering why there is no volunteer group of people not appointed by districts
or the County that may be more interested in Quality of Care and it appears that is badly needed. (The ACCOC (Animal Care Community Outreach) consists of 5 members who
are APPOINTED by the 5 County Supervisorial Districts and the FOAB (Financial
Operational Advisory Board) consists of 7 members (6 members APPOINTED but the
Orange county City Manager's Association and 1 member from the
County.)
Also the Performance Audit done by the County noted that the
County Shelter was 44% below industry standards related to staffing. The
Performance Report made it clear that so many of the County's problems
were symptomatic of a lack of funding. So if you want to consider only the
cheapest service available, we are seeing a really good example of that here
with this shelter. There were 108 pages in this County Audit of the Shelter
related to how bad off this shelter is and basically most of them were related
to lack of funding. Also, Related to the cost for the new county shelter there
were a lot of different buy in costs given for Laguna Hills over the past months
from $249,000 to $185,000 so I don't really know what the cost is going to be
for Laguna Hills to buy into a new County Shelter. Also the Staff Report
references an "indemnification clause" from the Mission Viejo Animal Shelter's
contract with it's cities. We've been guessing about that one since 2005
related to whether Mission Viejo's contract for indemnification was the same at
the County Shelter's, and it sure looked that way to us. So since we've been
thinking about that for 10 years, why not ask Greg (Laguna Hills City
Attorney)? We all trust Greg no matter what side we're on so why not ask
him?
Mayor Kogerman - We'll defer that
until we get to that item on the agenda re. the Mission Viejo Animal Shelter.
Rose Tingle - The
Financial Operational Advisory Board (FOAB) meets monthly at the county
shelter and has been doing that for as long as I can remember. This committee
does not take minutes and the public is not allowed to attend their meetings so
I'm asking you tonight to please make a motion to allow the public to attend
these meetings, so the public doesn't have to wait years for an Orange County
Grand Jury Report to come out to learn about all the problems at the County
Shelter. Also, I believe it was Council Member Carruth who mentioned
the mandatory spay and neuter. The Performance Audit Report done by the County
recommended mandator spay and neuter for the cats and the Orange County Board of
Supervisors said no. Question re. something Steve Franks said last year that the
county was going to issue an RFP or FOAB or ? to possibly create adoption
centers in North and South County, but did not hear any reference to that in
their presentation tonight.
Mayor Kogerman - Laguna Woods Can't
pass a motion tonight on your suggestion (because the suggestion was not
agendized) but we do hear what you have to say.
Rose Tingle - what do I have to do to make that
happen?
Kogerman - the motion you asked for was regarding the FOAB. We can make
that recommendation to Don White (Assist. City Manager) and find a way to act on
that.
April Josephson - Rancho Santa
Margarita and has a pet adoption center located in Laguna Hills.
April said she is the 5th District Representative to the
Orange County Outreach Committee and became active with the others that have
just spoken more than 10 years ago with trying to form a Regional Shelter that
we hoped to have had at that time. Then I found out that this position existed
and I applied and Supervisor Bates appointed me and I am now Supervisor
Bartlett's appointee to animal care and I currently chair the
committee. So we have a meeting on the 27th and while we do provide input
from the community, I provide a lot of input from the rescue community as well
so I am a public representative but I am appointed by the Board of Supervisors
so I just want to put clarify that.
ANIMAL CARE SERVICES UPDATE - EVALUATION OF INITIAL
RESPONSE FROM THE CITY OF MISSION VIEJO
Don White, Assistant City Manager of Laguna
Hills said last staff report was on Oct. 27 and it was becoming
clear that time that the County of Orange had accelerated their schedule to
build a new shelter. (after 74 years and multiple scathing reports by OC Grand
Juries plus 2 additional Grand Jury reports in 2015 and the County Auditor's
report in 2015 that all noted many long term significant
problems with the current county animal shelter.) We heard directly from the County tonight and I can tell you
that a new shelter is a real thing not a myth. It's going to happen soon. The
reason for that report on Oct. 27 was to give you the opportunity to look at
alternatives. There was some doubt related to the County being serious about
the shelter, we've put that to bed. In Oct. you directed us to make an initial
inquiry with the City of Mission Viejo, which we did. We're very appreciative
of the staff at Mission Viejo who provided a thorough response. A copy of our
letter to them from LH City Manager Channing is in the Staff Report as is
the thorough response from Mission Viejo to the 9 questions we asked. The info.
we needed to provide an preliminary evaluation the cost and issues involved if
we went with the Mission Viejo Animal Shelter as opposed to staying with the
county. There's no question that Mission Viejo is a Very Fine Animal Service
Provider and they have a long history of doing that. In their proposal to us
they are saying that absorbing another city into their system is an opportunity
for them to add a midnight shift, which they currently do not have. They
operate with 5 Field ACOs (Animal Control Officers) now so they would add 2
additional ACOs which included expanding some of the facilities at the shelter.
So we looked at what the cost would be if Mission Viejo were to contract with
both Laguna Hills and Rancho Santa Margarita at the same time starting July 1,
and in doing that perhaps could achieve economies of scale that would reduce the
cost to us and to Rancho Santa Margarita (RSM). Tonight we want you to defer
any decision until staff has the opportunity to see if we could achieve this
economy of scale with Mission Viejo. We have had discussions with RSM as well.
We've been told that Mission Viejo is working on this now.
Don White, Assist. City Manager continued -
In looking at Mission Viejo's proposal, we did an analysis from their numbers so
far and we know there is some confusion related to our shelter expense if we
stay with the county. Our Buy In Amount with the County Shelter is
$185,000. We've used larger numbers in the past, to be
conservative, but this is the number that the County has now published and
distributed to all of the contract cities based on a $30 million shelter with
the County kicking in $5 million and $25 million being divided among
the 18 currently contracted cities based on a 5 year average of
animal charge days.
***Don White is telling us here
that the final number for Laguna Hills' BUY IN AMOUNT for the County Shelter is
$185,000 but in the past we have been quoted many different "BUY IN" numbers by
the County ranging from $249,000 to $415,000 and tonight, this
is what
Steve Franks, the Director of Orange County Community Resources under which the
Animal Shelter services fall had to say about the confusion re. these
numbers: Steve Franks
said We are currently working on terms and conditions for
agreements and distribution of contract city maximum financial obligations and
participation agreements with the new shelter with the city negotiating
sub-committee (which includes Laguna Hills Assistant City Manager, Don
White) Intention is to have a final agreement with the cities in
January to share with city councils of contract cities
and those cities that have expressed interest in contracting with
us moving forward at a new shelter. The target date for
a commitment is April, 2016 of this year to allow for final design
work related to the size of the shelter needed for the number of cities that
will be contracting. **Related to this information that the
number of cities that are going to continue with the county animal shelter have
not yet been confirmed, therefore the amount of money that the City of Laguna
Hills will have to pay to the county for a new shelter, including the buy in
amount, has also not yet been confirmed.
Don White
continued that overall in projecting out over the next 5 years the
contract with Mission Viejo under a proposal that includes only Laguna Hills
joining the Mission Viejo Animal Shelter, without Rancho Santa Margarita also
joining is predicted to be $630,000 or ($120,000 per year) over the next 5
years.
**Don White's projection for
that amount may be significantly less if Rancho Santa Margarita joins the
Mission Viejo Animal Shelter at the the same time Laguna Hills joins and/or if
the annual amount for services from the new County Shelter is increased due to
the significant amounts of increased staffing required by the County Shelter
(see above) as well as other increases needed to maintain the new shelter
properly to prevent the chronic underfunding problems that have resulted in the
severe lack of maintenance that has plagued the current county shelter for so
many years.
Don White continued - There were 3 other areas of concern that are
not insurmountable One is revenue generation related
to the Mission Viejo Shelter charging substantially less for licensing of dogs
that the County Shelter does. If Mission Viejo decided to raise their fees for
licensing and their city council agreed and their partner cities agreed this
might be possible. Another concern is that Mission Viejo does not canvas
neighborhoods to check for up to date dog licensing, so this could result in a
drop in license compliance overtime. (Please see above
related to questioning of Dr. Hawkins, DVM, County Shelter Director related
to the amount of canvassing done by the county. When Laguna Hills used the
amount of canvassing contractually provided by the county it was too little to
make a difference so Laguna Hills had to pay significantly more for canvassing
that actually produced an increase in the license compliance rates. It is also
not mentioned here that the Mission Viejo Shelter believes that providing lower
rates for licensing fees and more as well as better services for residents
encourages residents to license their pets. They stay with that system because
they say it has worked very well for them for many
years.)
Don White continues
re. indemnification. He said the County indemnification is
blanket but Mission Viejo's is limited related to one 5 word phrase "anything
related to animal control" that is missing from Mission Viejo's contract.
He Added that it's possible that this could subject Laguna Hills to some
problems with law suite but admitted that neither of Mission Viejo's partner
cities, Laguna Niguel or Aliso Viejo have ever had problems related to this.
** 10
years ago we examined the contract language between Mission Viejo and their
partner cities and found the language related to indemnification to be exactly
the same as the language in Laguna Hills Contract with the County. However, at
that time, Laguna Hills told us that regarding indemnification that there were
"unknown risks" for Laguna Hillls with Mission Viejo but never could explain
what those risks were. Now, after 10 years Laguna Hills was able to give us the
5 words they say are missing from the Mission Viejo contract related to
indemnity which are "anything related to animal
control" so I asked the Laguna Hills City Attorney for his input
during this meeting and it appears that these words may make some difference but
the Laguna Hills City Attorney added that he'd have to research this to be
sure.
Don White continued that the other issue is equestrian related to
Mission Viejo Animal Shelter not being able to house large animals. He added he
has talked with the County and doesn't see this as an insurmountable issue. ** Approximately 2 years ago, we spoke
with a city representative from Laguna Beach Animal Shelter about this problem
and were told they maintain a contract with the County related to housing large
animals, including horses, as needed, from their community and they have found
this to work well for them. We suggested that Laguna Hills contact Laguna Beach
for more information.
Mayor Pro-Tem Don Sedgewick - Asked if Mission Viejo's facilities
were large enough to accommodate one and maybe two more cities with significant
expense to building a larger facility etc.
Don White answered - He thinks they do have
the shelter capacity. He added that Laguna Hills has low utilization related to
shelter days. Mission Viejo looked at a 3 year record of Laguna Hills shelter
days at the County shelter and responded that they do have the capacity needed
for our animals. Don added that Rancho Santa Margarita uses fewer shelter days
at the County Shelter than Laguna Hills uses.
** We just visited the Mission Viejo
Animal Shelter a week ago and they had only 4 dogs. We have noted over recent
years that Mission Viejo Shelter often takes dogs from bad shelters and taked
care of them, as needed, through the donations raised by their DAWG group
and finds good homes to adopt them through the Mission Viejo Shelter.
Mayor Kogerman - Asked if the Orange County
Animal Shelter that's being proposed is actually smaller than the Mission Viejo
Animal Shelter.
Don White responded that the county
Shelter will be significantly larger.
Council Mamber Carruth asked Would Mission Viejo
entertain the possibility of a split billing so that Laguna Hills
residents could be charged $27 rather than $20 for a dog license, which is the
same that they pay now to the County. she also asked if Mission Viejo would
allow it's partner cities to have a greater part in decision making about
shelter expenses such as capital improvement projects.
Don White - Answered No to a split
billing because he believes it would be a billing nightmare for them. He also
answered No to more input into shelter management from partner cities
because Mission Viejo has done such a great job in managing and maintain their
shelter and see it at belonging to them. He added that he doesn't blame them and
thinks they have done a responsible job in managing their costs over the years.
He added we would have a one time buy in fee now but would not expect expensive
surprises in the future.
**Neither do we blame them after what we
have learned over so many years about how the input from partner cities as well
as the County Supervisors has so negatively effected the
County shelter.
PUBLIC COMMENTS -
Jean Bland - Re. the indemnification issue, can we ask Greg
(Laguna HIlls City Attorney) about that, because we all trust Greg no matter
what side we're on re. any issue.
Mayor Kogerman asked the City Attorney, Greg Simonian if he could
respond to this.
City Attorney Greg Simonian answered
the issue has not been referred to my office for a legal review, having said
that however, I have reviewed the staff report and in preparation for tonight's
meeting and I did read the discussion in the staff report regarding this issue
and based on the information contained in the staff report I can safely say that
the two indemnification provisions are not the same, they are written
differently, and it would appear that Mission Viejo provides somewhat more
limited indemnity language, whereas the County appears to be providing more
broad indemnification favorable to cities. To confirm this I'd have to do
additional research but that's my initial review.
Jean Bland - Then my next question would be to ask Mission
Viejo if they might add that key indemnification phrase.
Don White said they asked Mission Viejo and they had provided
a response that they are happy with their indemnification language.
Mayor Kogerman asked if he other two cities, Aliso Viejo and Laguna
Niguel who contract with Mission Viejo have had any problems with Mission
Viejo's indemnification language.
Don White answered they signed off on it.
Jean Bland - The last time we were looking for animal shelters
a couple of years ago Laguna Beach told us that they have a separate contract
with the county shelter for large animals only so that's not been a problem for
them. I notice that the people from the Animal Shelter are gone but I wanted to
know what experience has the consultant that the OC Shelter hired had and what
experience has Dr. Hawkins had in turning significantly problematic animal
shelters like the county shelter around? That question has not yet been
answered by anyone, as far as I know. Dr. Hawkins said tonight that she'd been
at the County shelter on and off for 8 years but I think it's important to know
if you are hiring someone to do her job in a shelter like that that they
have significant experience turning around a shelter that's in such bad
shape.
Mayor Kogerman asked if there is any information on that issue.
Don White responded that the
consultant that the county is planning on bringing on board next month probably
would be considered the foremost person in the State of CA. to do such a thing.
We can make that experience public once it's approved.
Mike Bland thanked the counsel and
staff members. He said he remembered years ago when Mission Viejo did their
presentation, the existing council with the exception of Ms. Carruth, were
extremely nasty to Mission Viejo. It's fantastic that the attitude has changed
now. The other thing is that it's not just about money. We know
what Mission Viejo does. they do an excellent job! We've been with them for 20
plus years and have volunteered over there. We've adopted more dogs than
probably we should have but they do an excellent job. There are some concerns
that Mr. White has brought up and they need to be examined but re. the County,
how many times have we had Grand Jury Reports now about them plus the Audit.
It's terrible! To me, even if the build a new facility I'm not sure about who's
going to run that or if it will ever be any better whereas Mission Viejo is top
of the line. It will cost us more and it would be great if we could keep
the higher license fees because that would help offset some of the cost but
$630,000 over 5 years is a lot of money but if you stay with the county things
don't get better we're gonna come back and remind you that you should have gone
with Mission Viejo.
April Josephson said she is here now as the founder of the
non-profit pet rescue adoption center of Orange County and she added that she is
an attorney specializing in animal law. She thanked the City for granting her
conditional use permit for and said she will be having regular hours for pet
adoption shortly but she wants to address some policy issues that she hopes the
city will consider when you look at Mission Viejo. Mission has a better
facility and it's closer and we'd all would love to be at Mission Viejo
but their animal control and animal ordinances are theirs and when you contract
with OC Animal Care you're able to make your own laws. You negotiated with the
County and you pay for more days than any other city pays for with the County. ** Those days to which April is referring are only 3 days beyond the mandatory hold time. They are only for dogs with identified owners, they are available on a space available basis only, and if an owner finds his or her dog and takes it home the fees that owner pays to the shelter include reimbursement to the City of Laguna Hills for those additional 3 days.
You can have your own barking dog ordinance and those things and the county
will enforce it, but with Mission Viejo, in reading their response to question #
3, it appears that all governance is Mission Viejo's and their laws and you will
have to abide by their laws and their ordinances which are
different from yours. Not only is there the local control issue that we all care
about but I've heard across the board from rescue groups and volunteers from the
former adoption shop that was in the mall, several pet supply stores Vets and
others that Mission Viejo's ordinances are too strict and not rescue friendly.
And that may interfere with the business of the Pet Adoption Center in the
future and with any other pet related businesses in town. From what I know
already it could prevent operations completely.
We checked with MissionViejo about these regulations and learned that they are related to the need to prevent the spread of disease from shelter animals to other animals related to
** The County Audit's finding at the County Animal Shelter that in 2014, 1,605 dogs and cats were normal when they come to the shelter and later euthanized because of medical conditions or contagious disease. So a couple of specifics that I
would like to address are that they want all animals that are at events to have
a health certificate within 12 hours of an event. For rescue groups and
fostering that's impossible and costly to go to a Vet every time you have an
event. I don't know what that means in the context of our adoption center so I'm
very concerned with that and I have volunteers at my center who were with the
Adoption Shop and their issues were than Mission Viejo didn't consider their
animals healthy although a Vet considered them healthy so they couldn't bring
them from the shelter to the adoption shop. So those are the types of issues I'm
concerned with and I think it's imperitive that you see that all governance
is with Mission viejo and you have no leeway so do a thorough review of all
their ordinances or try to negotiate to provide your own ordinances. She added
she is an RSM Resident and gave this information to our City Manager so when
you're speaking with RSM's City Attorney, you may have some of this information
accessed already.
Fran Tardif, Laguna Hills - We've been hearing a lot about indemnification
and facilities and cost but the point I was trying to make the most and Mr.
Sedgewick was kindof broaching that with Dr. Hawkins and that was what more can
you do besides the physical things you're doing now and that's adoption programs
and spay and neuter programs can make more us of volunteers because they do
lower costs and improve the plight of the animals in the shelters. But it seems
that the County isn't aware of Mission Viejo and perhaps Irvine and how valuable
those programs can be. So in your dealings with Mission Viejo where I it's clean
and beautiful and I know they do a great job, I would rather have my animal
there than at the County obviously but is Mission Viejo more willing to
introduce some of these ancillary programs than the County would be in the
future. I didn't hold out a lot of hope for the County from what they were
telling us.
Mayor Kogerman said she understands that Mission Viejo has a lot
of volunteer services and they also have their DAWG group for which the cost for
neuter and spay are very low through VETs who volunteer their time. Low
cost availability from spay and neuter takes care of a lot of the concerns from
Mr. Carruth.
Don White said he thinks spay and neuter is not a big issue
for us in So. OC.
Mayor Pro-Tem Don Sedgewick said he got the feeling tonight that the county has a hard
time dealing with volunteerism due to their union contracts that seem to be
really restrictive in allowing volunteers do things. It sounds like they have
their hands tied a little bit. They may have other reasons as well that they
found volunteers to be less effective than they thought they might be? Mission
Viejo may not have those restrictions.
Don White - Acknowledged that it is less restrictive in
Mission Viejo but the County does have volunteers. Mission
Viejo doesn't have their hands ties in the same way that the county does. More
opportunity and convenience for volunteers at Mission Viejo.
Vote - Was to receive and File.
