Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSS2 - Animal Shelter ReportFebruary 22, 1999 Study Session Item No. 2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT February 22, 1999 TO: Honorable Mayor, Members of the City Council and City Manager FROM: Bob McDonell, Chief of Police SUBJECT: Animal Shelter Report RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Receive and file the attached report on animal control and animal shelter operations. 2. Continue the existing contract for animal shelter services with the Dover Shores Pet Care Center. 3. Consider directing staff to do the following: a. Continue to work with interested persons and community groups as staffing permits, to address and improve existing shelter operations. b. Periodically explore long -term strategies regarding the future of shelter operations. C. Work to improve adoption and care of animals housed in the City's shelter. d. Review existing licensing, impound, and adoption fees and recommend revisions as appropriate. 4. Encourage interested community groups to consider forming a non - profit entity, which could raise funds and potentially build and operate a shelter facility, thereby becoming eligible for the City contract. BACKGROUND: The attached report from Captain Henisey contains information, which responds to a number of concerns regarding animal control and shelter operations submitted by Mr. Greg Ruzicka, on behalf of a community group interested in changing the City's animal shelter operations. Also in the report is an analysis of our current animal control operations and a discussion of animal shelter operations in three other South Orange County cities. Finally, several Animal Shelter Report Page 2 alternatives to the current method of contracting for shelter services are presented and discussed. It is important to note that there is significant community interest in improving our animal shelter operations. It is also important to point out that our existing contract with the Dover Shores Pet Care Center operated by Dr. Bauersfeld has been a cost - effective and efficient means of providing animal shelter services to our community. Dr. Bauersfeld has developed a program to provide for a pro - humane method of adopting out all animals suitable for adoption and obtaining a relatively low rate of euthanasia that is comparable to other quality shelters. He has been very successful with this program without cost to the City or the taxpayer. It is appropriate to continue to periodically analyze the methods of providing animal control services to the Community. Volunteer services, donations of time and money, availability of grant money, current revenues and existing operations should be regularly reviewed to determine if there are more appropriate and cost - effective ways of providing these services. We believe we have done so in the attached report, and it is our intent to continue to study these alternatives and recommend improvements as necessary. Bob McDonell CHIEF OF POLICE 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT February 9, 1999 TO: Bob McDonell, Chief of Police FROM: Paul Henisey, Patrol/Traffic Division Commander SUBJECT: Animal Shelter Operations Background: The purpose of this report is to respond to two issues regarding animal shelter operations. First, this report will address a number of concerns included in a letter from the law firm of Ruzicka, Snyder and Wallace. Second, a number of community members are advocating changes in the City's animal shelter operations. This report will identify current animal shelter operations, discuss other cities' animal shelter operations and present various alternatives. Response to the Letter: Briefly, the City of Newport contracts with the Dover Shores Pet Care Center for animal shelter services. The Dover Shores Pet Care Center is located at 2075 Newport Blvd. in Costa Mesa and is operated by Dr. Bruce Bauersfeld, a state licensed veterinarian. The Center provides board and care, including medical care, for all animals impounded by the Animal Control Officers of the Newport Beach Police Department. The Center meets all state regulations. This agreement provides cost - effective and efficient animal shelter services for the City. The Center is a Pro - Humane animal facility that strives to adopt out orphaned animals without resorting to euthanasia unless it is clearly in the best interest of the animal or the health and safety of others. The Center accomplishes this policy through the PALS for Pets program. This program provides for long- term board and care, necessary medical attention, and spaying or neutering as necessary and the costs are recovered from the adopting family at the time of the adoption. This program has been very successful at adopting out animals without passing on the costs of this care to the City or the taxpayer. The PALS program is described in more detail in an attachment to this report. In the letter from Mr. Gregory Ruzicka, one of the first items identified is the provision in the agreement regarding having records available for inspection. The agreement specifically states the records shall be open and available for inspection by the City. The Center complies with this requirement and these records have been inspected at various times by City staff. There is not a requirement for these records to be available for public inspection. Making these records available for any member of the public and requiring the staff time to accommodate these requests would be too costly and labor intensive. 3 Animal Shelter Operations Page 2 Questions were raised about the Spay and Neuter Fund and the make -up of the committee responsible for these funds. The Spay and Neuter Fund consists of state - mandated fees paid when an animal is adopted that is not spayed or neutered. If after the adoption the animal is spayed or neutered the adopting family is eligible to request a refund of the fees paid. Otherwise, the fees remain in the account and are available to be used to promote the spaying and neutering of animals. The City has a Spay and Neuter Committee consisting of Dr. Bauersfeld, his office manager Scott Hamilton, Civilian Supervisor Karen Weigand, Animal Control Officer Jayme Rodgers, and City Management Analyst Craig Bluell. At the October 23rd meeting, a City staff member suggested giving consideration to have Ms. Morgan serve as a member. The committee concluded the existing makeup provides for efficient operations and effective decision - making regarding the appropriate uses of these funds. The Spay and Neuter Committee has authorized the expenditure of funds to reimburse qualified spay and neuter operations, purchase equipment to assist in post- operative recovery, and to promote the spaying and neutering of pets. These funds have been placed in a City account and expenditures are approved and paid following normal City procedures. Based upon preliminary analysis of recently passed state legislation, the Spay and Neuter fees will be eliminated in July and there will be specific requirements placed upon each animal shelter regarding the spaying and neutering of animals. Animal Control officers are scheduled to attend training in February regarding this new legislation. The Dover Shores Pet Care Center did receive donations from a number of citizens as indicated. Ms. Morgan was reimbursed the $200 for the cost of advertising. The donation checks were made out directly to the Center. According to the Center, there was no agreement as to what the donations were to be used for. The Center purchased rubber- coated racks to raise the animals off the floor and improve their living conditions. The racks provide for a cleaner environment and as a result, reduce the need for bathing of the animals. The racks can be easily cleaned and disinfected and do not harbor germs or diseases that blankets or other absorbent material would. This issue of cleanliness was one we previously had identified for improvement. The letter identified 13 additional questions. The responses to each of the questions are listed as follows: 1. How many animals were impounded, (600 or 1200) and what happened to them thereafter? According to our shelter statistics, we lodged in the shelter a total of 749 animals in 1997 and 693 animals in 1998. Of the 1997 total, 638 were returned to their owners or adopted including 45 through the PALS Program, and 93 died in the shelter or were euthanized. In 1998, 598 animals were returned or adopted including 38 through PALS, while 79 died or were euthanized. The animals euthanized were either injured too seriously to justify medical treatment, were determined to be vicious and unadoptable, or were wild and could not be domesticated or relocated. Animal Shelter Operations Page 3 2. How many pregnant cats came in by the person who found them or the officer? Were they allowed to have their babies? Who kept the cat for the two months it takes for the babies to be big enough to adopt? Detailed information such as whether a cat is pregnant or not at time of impound is not computerized but noted in a card file. It is not feasible to manually search all of the records for this information. However, the Animal Control Officers recall impounding a few pregnant cats every year. The Center's policy regarding pregnant cats is that they are allowed to have their kittens and then are kept approximately 2 months until the kittens are adoptable. This is done at the Center's expense. Some of the costs for this care are recovered through the Center's PALS program. 3. How many pups did you impound that were not yet weaned? Who bottle fed them? According to the collective memories of the Animal Control Officers and the Center's staff, a puppy has never been impounded in the Shelter that was not yet weaned without the mother being there also. Puppies this young do not usually get out away from their mother and run at large. If one did come in, it would receive the same treatment as when young kittens are brought in. One of the Center's staff members would take it home and bottle feed it just as they have numerous times with young kittens the ACO's have brought in. 4. /f a dog was hit by a car, but had injuries that could be surgically repaired, which vet performed the surgery and how many dogs did you impound like this last year? Again, the information is not available as to how many dogs injured in vehicular collisions are brought in, but the ACO's state this probably occurs about twice a month. Many of these are minor injuries and are treated by Dr. Bauersfeld at the Center. Sometimes these emergencies happen at odd hours and the animal is taken to either Central Orange County Emergency Animal Clinic or All Care Animal Referral Center for emergency treatment. In most of these circumstances, the owner is located who will claim the animal and then pay for the treatment, or they will obtain their own medical care. In the event an owner is not located, the City's agreement with the Center provides for medical care at the City's expense up to a set limit. In one instance several years ago, a dog was brought in that was seriously injured and no owner was found. The dog was given four surgeries and was kept at the Shelter for six months before finally being adopted, all at the Center's expense less several donations received from the public for the dog's treatment. 5. What happens to animals with ringworm or mange? Are they treated or euthanized? How many were impounded in this status last year? Animals impounded with mange or ringworm will receive treatment at the Center and are not euthanized. In a recent case, Senior ACO Eric Metz impounded a small toy poodle. The dog was found on the Corona del Mar Freeway and brought to the Corona del Mar Animal Hospital by a private citizen. CDM Animal Hospital called the Police Department to have the dog impounded as a stray. The dog did not receive any treatment during its short stay at CDM Animal Hospital. The staff told ACO Metz they thought it had scabies. The dog was impounded at the Center and S Animal Shelter Operations Page 4 was correctly diagnosed as having sarcoptic mange. The dog was successfully treated and adopted through the PALS program after approximately four weeks. 6. if you impound feral cats, ones that are wild and living on their own, do you euthanize them? How many feral cats are impounded? Any cat that is impounded will be placed for adoption if unclaimed unless they are deemed to be wild and unsuitable for adoption. At this point it is likely the feral or wild cat will be euthanized. It is unknown how many of the cats impounded were feral because the Police Department does not individually track wild versus tame cats, however the Animal Control Officers state most of the cats euthanized were feral. The primary concern with releasing feral cats back to the wild is that they are usually trapped by a citizen because they were already causing a problem. It is estimated about 80% of the cats impounded are collected from these traps. To spay or neuter the wild cats and then release them back into our community would just re- introduce the problem into another area. The City is very limited as to locations suitable for the release of wild cats without altering the existing environment. Also, most feral cats have a short lifespan due to the harsh nature of their existence. Because of these facts, it is our opinion euthanasia is the most appropriate option for those feral cats unable to be domesticated and unsuitable for adoption. 7. Are all animals impounded if they are alive? Do animal control officers euthanize injured animals or feral cats in the field? Do they all go to the shelter vet? What about ones delivered to owners in the field? With the exception of a few dead animals that we impound for necropsy examination by Dr. Bauersfeld such as in an animal cruelty case, all domestic animals are impounded alive. Most wildlife are relocated or if injured they are taken to rehabilitators. Occasionally, wildlife is impounded at the Center, but this is usually only to hold overnight until the rehabilitators open in the morning. Animal Control Officers do on rare occasions euthanize animals in the field. The vast majority of these euthanasias are wildlife that are usually found in a morbid condition and would likely not survive. Injured domestic animals are taken to the Center or one of the emergency clinics for treatment. The Animal Control Officers prefer to let a licensed veterinarian decide if the animal can be successfully treated due to their training and expertise. Any injured animal delivered to an owner in the field is the responsibility of the owner. We will assist owners in transporting animals to the veterinarian or emergency clinic of their choice, but we do not euthanize them at the owner's request. 8. The euthanasia figure presented to my clients should include every domesticated animal that was ever euthanized, including injured and feral cats. Does it? if animals are ever euthanized in the field is that included in the 3% figure that Bauersfeld asserts? The only knowledge staff has of a 3% euthanasia rate centered around a discussion of the euthanasia rate for impounded dogs in 1997. The records for our shelter include all animals euthanized or that died in the shelter due to injuries or illness. The euthanasia/died in shelter rate in 1997 was 12.4% and in 1998 the rate was 11.4 %. These euthanasia figures include all of the animals impounded by the Animal Control Officers including any domestic animal. The rare euthanasia that occurs in the field is not included in the above figures. Animal Shelter Operations Page 5 9. Are all animals held for a minimum of 72 hours before euthanasia or adoption? Food and Agriculture Codes 31108 (dogs) and 31752 (cats) require these animals to be held at least 72 hours at an animal shelter. The agreement between the City and the Center requires the Center to hold any impounded animal for a minimum of five days if it has no identification. If the animal has identification, the Center is required to hold the animal for six days although the Center's policy is to keep the animal for seven days. Any adoptable animal still remaining will continue to be available for adoption through the PALS Program. 10. Why are there discrepancies in the 'adoption' fees for puppies? The Dover Shores paperwork shows $58.00 for the costs of puppies and adults to be adopted but puppies are being 'adopted' for $253.00. There are two categories of animals at the Center. The first category is those unidentified and adoptable animals within the five -day holding period as required by the agreement with the City. These animals are available at the regular adoption rates. The basic adoption fee is $38 not including the Spay and Neuter Deposit Fee. Once the animal stays beyond the mandated holding period, the animal is included in the Center's PALS program. These animals receive a thorough medical exam and all necessary shots. The vaccinations are necessary not only for the animal's health, but to prevent the outbreak of disease in other shelter animals and those animals that belong to Dr. Bauersfeld's clients. Impounded animals are treated for any diseases and continue to receive board, care and exercise. To reimburse the Center for the costs, which in many cases can be extensive, the PAL adoption rates are increased to provide for this care. The cost to adopt these animals out of the PALS program is based upon the specific care each animal has received and the length of time the animal is in the facility. Puppies and kittens are generally more expensive because the number of vaccinations required or recommended is greater and they will usually require an increased level of care. Dr. Bauersfeld has been practicing veterinary care for over 26 years and takes great pride in the Center's ability to adopt out literally thousands of animals during his association with the City. This program has experienced tremendous success without burdening the City or the taxpayer with all of these additional costs. Those that benefit from the program, the individuals adopting the animals, pay for the costs of the program, but they also benefit from discounted services offered to them by Dr. Bauersfeld as part of the package. It is important to note the costs assessed in the PALS program cover only the actual expenses incurred by the Center. It is not a profit- generating program. Dr. Bauersfeld does derive additional business as many of those who adopt the animals return for future veterinary services. 11. Why are animals being tranquilized? Because the Dover Shores Pet Care Center also serves as an animal shelter, they are required to accept animals that they would not normally accept for boarding from clients. If Animal Control impounds a vicious pit bull, the Center is required to accept and house the animal. These types of animals may be given tranquilizers for their safety as well as the safety of the Shelter and Dover Shores staff, not to mention any citizen that might be in the kennel area looking for an 1 Animal Shelter Operations Page 6 animal. This prevents bites to staff and visitors and also keeps the animal from injuring itself by charging the cage doors. It allows for the moving of these particular animals on a daily basis to accommodate the cleaning of the cages. In addition, some animals that are excessively excited or noisy due to being in the shelter with other animals, may on occasion be given a light tranquilizer in an effort to calm them down. 12. Why are racks being used in the cages? Many of the cages in the Center now have new soft rubber covered racks in them. The racks were purchased to improve the living conditions for the animals. The racks keep the animals off of the concrete floors and out of any urine or excrement deposited prior to the staff cleaning the cage. The racks are easily cleaned and disinfected as opposed to an absorbent towel or blanket that retains moisture and may harbor diseases. This also reduces the number of times an animal must be bathed, as it keeps them off the floor and therefore cleaner. 13. 1f an animal has a treatable illness, is that provided for in the contract. Who decides if the animal gets treated and at what dollar amount? How much money can be spent on each animal for ear infections, skin problems, infected eyes, tumor removal, urinary infections and other routine illnesses? Since the animal becomes the property of Bauersfeld after five days, it appears he decides whether this animal gets a second chance. 1f true this policy is unacceptable! Per the Shelter contract the City will pay up to $47.50 per animal for treatment. Any additional treatment is at Dr. Bauersfeld's expense, although some of these costs may be offset by donations to the Center. There seems to be some concern that Dr. Bauersfeld is given the authority and responsibility to decide which animals live and which die after their time in the Center. However, who better to assess the medical condition and the adoptability of an animal then an experienced and licensed Veterinarian. As an animal owner myself, a licensed Veterinarian would be, and is, my choice to make decisions about the health of my animal. It is the Police Department's opinion that based upon our experience with Dr. Bauersfeld and in consideration of the euthanasia statistics, it is clear Dr. Bauersfeld decisions have been very appropriate in this area and that this policy is in fact, reasonable and meets the needs of this community. Animal Shelter Analvsis and Discussion: This section will discuss the organization and costs of the animal control and shelter operations of the City of Newport Beach. Costs and operations of animal services in neighboring cities will be presented to provide a basic understanding of animal shelter operations within the County. Finally, various alternatives along with estimates of staffing and costs will be presented for the City Council's consideration. First, as stated previously, the City contracts for services with the Dover Shores Pet Care Center under the direction of Dr. Bauersfeld. The basic cost of this contract is not to exceed $2,928.51 per month. The contract establishes limits on inoculation costs, boarding fees, medical care expenses, quarantine rates, and spay /neuter deposits. The contract requires all dog license revenue, all uncollected spay /neuter deposit fees, and one half of the impound fees to be turned P Animal Shelter Operations Page 7 over to the City on a monthly basis. One staff member, Maggie Thigpen, is assigned as the PALS and Shelter Coordinator and serves as the liaison to the Police Department on animal shelter issues. The agreement can be terminated by either party upon a 120 -day written notice. The Dover Shores Pet Care Center is a full- service veterinary care facility. The Center consists of a pet supply retail area, reception desk, examination rooms, operating room, intensive care area, and shelter rooms for cats, dogs, and other animals. The shelter rooms consist of metal and concrete block cages. All of the cages are indoors and climate controlled. Of the available cages the Center uses on average about two - thirds of them for animal shelter purposes. Although the Center is an older facility, it is clean, well maintained and meets or exceeds all applicable standards. For the 1998/1999 Fiscal Year, the City of Newport Beach budgeted $40,900 for Animal Shelter and Veterinary Care Services. The Police Department budgeted approximately $250,000 in personnel costs for the one Senior Animal Control Officer and three Animal Control Officers. Additional maintenance and operations costs (including fleet rental charges), total $37,675 and capital outlay costs are $7,200. The total costs of operation to the City of Newport Beach will be about $335,755 in this fiscal year. These figures do not include any indirect costs for dispatching of calls, processing dog licenses or other administrative services. Animal related revenues include $43,260 for Dog Licenses and $4,100 in impound fees and miscellaneous income. Thus, the net cost for all animal control services is approximately $288,395. There are currently 4,976 dogs licensed in the City of Newport Beach. In 1998, there were 693 animals taken to the shelter of which 598 were returned to their owners or adopted while 79 (11.4 %) died or were euthanized. Ten years ago, the City of Newport Beach operated with a staff of six Animal Control Officers. Currently, staffing consists of one Senior Animal Control Officer and three Animal Control Officers. In 1998 these four officers handled 4,618 radio calls, 1,353 observation activities, 1,341 Problem Oriented Policing activities, and 7,118 other activities. Given these numbers, each ACO averages 20 of these various activities each shift they work. Included in these activities, the ACO's issued 899 citations, wrote 1,360 reports, issued 136 quarantines and transported a total of 1,652 animals. The majority of citations issued were for leash law violations, specifically in the beach areas where most citizens' demands for enforcement occur. As with other city services, significant demands are placed on the Animal Control Officers during the summer months because of increased tourist and seasonal resident populations. The City of Irvine operates its own Animal Shelter. The shelter was built in 1984 at a cost then of about $3 million and is a clean modern facility. The Animal Shelter is operated through the Community Services Department. The staff consists of I Animal Care Supervisor, I Veterinarian (currently unfilled), 11 part -time Kennel Assistants, 6 part -time Office Assistants, I part -time Volunteer Coordinator, and I part -time Senior Account Clerk. The total cost of the Shelter operations for this fiscal year is $606,950. The Animal Control field operations are assigned to the Police Department. This unit consists of I Animal Control Supervisor, 3 Senior ACO's and 3 part-time ACO's. The budget cost for these personnel is approximately $300,000. Total program costs for the City of Irvine are $906,950 and are offset by revenues of $236,740 for a net cost of $670,210. During the 1998 calendar year, the Irvine Animal Care Center took in Animal Shelter Operations Page 8 2,177 stray animals. Out of this number they returned 498 to their owners, adopted out another 1532 animals and euthanized 221 animals while another 21 animals died in the shelter. Their euthanasia/died in shelter rate for 1998 is 11.1 %. The City of Mission Viejo also operates their own shelter and provides animal control services to the City of Laguna Niguel. The shelter facility was built in 1993 at a cost of $2.3 million. The shelter includes a large reception area, service areas, and several offices. One office was converted into housing for cats with the addition of portable steel cages. The dog shelter is an outside facility in which the concrete floor of the dog cages is heated. The shelter has added canvas awnings for additional shade in the summer and the awnings can be converted into canvas walls during the winter to help retain the heat. There is a fenced grass play area for the animals and a nice park setting immediately adjacent where the animals can be walked. Because of insufficient space to house impounded cats, the shelter is planning a $300,000 expansion to provide for the care and shelter of cats. The shelter is administered by the Animal Services Supervisor who reports directly to the City Manager's Office. Additional staff includes 2 Clerical Personnel, 2 Kennel Attendants, 1 part-time Kennel Attendant, and 2 part -time License Canvassers. Three Animal Control Officers and 1 Reserve ACO (currently not filled) report to the Animal Services Supervisor. The operational costs for all animal services in this fiscal year are budgeted at $609,449. These costs are offset by revenues totaling $300,150 for a net operating cost of $309,299. During the 1997/1998 Fiscal Year, the Mission Viejo Animal Shelter took in 2,086 animals. Out of this number they returned 739 to their owners, adopted out another 1,132 animals and euthanized 134 animals for a euthanasia rate of 6.4 %. The number of animals that died in the shelter is not included in this figure. The City of Costa Mesa contracts with the Orange County Humane Society for its animal shelter operations. They have budgeted approximately $60,000 this fiscal year for animal shelter services. The Costa Mesa Police Department has two full -time and two part-time animal control officers. Direct costs for the Animal Control unit is estimated at $258,000. The City of Costa Mesa estimates revenue from animal control services and licensing is approximately $48,500 for a net cost to the city of $209,500. The unit impounded 882 animals, issued 300 citations, licensed 6,420 dogs and handled about 5160 calls for service in 1998. Costa Mesa reported the euthanasia rate for the Orange County Humane Society to be about 10% for dogs and 30% for cats. The City of Costa Mesa is currently studying their existing method of providing animal control services and contracting for animal shelter operations and has requested proposals from outside agencies and private vendors to determine if there are effective alternatives. There are two points worthy of additional discussion. First, both Irvine and Mission Viejo receive considerably higher revenues while also having higher expenses. There are two reasons for their higher revenues. The first is because they do not have to share any of the revenues with a private vendor, the second reason is because their fees charged for dog licenses, adoption rates, and impound and boarding fees are somewhat higher than those charged by the City of Newport Beach. The second point of discussion is the euthanasia rate. In 1998, our euthanasia/died in shelter rate was 11.4 %. For the same period, Irvine's rate was 11.1 % including those that died in the shelter. The rate for Mission Viejo/Laguna Niguel was 6.4 %, which did not include any animals that died \J Animal Shelter Operations Page 9 in the shelter. Costa Mesa reports a euthanasia rate of about 20 % including both cats and dogs. On this basis, our euthanasia rate compares favorably with the other pro- humane shelters in the county. It is well know that large animal shelters such as the Orange County Animal Shelter, Long Beach Animal Shelter, and the City and County of Los Angeles shelters all have euthanasia rates far higher. It is also worthwhile to note that even the "No- Kill" animal shelters indicate the no -kill policy applies to adoptable animals and not to those animals who are too seriously injured, ill, vicious or wild for adoption. Alternatives: There are several alternatives to the current method of contracting out animal shelter operations. However, there are positive and negative aspects to each of these alternatives. It is important to note that currently, the Dover Shores Pet Care Center houses on average about 18 animals a night as the animal shelter for Newport Beach and 3 animals a night as part of the PALS Program. Therefore any shelter arrangement would entail the housing of on average, about 21 animals a night. In 1998, the number of animals in the shelter at any one time ranged from as little as 5, to as many as 46 based upon the end of month reports. Certainly, one such alternative would be for the City of Newport Beach to build and operate its own shelter. However, even a modest shelter would likely cost a minimum of $1 million in capital outlay costs and would require additional staffing and operational costs estimated to be about $250,000 per year. Recommended staffing levels would minimally include one shelter manager and three part-time assistants. The shelter manager would also be responsible for the coordination and scheduling of volunteer services. It is estimated there would be an increase in revenue of about $100,000 above current levels because the City would receive all impound, board and care, and adoption costs. All veterinary care would still have to be contracted out because there would not be enough work to justify a full -time veterinary position. A question was raised regarding the possibility of using an existing City building or land for a shelter. However, no such available property could be located at this time. Some of these capital outlay costs to build a shelter could be recovered through donations and grants. One such available grant is through the Duffield Foundation. This particular foundation has set aside seed money of $200 million to "help shelters develop their goal of finding homes for every adoptable animal." This group's plan is to provide sizable grants that increase each year as the shelters work towards achieving a five -year goal of finding a home for every animal regardless of age, appearance, or physical disability. There are two groups within the City that have expressed interest in helping establish and build a shelter. Both the Tailwaggers Adoption Group Services of Newport (TAGS) and the Community Animal Network (CAN) have expressed a sincere interest in assisting the City of Newport Beach build its own shelter. One option may be for the City, instead of building its own shelter, to encourage the construction of a new facility under the direction of a community group or in conjunction with a private provider such as Dr. Bauersfeld. The City could then contract for animal shelter services through these providers at this new, modem facility. A second alternative would be to share the operation of such an animal shelter with another jurisdiction. The only city that would be close enough to likely consider this type of Animal Shelter Operations Page 10 arrangement, would be the City of Costa Mesa. As indicated above, Costa Mesa is in the process of analyzing their current animal services operation. They would be open to other alternatives, however, it is important to note they would be reluctant to increase either the number of City personnel or their costs of operation, given the level of service they currently receive through the Humane Society in Huntington Beach. Another alternative would be to contract with an adjacent jurisdiction that currently operates their own animal shelter. This alternative was examined back in October of 1993 with the City of Irvine. At that time, their proposal would have cost the City of Newport Beach $5,288 a month and this amount did not include any staff dedicated to our needs. As a result, the final cost would have been well over $6,000 a month, which was over twice the cost of the contract through the Dover Shores Pet Care Center. However, an even more significant factor is the distance involved to the Irvine shelter. The shelter is located on Sand Canyon near the Santa Ana Freeway. This would be a major inconvenience to the residents of Newport Beach to travel such a distance for animal shelter services and would prove to be a significant hardship for the Animal Control Officers who make multiple trips to the shelter on a daily basis. From many areas of Newport Beach, especially the Peninsula and West Newport areas it could involve round -trip times of as much as 1' /z hours to access this shelter. Given the current workload demands on the four Animal Control Officers, this additional travel time would significantly impact their ability to respond to calls and provide the existing level of service to the City. This alternative would likely result in the need to add at least another Animal Control Officer with a corresponding increase in salary and benefits of about $75,000. A fourth alternative is to continue the existing contract with the Dover Pet Care Center. This agreement has proven to be cost - effective and efficient for the City. At the same time, there are some areas where there may be room for improvement. There is interest within the community to increase efforts towards the adoption of unclaimed animals. Police Department staff is working on setting up an Internet web page and has recently worked with the Daily Pilot on a Pet of the Week article. In addition, organizing a volunteer group could be helpful towards improving some of the aspects of the current shelter. It is important to note the City contracts with a private vendor who operates the shelter in conjunction with his own business. This limits the level of volunteer involvement and direction given to the vendor by the City under the terms of the agreement. A volunteer unit also requires organization and establishment of various policies and procedures. Currently, neither the Police Department, nor the Center has the staff available to handle these duties. Both Irvine and Mission Viejo have paid volunteer coordinators who direct the operations of the volunteer unit. To the extent possible, the Police Department will continue to work with interested persons and community groups to benefit the shelter and the adoption of unclaimed animals. Conclusion: This report addresses a number of issues raised by several concerned citizens. It also discusses animal services of other neighboring cities in the South Orange County area. Various alternatives regarding animal shelter services were explored. Given the City of Newport Beach's efforts towards privatizing many city operations, careful study should be given to this issue before commencing an effort to build and staff our own animal shelter. Animal Shelter Operations Page 11 It is recommended that the City of Newport Beach continue to contract for animal shelter services with the Dover Shores Pet Care Center for the immediate future. It is also recommended the Police Department and other City staff as appropriate continue to work with interested individuals and community groups towards improving adoption efforts and shelter operations, given current staffing limitations. At the same time, consideration should be given to how the City can most effectively address animal services in the future. Based upon the fiscal realities of building and operating our own shelter facility at this time, and all the other competing priorities faced by the City, we believe there are not sufficient grounds to proceed down that course at the present time. As conditions change, the City Council can certainly revisit the issue at some later date. If local community groups are successful in raising sufficient funds to build and operate a shelter as a non -profit venture, then the City should explore contracting with them, as our current contract is re- evaluated. Paul Henisey, Captain—_ PatroUTraffic Division Commander Attachments: 1. Letter from Gregory Ruzicka dated November 25, 1998 2. PALS Program Flyer 3. Daily Pilot Article – "Saving Pets is the Year -Round Gift of Animal Lovers" 4. Orange County Register Article – "Pair's Pet Project Aims to Halt Euthanasia at Shelters" 5. 1997 Animal Shelter Statistics 6. 1998 Animal Shelter Statistics 7. 1997 Animal Control Summary of Field Activities 8. 1998 Animal Control Summary of Field Activities ,LI Vl 1JJU 11 YJ GREGORY V. RUZICMA. I.L.M. PAUL C. SNYDER LACL R. WALLACE November 25, 1998 John Noyes c/o City Of Newport Beach 221 Marine Avenue Balboa Island, CA 92662 Dear Mr. Noyes, 1 I I I I'I11 Nn.=Ko THE LAW FIRM OF RUZICKA, SMER & WALLACE A LIMITED LIABILITY ✓ARTNERSNIP 130 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE 5UITE 100 NEWPORT BEACH. CALIFORNIA 92660 TELEPHONE f949) 759-1060 FACSIMILE (9A8) 759-6813 r . ele. e�ti 01 CBYNiCL RICHARD 3, SONTAG KIRK D. SEAT y EDCu3A L. GGORDE JAMES M. SPELLMIRE This law firm has agreed to assist Ms. Christine Morgan, and other concerned citizens of Newport Beach, on a pro bona basis in an effort to improve the welfare of lost and/or abandoned pets in our city. My tentative research evidences that on June 26, 1997 an "Animal Control Agreement" was entered into by i'ne City of Newport Beach ( "City") and Dr. Brace C. Bauerfeld ( "Bauerfeld "), DVM, and in his capacity as director of the Pet Care Center of Dover Shores. A provision of that contract states that the agreement may be terminated by either party upon 120 day advance written notice, without cause. Provision 9 of said contract entitles Bauerfeld to be compensated up to $2,928.51 per month for contractually delineated services. Additionally, Provision 10 requires Bauerfeld to keep accurate contemporaneous records relative to services provided, and make those records available for public inspections. Ms..M.organ, as well as other citizens, have expressed grave, and apparently well founded concerns as to the quality of services now being rendered by Bauerfeld and Pet Care Center of Dover Shores as mandated by said contract. I trust the reports required per Provision 10, of the aforementioned contract, can be made available to Ms. Morgan for inspection at once. I further trust Dr. Bauerfeld has complied with his affirmative obligations, and the requisite reports were filed in a timely manner- An informal meeting was convened on October 23, 1998 at the behest of Ms. Morgan, and several concerned citizens to address their concerns relative to the quality of care currently being rendered by Dr. Bauerfeld. At this meeting Ms. Morgan was asked by the city if she wished to participate on the committee responsible for the spaying and neutering of animals. She was told that she would be contacted within 14 days by the animal control officers and as of this date, no one has contacted her. \A e'er. uti One of the concerns of Ms. Morgan pertains to the spay and neutering fund. The law states that money in the fund which is understood to be in the region of between $10.000 - 11,000 is not being used. The concerns are that animals are leaving the facility without being spayed or neutered. The money is there to cover the costs and the service to perform the necessary operations is available at the facility. Donations were raised by concerned citizens, and sent to Dover Shores in care of Ms. Morgan, due to an article which appeared in The Daily Pilot. Per the article, these donations were intendcd for the use of advertising for homes for animals in the shelter, the purchase of treats for the animals and to cover the costs of bathing the animals. The manager of Dover Shores informed Ms. Morgan that the money acquired was in fact being used to purchase racks for cages and not what was originally intended. Ms. Morgan has not received any statement showing the amounts raised. However, she was. given 5200.00 by the manager to cover the costs of advertisements that she had already placed. After the meeting many important questions and concerns were raised. Paramount amongst these issues was the disparity between animal control's figures for animals impounded annually, and that of Dr. Bauerfeld's. Is it 600 or 1200 animals impounded? I am incredulous to believe record keeping is so lax as to justify such a huge disparity. 1. How'many animals were impounded, (600 or 1200) and what happened to them thereafter? 2. How may pregnant cats came in by the person who found them or the officer? Were they allowed to have their babies? Who kept the cat for the two months it takes for the babies to be big enough to adopt? 3. How many pups did you impound that were not yet weaned? Who bottle fed them? 4. If a dog was hit by a car, but had injuries that could be surgically repaired, which vet performed the surgery and how many dogs did you impound like this last year. 5. What happens to animals with ringworm or mange? Are they treated or euthanized? How many were impounded in this status last year? 6. If you impound feral cats, ones that are wild and living on their own, do you euthanize them? How many feral cats were impounded? 7. Are all animals impounded if they are alive? Do animal control officers euthanize injured animals or feral cats in the field? Do they all go to the shelter vet? What about ones delivered to owners in the field? 8. The euthanasia figure, presented to my clients, should include every domestic animal that was ever euthanized, including injured and feral cats. Does it? If animals are ever euthanized in the field is that included in the 3% figure that Bauerfeld asserts? ..�.. ..� ��i.. � • �� \.I I I I II-II YI'YUGfCJ .. ..._ I C��i v�� 9. Are all the animals held for a minimum of 72 hours before euthanasia or adoption? 10. Why are there discrepancies in the `adoption' fees for puppies? The Dover Shores paperwork shows $58.00 for the costs of puppies and adults to be adopted but puppies are being `adopted' for 5253.00. 11. Why are animals being tranquilized? 12. Why are racks being used in the cages? 13. If an animal has a treatable illness, is that provided for in the contract. Who decides if the animal gets treated and at what dollar amount? How much money can be spent on each animal for ear infections, skin problems, infected eyes, tumor removal, urinary infections and other routine illnesses? Since the animal becomes the property ofBauerfeld after 5 days, it appears he decides whether this animal gets a second chance. If true this policy is unacceptable! These initial questions seem reasonable, appropriate and worthy of a timely and accurate response by the appropriate city official within ten (10) days. I look forward to your timely responses. Cordially, Gregory V. Attorney At GVR/fm cc: Janice A. Debay Norma J. Glover Mayor Pro Tern Dennis D. O'Neil Tom W. Thomson Todd Ridgeway Gary Adams Dave Kiff TOTAL P.04 `0 PALS For Pets Dover Shores Pet Care Center Home of the Newport Beach Animal Shelter 2075 Newport Blvd., Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Telephone 949- 722 -8301 Fax 949 - 722 -2970 Pals For Pets ( PALS ) N Program Summary Pals for Pets was formed in the spring of 1986 by Dr. Bruce Bauersfeld at Dover Shores Pet Care Center. PALS was established as a PET ADOPTION VEHICLE for local residents who were in need of a new home for their pet. Our endeavor was to place these animals with suitable new owners. We accepted donations but the primary financial responsibility fell on Dr. Bauersfeld. Only modest numbers of pets were adopted through PALS from 1986 to 1989. The program was put on hold for several reasons; the primary one being lack of effective advertising with a commensurate low volume of prospective new owners. In the spring of 1991, The City of Newport Beach contracted with Dr. Bauersfeld and Dover Shores Pet Care Center to provide shelter services, and PALS was reborn. How The Program Works; The City of Newport pays Dover Shores Pet Care Center, a private business, to provide shelter services for lost and/or injured animals. We are reimbursed for some of our costs to provide these services. The City shelter contract mandates that animals be held for a five -day period. That time is extended an additional 48 hours, if the animal has any form of identification. After that time, The City's funding and involvement ceases. There are three alternatives or possible outcomes for impounded animals: 1. The pets are claimed by their original owners 2. The pets are adopted/pre- adopted by a new owner. 3. The pets remain here at the end of the holding time awaiting euthanasia. THIS IS WHEN THE PALS PROGRAM KICKS IN. \1 HE PALS PROGRAM BEGIN With the permission and blessing of the City of Newport Beach, we place ALL adoptable pets into the PALS PROGRAM, after the prescribed holding period. This has included dogs, cats, rabbits, iguanas, etc... Violent animals, that is animals that are deemed dangerous to the public, are excluded from the program. Geriatric or debilitated animals are not automatically excluded. Animals remain in the PALS PROGRAM until they are adopted. Some are here for a few days. Many are here for three to four weeks, some adult dogs and cats even longer. Kittens born at Dover Shores Pet Care Center are not euthanized. They are ALL cared for. Many require hand raising and extensive medical care. The City does not reimburse us for any of these costs. Although we continue to accept donations, the primary financial responsibility remains with Dr. Bauersfeld. Why does he continue to invest his own time and money into the program? "I have been practicing veterinary medicine in this local area for the past 26 years. I have been involved in helping sick and injured animals for well over half of my life. The PALS PROGRAM has successfully adopted thousands of dogs, cats and other pets since its partnership with the City of Newport in 1991. I consider this a tremendous success, due not only to my own personal efforts, but also to the efforts of my staff, and my generous and loyal clients, many of whom have adopted pets and given of their time and resources as well. — Well -done, thou good and faithful servants (Matthew 25:21). " — Bruce Bauersfeld D. V.M. Program Benefits; All pets adopted by through the PALS PROGRAM receive a 20% discount on all veterinary services at Dover Shores Pet Care Center for the 12 months immediately following their adoption. In addition, there is a special 80% discount which applies during the first 30 days of the adoption on specific services. Please Direct Questions or Inquiries to: Contact: Maggie Thigpen, PALS & Shelter Coordinator Send Donations To: Pals For Pets, Dover Shores Pet Care Center, Newport Beach Animal Shelter 2075 Newport Blvd. #112, Costa Mesa, CA, 92627 Page 2 Newport Beach /Costa Mesa Daily Pilot pec�.>7aEez3, /9 Saving pets & the year - round gift of animal lovers Y •Money will buy a pretty BEACH NOTE S ='good dog, but it won't buy the wag of his tail." — Josh Billings - .._._...... _ INIMMINN 1457! C ome Christmas morning, lots of lids will find Santa has answered their Prayers and brought them a pup- py or kitten. But when the adorable bundle of fluff under the Christmas tree (like the cute little bunny or duckling at East- er) grows into a mature animal, the transition is too much for a lot of people. .; The end result is unwanted 'animals — lots of them. The American Humane Society esti- mates that more than 15 million healthy and friendly but unwant- ed dogs and cats will be put to -death this year. Except at certain havens such -as the Newport Beach Animal °Shelter. Lost and abandoned am- mals lucky enough to be housed in Dr. Bruce Bauersfeld's Dover Shores Pet Care Center, in which the shelter is, are held for seven days (five if they don't have tags), and then Bauersfeld claims them for his Pals for Pets rescue program. If its a purebred, one of the breed rescue organizations may place the animal in their adop- lion, program. if not, Bauersfeld, a soft - spoken man with a palpa- ble air of empathy, will keep'the animal until it is adopted. For one female German shepherd mix, this meant six months with extensive leg surgeries during that period (all provided by christin Carney nancy gardner appearing Saturdays in the Daily Pilot. There are a lot of animals that need happy homes, and while they may not be quite as adorable as new puppies, they're already housebroken, they don't chew on everything, and like Benjamin Franklin said of old mistresses, they're so darn grate- ful. But even if you can't take in a dog or cat, you can still help by becoming a volunteer — or even just dropping off your old news- papers. As you can imagine, they go through a lot of them. So a rousing cheei for all the rescue people — volunteers, vet techs and veterinarians like Baueisfeldl TYuly Santa's helpers — all year - round. For information, call the New- port Beach Animal Shelter at (949) 322 -PETS, the Costa Mesa 1� If it's a purebred, one of the breed rescue organizations may place the animal in their adop- lion program. ff not, Bauersfeld, a soft - spoken man with a palpa- ble air of empathy, will keep the animal until it is adopted. Far one female German shepherd mix, this meant six months with extensive leg surgeries during that period (all provided by Bauersteld), but she was eventu- ally adopted by a loving family. , ]n another incident, a preg- nant cat was found to have a ibroken pelvis must as she Began labor. Her condition meant she couldn't deliver, and fhe kittens were born dead. Post labor, Bauersfeld fixed the cat's 'Pelvis, and while she was recu- perating, a litter of kittens came fn whose mother had died. The cat adopted the kittens and raised them, was then spayed by Bauersfeld and successfully placed with a new family. At the Newport Beach Animal Shelter, no dog or cat is eutha- nized unless feral and unable to -be tamed. Ali eventually find homes, sometimes with staff. $auersfeld also offers a 20% dis- count on the first year's care. " 'We've all fallen in love and had animals go home with us,' said Maggie Thigpen, newly appointed shelter coordinator. Debbie Allison, another employee, adopted a t0- year-old Pomeranian found tied to a 'beach parking meter with the pads nearly burned off his feet by the hot asphalt. . Keeping such animals requires more than a place for them to sleep, even with the Care Center's animal - loving employees — Tbny Barrett, Renee Page and Amy Hesch — helping as much as possible. Thigpen is coordinating a new volunteer program to meet these needs. As shelter coordinator, it Will be her role to organize vol- unteers to walk dogs, clean pens, bottle feed and socialize puppies and kittens, and keep the ani- 'vals healthy and happy while May await.their new families. She will also work on publicizing `the need for pet adoptions. .. In the same vein, DiAnna Qfaff- Martin works with Bauers- feld and other vets In the area with her Community Animal Network. Martin publishes a -monthly Community Animal ,Report that highlights adoption needs and selects the annals featured in -Pick of the Litter,' 17 nicle r� ore NATURE: Their nation- wide `no kill' goal is ambitious, but they may have the drive — and, notably, the mon- ey — to pull it off. By MARTHA WAGGONER The Associated Press For the love of a dog, one man helped a city transform the way it treats abandoned pets. For the love of a dog, another man is pro- viding $200 million to try to trans- form a nation. Sido, an 11- year -old Sheltie mix, proved to Richard Avanzino that the city of San Francisco loved companion animals enough to save them from eutha- nasia. Maddie, a miniature schnau- zer, loved Dave Duffield so much that Duffield vowed to gear his philanthropy toward helping ani- mals. Now the men are bringing to- gether Avanzino's enthusiasm and Duffield's money to work to- ward a "no kill" goal. What it means is that by 2010 every adoptable dog and cat in Ameri- ca's animal shelters and pounds would be guaranteed a loving home. In a nation where an estimated 4.85 million dogs and cats are euthanized annually, it's 'a tall order. "We are capital venturists who say we will invest ... to save ani- mal lives with the understanding that the return on our investment has to be measured in the reduc- tion of animals killed on a quar- terly basis," Avanzino says. "We're not here to enrich stock- brokers; we're not here for a quarterly profit. Our goal is that every healthy animal has a lov- ing home." Sido came into Avanzino's life in 1979, three years after he took over as head of the San Francis- co Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Her owner, who killed herself; stated in her will that Sido should be euthan- ized and buried beside her. Sido went to the SPCA to live her last days, but, when a lawyer, showed up to take.her;aivav the Lawyers, judges, legislators, even then -Gov. Jerry Brown got involved. Avanzino took her home to live with him and his wife while the legal war was waged. Ultimately, her life was spared. "We were best friends for five wonderful years, and we'were never apart," Avanzino says of the dog, who went to work with him every day. "She was a won- derful goodwill ambassador for animals in need." Maddie came into Duffield's life in the early 1980s, lean years when he and his wife, Cheryl, were living in a condo in Walnut Creek. "She got to be a very good friend during some really rough times we were going through at the company," Duffield says of Maddie, who died of cancer in March 1997. "I promised her that if I ever had enough money, I would return it to her and her kind." Through PeopleSoft, his $5.5 billion computer software empire founded in Pleasanton, he now has that money. He pledged the $200 million and said it was just the beginning. Duffield, 58, has eight children, five of them adopted. But he said his will provides that most of his wealth — "we're talking the b- word" — goes to the Duffield Family Foundation. Duffield's first donation to the San Francisco SPCA came in 1994, when he gave $500,000, fol- lowed by $1 million for Maddie's Adoption Center, a wing at the SPCA. He says he has contribut- ed to 30 to 40 animal - protection' groups, and in 1997 he donated $20 million to the engineering school at Cornell University, his alma mater. Avanzino took over Jan. 1 as head of Duffield's foundation and has 11 years to achieve his no -kill goal — city by city, state by state. His plan for the Duffield mon- ey is threefold: spaying and neu- tering; finding each adoptable animal a home through several means, including better market- ing of shelter animals; and help- ing owners keep their pets under adverse, unforeseen circum- stances, such as illness or a move. "We've seen the pluses and minuses of the conventional ap- proach," says Merritt Clifton, editor of Animal People, a maga- zine based in Clinton, Wash. "We've not seen what happens if we try to do it Richard's way. So ... let's see." Avanzino arrived at the San Francisco SPCA in 1976 after in- vestigations revealed high -vol- ume killing of dogs and cats. He ended the SPCA's animal - control contract with the city. The SPCA also began off -site adoptions; programs to provide dogs to the hearing impaired and to help senior citizens and the homeless keep their pets; behav- ioral counseling and training;' neutering feral cats for free; and later, paying'people to bring in feral cats for fixing. It also helped homeless people keep their animals by providing health care, tags, leashes and grooming. His work has brought praise, criticism avid some hurt feelings from those who run traditional shelters where adoptable ani- mals are euthanized because of a lack of space. Much of the criticism centers on semantics. What are the crite- ria for an adoptable animal? Who decides? Roger Caras, head of the ASPCA in New York City, last year . called no-kill "more hoax than fact. But ASPCA spokesman Peter Paris says Avanzino may have a chance. "Will we get to the point where the overwhelming majority of adoptable animals won't have to be killed because of a lack of cage space? We hope so," Paris says. The �gister's Rental �- 1dS;a ^'+ listings are now online! visit 0. C u ity's Apartment Communities: wW.ocreg1*We oiNads/real estateirentaU; 2'"s'/K. ...�. .•�., tt'.L• wa., _'3SCv: +�, :bte'ik•y ' I. It It, q q e e a` U N H W J W S J Q Z a Q W m O a W Z to co cm (U N L i ri) r C -0 L N V% O) N -J (U np N C N a C N L U H W oc J oo Lo O 0 Co O O N m V N N T 0 0 H WO N th N O N O to > ZN N t0 N N O N a�D H ON n m N O m m O O N N N N W (Y) in 0 0 0 0 O N th 0� Q Jth V N O to N t0 N '- N N w Z� (n O O N V V 0) Q N (h t0 N t0 O ^ to �L a coo °nv -°D Q Q 0 O N O O O. LO �L LL N O N O .-- O V Z Q N to N to ° N N LO y a C __0 O N 0 N 0 o m 3 0 op:= .2tn N J ) N 'N N N y d c N T N 0 L N y � .. - - y N �a m = =io U U L n y E N N O coca mmmm aaaaaa�� to co cm (U N L i ri) r C -0 L N V% O) N -J (U np N C N a C N L U H W oc J N U N H W J W S J Q Z a a W m O a W Z Y to W ch O N W •-- N N (n H N^ n LO N - N 0 LO t0 Z H V N N I,. O^ O m co 0 W M CO Co N O N" rn in aN O N N N 0OD N N J O N N N N N N n O W Z O t0 V N N V O N } Q Nth�N °t0 It �L L O n N N^ n (Y) Q Q N N nO� �L W N N t0 O N to LL N (Y) N N O tQ LO y C O O` U 0 0 0 .-. 0« ::. r t1% t y co .p -O y N O O o< c N N y d N r Eta L u) � r C '- C � C N G Z) a Q) = _ Co U U 0 L w N E N N O N N N 'E E E J E E E ca o L C QQaQQQ�� E Q E C C co m � r V (U (U L ri) N C N V% to N J (U y o c6 C N Q N oW'oc Co r % Yj W V ^� Q W v E A CL 11 ❑ C d V L a° E V E c M0 /r/�, W _ 0 O L CL } d Z c E .r. Q A C9 W C y Q P N O O m N w Q U a p m O m o U 0 Q U O m ol N p m C p W p p p Q o y w Q W p w p m C C Z p Q m U Z of Q p m O m Q Q Q vwi U m C w a O C m N m o � m � n Q � � Q w J O ON N O Q C9 V w Z O 2 Z p N h m y C O Q Q C Q J Uj Q U D CD C p Q U N N N N U Q C O ° 21 m m ° p Q N a Z U Q Q Q n D O C9 x o n p 0 x O U m m m N N C) m ' ~O Q Q Em o O m0 x C9 E Q E UO o m U m p u�i O Q N P > O j U m � Q . O _� -- Q� d on- N N U m Q m W O N Q = U n Q Q n C Qp -O Q �° N o Q U U Q Q Q w m C w < Q w Z O w O Q J h z � OC z W 3 C Z A wY` W E t9 Q d V .O a v t9 d mr i O wL W Z TA • 2 E E u i n` W Q 0 0� P N ol 0 O r Q U a p O O N _ N N w P C Z p a LL Q p O p a w° N O O w O O O C C n J Q c Z a W Q O Z � Q � Q O Q < n o O Q O U Of w CL of ° m 0 ° M p M Q N N Z Q O O 0 w > co 0 2 N U w Z _Z Y C h 0 � C p w co Q _ Q a a Q J O Un Cf co M M N W C O P o P ol p Q P P P o 0 Z O Q O 0 a P M p O S 0 m v N p co eO Z 0 m v N o O U O ^ E R 3 U p h >m O N M P P J � S m i2- V N O= C 1>1 I m a ^ a 0 a M cw n _ U O Fo M M Q -Z CQ P '2 Q ^ a m j a c C9Z O M M N M Q M ^ ^ ^ ^ Q W C w H H z Z w Z c� C O C Z C9 a a O i n` February 5, 1999 Mayor Dennis O'Neil City Hall 3300 Newport Blvd Newport City, Ca. 9266' Mayor O'Neil, I am planning to attend the City Council study session on 2/25/99 and would like to share some thoughts for consideration in your deliberation regarding possible changes in how your City delivers animal control services and animal sheltering services. My interest in this matter is based on my genuine love for animals. Having served on the Mission Viejo City Council, I was fortunate to have the opportunity to guide the process in Mission Viejo that resulted in our own pro- humane program and Shelter. At the invitation of Christienne Morgan of TAGS I have participated in discussions with members of your staff at City Hall and most recently at your Police Station. Captain Hennesey was most gracious in providing some vital information. Newport City staff has visited our Shelter and others to glean information for your study session. This process is similar to our own journey. Before we put our program together we spent many days and hours with the staff of the San Clemente Shelter and gathered information from shelters in several counties to begin comparing the many ways animal control and sheltering services are delivered in other locals. In my opinion, Newport's method for delivery of shelter services, for good or for bad, is definitely out of the mainstream of how most jurisdictions provide service. I would like to highlight those unique differences because it is important to take them into consideration when determining what it may cost your City to set up a new way to deliver service. It would be difficult to compare budgets of Mission Viejo, Irvine, or San Clemente to your service for the following reasons. All animal control and sheltering services require certain functions i.e. licensing, dispatching calls and field service. Personnel, irrespective of their title, are required to answer general inquiries that may or may not require officer assistance, i.e. wild life inquiries, information on pet care, referrals to private organizations for pet problems, barking dog complaints, general license information. In your City those duties are performed by individuals in different departments and those salaries and benefits are absorbed into at least two departments budgets. Licensing is the part time function of an individual in the revenue department and those costs are absorbed by that department. Therefore it is impossible to compare your costs to any City's total cost for animal control and sheltering service because of your unique way of delivering and budgeting service. Your current budget numbers are really reflective only of the costs relating to the animal control officers. ��,kp The cost for Mission Viejo and Laguna Niguel to provide animal control, licensing, canvassing, and sheltering service was $680,000 for fiscal year 1997 -98. Laguna Niguel's share was $245,502. Depreciation on the building, kennels, vehicles etc. accounted for $65,000. (This is not money spent but rather dollars set aside for eventual replacement of buildings, kennels, vehicles etc.) The budget includes the costs for a full service animal program including animal control, shelter services and licensing, i.e. staff salaries and benefits, insurance, cleaning service, landscape maintenance, medical care for animals, dog food etc. Our cities' service needs are vastly different. Our program serves 2 cities with a population of approximately 160,000 people and 20 square miles and requires 9 full time employees. We have one supervisor, one dispatch/receptionists, one admin/office manager, one license clerk, 2 kennel attendants and 3 animal control officers. (Our kennel attendants assist visitors at the counter and answer the phones when they have finished cleaning kennels.) We also have 2 canvass clerks part time and one part time kennel attendant who are hired through a temp agency and do not receive benefits. It is important to note that the Shelter has approximately 100 volunteers who come in shifts weekly and perform every job in the Shelter except those of the Field Officer. When comparing your service area and the approximate 600 animals impounded last year to our service area and the 2,000 animals we impounded last year, it would stand to reason that Newport's costs for service should be far less than half of our costs for both cities. When you compare our 3 Animal Control Officers with Newport's 4 Animal Control officers, it would appear you are overstaffed. It is important to note that with the exception of a Shelter Manager, the position of ACO is the highest paid position in our program. Should there be interest in reconfiguring staffing assignments, Newport is likely to already have adequate personnel to operate a shelter. Your animal control officers spend a great deal of time handling general inquiries that are currently handled in Mission Viejo by volunteers. With a well trained volunteer force in place, the public's general inquiries could be handled at that level making it possible to direct the energies of a highly skilled Animal Control Officer to supervise your Shelter. Their duties would need to include managing aggressive animals but nearly all other shelter duties could be performed by volunteers. Maximizing revenue is critical. Mission Viejo takes in $253,000 annually in licensing revenue with 16,000 dogs licensed. Our fees are only slightly higher than yours: Altered dogs are $12, Unaltered dogs are $24 and Seniors get a 50% discount on each dog. We have a number of ways of increasing licensing revenue which are very well received by the community and based in education rather than enforcement. It is interesting to note that Newport's animal control officers wrote 1,300 court citations last year compared to MV's 100. It might be more advantageous to work toward voluntary compliance with leash laws etc. and take a little more aggressive approach to licensing which will result in increased revenue to the City. Licensing is a State mandate not a local ordinance. A majority of people want their animals to be identified so they can be returned to them if lost. It's all in the packaging but we have had tremendous success. Our canvass clerks do not currently go door to door looking for unlicensed dogs. They do follow up on every dog nuisance complaint received by the City to determine if an owner has licensed their dog, and routinely follow up on every rabies vaccine certificate. This effort has resulted in an additional $20,000 in licensing revenue in each of the past 3 years. Contracting out for sheltering services has drawbacks. Your current contract with a local vet for sheltering service has what I believe to be some inherent problems. Because impounded animals become the property of the vet after 5 days, there is no requirement that the vet maintain records of what happens to these animals after 5 days. It so happens that a paper trail exists and your staff is relatively certain they have a reasonable idea of the final disposition of the animals but frankly that is questionable because record keeping has been somewhat lax. Medical costs should be donated. The second unusual part of this arrangement is that the vet can provide medical treatment for orphaned animals and then attempt to recover some if not all of those costs by changing the adoption fee to include medical care. The PALS program was set up by the vet for the purpose of recovering costs for treating animals while in his care. This is extremely dangerous and circumvents the fee structure set by Council. In one particular case, fees to adopt a puppy were over $260 rather than the fee set by Newport Council of $58.00 No shelter I have ever visited or spoken with attempts to recover medical costs other than reimbursement for vaccines. Those costs are paid for by private donations or donated by vets. While it is understandable the vet would like to recover his costs, this practice creates a question of whether the vet is being reimbursed for his own out of pocket costs or is being paid for professional services rendered. Adoption fees could include some of the costs for spaying and neutering animals but fees should be in line with what other shelters charge. Of the 1,090 cats and dogs adopted from the Mission Viejo Shelter last year all were spayed and neutered prior to their adoption with the exception of 32 animals that had medical reason requiring surgery to be deferred. (In all of those cases the Dedicated Animal Welfare Group paid for those costs after the animal was adopted.) About 500 free surgeries were donated by 22 vets and because large K -9 surgeries are generally the most costly nearly all of those surgeries were for dogs. Some of the cats received donated surgeries and the balance were paid for by DAWG. This year however, the adoption fees have been increased to $70.00 for an altered dog, ($50.00 + $20 for rabies and DHLP2 for a total of $70.00) and $55.00 for a cat ($45.00 + $10.00 for FVRCP for a total of $55) The increase in fees allows the Shelter to receive enough revenue to spay and neuter all animals after donated surgeries are depleted. These fees are in line with those of most shelters in our area. 3 When TAGS volunteer Tina adopted her cat from the Newport Shelter in November of 1998 she could see the cat was sick. Although the cat had been at the Newport Shelter for one and one half months the staff said they only treat medically when it is critical. They did urge her to use this vet to buy needed medical care and concurred medical care was necessary. Tina took the cat who was later determined to have pneumonia, to her own vet and paid for it's care. At the MV Shelter donated money, for the most part, pays for these services but even when the City pays for care, this amount is never recovered from the person wishing to adopt the animal. When an animal is adopted from our Shelter a list of vets who donate services to the Shelter is provided along with a coupon for a free visit with any vet but a specific vet is never recommended. I would urge the Council Members to take the plunge and begin your own shelter services. Perhaps a building not in use at your maintenance yard could be improved for a modest sum of money. I recommend that you increase your licensing efforts. Veterinarians are required to give you a copy of every rabies vaccine certificate they issue so that you can send a friendly reminder to residents to purchase a license. You can create a public awareness program that can be fun and friendly and result in greatly increased revenues. Your City only has 3000 dogs licensed currently. There is a great deal of room for improvement there. A reallocation of staff may be all that is necessary to staff a shelter. Staffing your new shelter with community volunteers will create excitement in the community and result in a warm and friendly environment that is good for animals and people who visit the shelter. I highly recommend a matching fund program for your capital costs to build a new Shelter much like what you achieved already with community support for your new library. I believe community interest is strong. The volunteer base with TAGS is talented, resourceful, energetic and most capable of getting the job done. cc: Captain Paul Hennisey, for distribution to all Council Members (to be included with the staff report for study session 2/25/99). -X,7- 9a� 6 CP- 4 -- r1 rII' I (!/ The Mission Viejo Animal Services Center is a "state - of- the - heart" facility conve- niently located one block south of the intersection of Crown Valley and Marguerite pkwys., at 28095 Hillcrest. Situated on 3.66 parklike acres, the center is surrounded by landscaped slopes and open space. Specially designed by architect Richard Rauh, it includes both an Animal Shelter and an Animal Urgent Care Clinic. t i xs` r" (. DS... fED eve F-r_ An integral part of Mission Viejo's Animal Services Center is the Animal Urgent Care Clinic of South Orange County. Built and operated by a group of local veterinarians, this clinic is open at night and on weekends and holidays to provide emergency care for sick and injured animals during the hours when most veterinary offices are closed. The purpose of this center is :o to provide humane shelter for lost and homeless animals, :o to provide life- saving treatment for animals that are injured or ill, and to to find homes for "orphaned" animals without resorting to euthanasia unless it is in the best interest of the animal or is necessary to protect the health and safety of others. The Animal Shelter is operated by the City of Mission Viejo. Members of the shelter's professional staff are aided in the performance of their duties by more than 100 dedicated volunteers. Animal Services Officers Linda Greaves and Marcus Nieto respond to calls for help from people whoare concemed about strays like Busteror are startled tofind a snake orother wild creature in their yard. Their duties include calming jittery nerves, rescuing frightened or injured animals, talking with school children about animal care, and helping people learn how to live safely near wild animals and take better care of their pets. r Volunteers donate time weekly to answer telephone inquiries, welcome visitors to the shelter, groom animals, walk and play with dogs, hold and stroke lap cats, clean kennels and cages, reunite lost animals with their owners, and `5 help people seeking pets get acquainted with animals looking for new homes. r� Since the shelter opened its doors in October 1993, it has been in.strunlental in: reuniting more than 12st pets with their owners or finding families ' . for those needing new homes. � I // ICI c% Me.5v oolnc%eiss conrc�fiY�nc9 The volunteers at the Animal Shelter are recruited by the City of Mission Viejo and by the Dedicated Animal Welfare Group (DAWG), a nonprofit corporation. In addition, DAWG raises money to pay for medical care for abandoned animals after the first $100 and boarding costs for animals who remain at the shelter for more than 30 days. DAWG also supports the shelter by ;® providing foster care for sick or young animals, !j promoting adoption of animals through a televi- sion program called Animal House, shown regularly on Channel 31, and a weekly newspaper feature aptly entitled "Pet of the Week," ?® conducting educational tours of the shelter, and ?® informing pet owners about the importance of spaying and neutering to prevent pet overpopula- tion. ` / / %uP sc iaic •ca Cw/v /11 -oo([k P The Animal Urgent Care Clinic was established in 1979 by a group of local veterinarians to provide emergency off -hour care for sick and injured animals. Fully equipped with the latest surgical, anesthetic, laboratory, and monitoring equipment, the clinic is staffed by an experienced veterinarian who stands ready to assist animals and their owners in any emer- gency. Kennel Attendant Susan Paul has herhands full. Because the number of cats and kittensabandoned daily has far outpaced projections, shelterfelinesare currently housed in a temporary building, and a new cattery is urgently needed. You can help by providinga fosterhome fora kitten, adoptinga cat, ormakinga contribution to DAWG's capital fund. Dogsat the shelterare housed in 32 four - foot -by- eight -foot outdoor kennels specially designed foreasy cleaning. Each group of 16 kennels is covered with protective roofing and equipped with roll -down canvas, which provides a barrier against wind and rain. � sm ENZ "imb 9-ImMa 91�J & &ocz oaiz p, .6 Join DAWG. Send a check for $25, payable to DAWG, to 27427 Capricho, Mission Viejo, CA 92692. Give Time. If you love animals and have some hours you could donate to give them a second chance, call either 470-3061 or 470-3045. Send Money. Funds are needed to cover the costs of boarding animals, paying medical bills, buying cat cages, and building a cattery. Arrangements can be made to affix your name or that of a beloved pet or person to a cage, kennel, or room. For more information call 582 -9332. Donations in any amount are welcome and are tax deductible. Animal Control .......... .......................470 -3045 Animal Urgent Care Clinic .............. 364 -6228 Dedicated Animal welfare Group ... 582 -9332 Mission Viejo Animal Shelter.......... 470 -3045 CLINIC HOURS Mon.-Fri ....... •6 p.m. to 8 a.m. Weekends..... From noon on Sat. until 8 a.m. on Mon. Mission Viejo Volunteers ................ 470 -3061 All Major Holidays .24 hours This printing of the Shelter Story was sponsored by Animal Urgent Care. Western Waste Industries, and by TAMS. the food of choice for all of the animals at the shelter. u•. 2/10/99 Council Member Newport Beach City Council P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 Christi Coker 503 Marguerite Corona del Mar. CA 92625 Dear Council Member, ?ECE:IV J '99 FEB 11 A10:29 OFFICE OF T!i CITY CLERK CITY "':LrVrORTBEACH I am writing in support of T.A.G.S.. the "no kill" animal shelter proposed by Tina Seri and Christienne Morgan. A shelter of this kind could only benefit our community and our pets. Newport Beach has the money, the space and the concern of the people to make this happen. Our pets mean a great deal to us and providing a safe and comfortable, "no kill" facility for them, should they become lost, is a most logical and humane idea. The integrity of our city relys on your good, sound judgement for the appropriate spending of funds and I'm sure you've heard all the arguments for the need of such a facility so I will not make this a long and heart wrenching plea. So on behalf of the concerned pet owners of this city, I ask you to please make room in your hearts and in our community for T.A.G.S. Thank you so much for your time, Christi Coker Date Copies Sent To: yor �,,�a until Member �anager Attgrne p� o V 0 0 Date Cope Sent To: Cap- Q� ncil Member Manager ❑ orney February 10, 1999 LAW OFFICES OF KELLY S. JOHNSON ATTORNEY AT LAW ISO NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE SUITE 100 NEWPORT BEACH. CALIFORNIA 92660 TELEPNONE (9491 729-8014 FAC51MILE 19491 729 -8050 Newport Beach City Council 3300 Newport Boulevard Raach, CA 92663 e� '99 FEB 12 h 9 :46 Re: Why We Need a Top Quality New Shelter for Newport Beach Dear Newport Beach City Council: 'C,4T BEACH As a long -time business owner in and former resident of Newport Beach, as well as a multi -pet family, we wanted to contact you with our support for a new animal shelter in the City of Newport Beach. The time is right, the need is there and the community is anxious to support a quality facility, which would benefit the City, its residents and its furry- friends. There are many reasons why a new animal shelter is needed and some of those reasons, related issues and considerations are set forth below. Thank you for your prompt consideration thereof and I look forward to meeting with you regarding the new shelter at upcoming City Counsel Meetings. The Location of the new shelter is of extreme importance. The shelter should not be located in a "For Profit" business. It needs to be at a separate location so animals can receive the care they will need. No one in the community knows we currently have a shelter. Rather, they think of Laguna Beach, Irvine or Mission Viejo. We reed and want. a shelt, -r that is located c.n the map as well as in the hearts of the citizens of Newport Beach. The contract with the City apparently now relinquishes animals to a Vet after 5 days. However, why would the City absolve itself from making decisions on what happens to these animals such as: medical care (ie. who gets treated and who does not), who gets adopted, who gets euthanized, etc. With respect to medical care, it is important that the burden to examine and /or treat the animals at the shelter be fairly shared by the local vets, who can both assist and benefit from the new shelter. Newport Beach City Council February 10, 1999 Page 2 Also, the new facility needs to have room for an exercise area and a get acquainted area to evaluate the dispositions of the animals. In addition, all animals need to be spayed or neutered before being adopted at the new shelter. Otherwise, the problems associated with animal overpopulation will continue. Furthermore, animal cages and runs need to be larger at the new shelter. The new shelter also requires the support of a volunteer program that will assist Cite functions of the shelter, i.e.: walk and exercise the animals to keep them in good spirits while waiting for new homes; • evaluate the animals; • drive them to Vet's for medical care; • answer phones and greet people; • handle adoptions and screen applicants; • give all the animals T.L.C. daily. Overall, the City wants to have a shelter with a friendly and inviting atmosphere so that the community will think positively of the shelter and it will encourage people to come by and adopt. Please contact me if you have any questions with regard to the foregoing and thank you for your cooperation herein. Very truly yours, K-4. KELLY S. _HNSON KSJ: smm