HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 20030828APPROVED 12!1!03
MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WORK SESSION
JOINT SESSION WITH ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH AND
ANIMAL PROTECTION SOCIETY BOARD OF DIRECTORS
AUGUST 28, 2003
7:30 p.m.
The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Joint Work Session with the
Orange County Board of Health and the Animal Protection Society Board of Directors on
Thursday, August 28, 2003 at 7:30 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in
Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Margaret W. Brown, Alice M.
Gordon, Stephen Halkiotis and Barry Jacobs
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Moses Carey, Jr.
COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill and S. Sean Borhanian
COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager John M. Link, Jr., Assistant County
Managers Rod Visser and Gwen Harvey, and Clerk to the Board Donna S. Baker (All
other staff members will be identified appropriately below)
BOARD OF HEALTH MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Melvin Hurston and members
Alice White, Edith Wilder, Alan Rimer, Jessica Y. Lee, Jonathan Klein, and Matthew
Vizithum
BOARD OF HEALTH MEMBERS ABSENT: Janet Southerland, Martha Jane
Stucker, Lee D. Werley III, Sharon E. Van Horn, and Barry Lynn Adler
APS BOARD OF DIRECTORS PRESENT: President: Pat Beyle and members
John Wise; Erin Furr, Secretary; Ann Petersen, Treasurer; Kendall Page; Dan Textoris;
Jesse Kaufman; Suzy Cooke; Cynthia Wise; John Guibert; Elfreda Illiano; and Tracy
Carroll
APS BOARD OF DIRECTORS ABSENT: Sanford Routh, Mette Tomkins, and
Sam Chase
NOTE: ALL DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THESE MINUTES ARE IN THE
PERMANENT AGENDA FILE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE.
Welcome and Introductions
Chair Brown welcomed everyone. She said that this is a regularly scheduled
work session far the Board of County Commissioners. The entire work session has
been set aside to hear a report that the County Commissioners commissioned and have
invited the Orange County Health Board and Animal Protection Society to join them.
There will be a presentation and then a question and answer time. The County
Commissioners will ask questions first, and any Board of Health or APS Board members
can submit questions in writing far their chairs to read. She made reference to the sheet
that explains the work session process and why there is no public comment at this
meeting.
She announced that Commissioner Carey was out of town and could not attend
the meeting.
II. HSUS Animal Shelter Study
Consultation Services Director for the Humane Society of the United States Kate
Pullen introduced her staff. She gave a PowerPoint presentation.
aj Presentation from the Humane Society of the United States on Assessment
of the Orange County Animal Shelter -Kate Pullen, Consultation Services
Director. HSUS
Process Overview
o The Animal Services Consultation process started out about 10 years ago as the
E Team, and is now a formal process and they do eight to nine a year far multiple
agencies.
o They put out a call to the public for input sa that they have an idea of how the
agency is perceived in the community.
o The Dispute Settlement Center report on APS was very valuable to HSUS in
putting together this report.
o They did have special one an one meetings with community advocates -both
critics and advocates.
o The report is delivered about three months after the site visit. It is a very long
process and is well thought out. In Orange County, they were asked by the
County to provide a preliminary report specifically on issues that had come to the
service about animal health problems, etc.
Suggestions on How to Receive the Report
o The report has observations, recommendations, and discussion.
o They specifically do not prioritize any of the recommendations because they feel
that they would be putting the agency in a hard place.
o Many agencies have been successful by establishing a task force to evaluate the
recommendations.
o It is important that the report be used as a tool and not a weapon.
Agencies With the Most Success Have Used the Report As:
o A springboard for strategic planning
o Status of where we are now and where we need to go
o Opportunity for change
o Opportunity to prioritize community goals and apply the needed budget and
staffing to achieve those goals
Kate Pullen said that HSUS was criticized on the preliminary report in that it had nothing
positive to say about APS. She said that this is true because the County and APS asked
them to provide the things in the preliminary report that needed immediate attention to
address animal health. This is generally not the place to put positive things. It was not
HSUS's intention to give everyone the impression that APS is devoid of strengths.
Strengths
o Dedicated and compassionate staff
o Effort to ensure spay and neuter before adoption and follow-up for compliance for
animals sent home on contract
o Trying to run a modern animal welfare program from a building that was not
designed for such a program
o Internal formal euthanasia training
o Temperament evaluations beginning to be conducted
o Initiated "breed party" to strengthen relationship with outside placement groups
o Provides after hour emergency animal rescue, behavior assistance to pet
owners, and other services to the community outside the contractual relationship
with the County
o Informative website providing needed information to the community and featuring
animals available for adoption
o Good working relationship with County Animal Control Officers
Recommendations in General
o When taken out of context are damaging and hinder progress
o Many hinge on others and should be considered in tandem
o Many cannot be implemented overnight -allow time for changes to be
considered and made -some may be years down the road
o Will need the dedication of time, energy, and commitment from shelter and the
County staff
General Discussion
o Shelter programming falls into two categories -reactive and proactive. The
proactive approach is recommended (i.e., humane education, outreach, changing
people's views, and spay and neuter}
o Limited admission versus open admission
o Conflicts between ability {budget, staff, and facility limitations} and desire to treat
treatable diseases often result in unhealthy general population and negative
public perception resulting in reduction of adoption numbers
o Weigh efforts against outcomes -hard to da
General Direction of Report Recommendations:
Facility Reality versus Desire
o Attempting to respond to the demands of the community to provide
serviceslprograms for which the facility was not built
o Strengthen and adhere to standard operating procedures to ensure facility is
used to its best ability and also to provide necessary accountability and oversight
Animal Management
o Streamline process -adoption, behavior, evaluation/selection criteria
o Promote healthy and behaviorally sound animals =increased positive public
perception
o Utilize agency vet to full capacity of talent: pediatric spay/neuter and disease
management
o Establish a euthanasia protocol based on the reality of the facility. Provide time
and space far those with stranger potential for re-homing
Management
o Increase accountability for staff
o Pracesslprocedures -compare what is expected and written to actual process
o Ensure the "basics" of the program are met before spending the time and funds
to expand the scope to include new ideaslprograms
o Establish excellent statistical reporting to reflect agency reality and impact to
citizens and County
o Utilize strategic plan to work smarter and more focused sa energy does not
became dilute and programs ineffective
Field Services
o Infrastructure weakness -lack of effective computerization and adequate staffing
o Update and use standard operating procedures to ensure consistency
o Formalize training for officers dealing with aggressive dogs, stray dogs, and
irritable people
o Good working relationship with APS
Responsibility of Community
o With all the programs and efforts of APS and the County, the solution to the
problem of unwanted/homeless animals lies firmly at the feet of the citizens of the
community. To change the reality of animal overpopulations, emphasis and
funding must be equally provided for proactive and reactive programs. Adoption,
although critical, will not alone solve the problem.
Comments
o Operating a full service animal shelter program is difficult, demanding constant
energy and direction. The life and death decisions, budget allocations, program
development and evaluation, training, accountability and public service are all a
challenge and should not be simplified by the public who may not understand the
full scope of sheltering. This will always be the reality regardless of which
agency operates the facility.
o Although the concerns highlighted here and in the report must be addressed they
are not unique or uncommon to shelters across the country.
b] Discussion [Q&A -Members of BOCC, BOH, APS Board Only]
Board of County Commissioners:
Chair Brawn asked about the facility the County has and the future -
limited versus open admissions.
Kate Pullen said that the limited admission title is something that started
about ten years ago that was "no kill". They felt that this term did not
communicate what this meant. The reality is that a municipal program that is
obligated through law and mission to be there as a resource far all of the animals
in the community, regardless of adaptability, cannot be limited admission or na
kill. Non-profit agencies that are not bound by contract to also accept all animals
in the community can choose whether they want to be limited or open admission.
There are pros and cons to both. There is a responsibility of where the animal
goes if the shelter decides not to deal with an animal that is not a candidate for
adoption. She said that a municipal program and anon-profit with a contract do
not have a luxury to became limited access or no kill. They can strive far low kill,
but there are still going to be animals that are not adoptable.
Commissioner Gordon asked about the report and where it is. Kate
Pullen said that they have the report and there are multiple copies. They are
happy to send it out. She thinks that it might not benefit anyone to get into
specifics because the bigger broader questions might be helpful.
Commissioner Halkiotis thanked Kate Pullen for saying this. He thinks it
is important for all parties to step back. He was glad not to have the report
beforehand and he thinks that it was a good idea. He thinks it is important to
read this report in a calm environment.
Kate Pullen said that they do it this way because it works and not
because they are afraid of anything that is in it. She said that the HSUS Animal
Services Consultation Program is available to Orange County, the task force, and
APS however they choose to move forward with this. They also have regional
offices around the country and the regional director far the central states, which
includes North Carolina, is Phil Snyder. He is in Naperville, Illinois. He
communicated with her that he is available to help Orange County.
Commissioner Gordon asked how many Commissioners the HSUS
interviewed. Kate Pullen said that she interviewed Chair Brown, Commissioner
Gordon, and Commissioner Jacobs in person. The other two interviews were
done by telephone. She pointed out that she has never had every single County
Commissioner want to talk about this except in Orange County. She was
impressed by this.
Board of Health:
Mel Hurston, Chair of the Board of Health, asked about the greatest
change that could be made to improve operations and if the report would help the
task force be able to discern this. Kate Pullen said that she believes so. She
said that strengthening the SOPS (Standard Operating Procedures) was the
single most important theme seen in the report.
Mel Hurston asked if a building replacement is necessary, then if the
report would help us decide how to better use the facilities between now and the
time that funding is received for construction. Kate Pullen said that in the
preliminary report they tried to convey how the agency could be run in a building
that does not allow it. She gave some examples. They did not take any space
away from APS, but they said to use it in a different way and manage the animals
so that a healthy population is ensured.
Mel Hurston asked if the task farces would report directly to the County
Commissioners ar if they would work directly with the other boards. Kate Pullen
said that they start off with this concept of the task force at the beginning of the
report. They generally recommend that the makeup of the task force be one or
two representatives from each party (the facility, the Board of County
Commissioners, the boards, the community, etc.}. They also recommend same
rules and regulations and an MOU for the task force.
Mel Hurston said that some were anxious about how we compare to other
shelters around the country. He asked how the HSUS would grade our program
compared to others that they have seen - from a scale of 1-10. Kate Pullen said
that she understands the desire to know where you stand but they do not do that.
She cannot give a 1-10 because she does not think it would be fair. She said
that the scope of the program that is offered by APS is up there with effort and
desire. They are saying to scale back those programs that are not so essential
right now and get some things structured in a business plan.
Mel Hurston said that it was gratifying to hear that Orange County Animal
Control works well with APS. He asked if the report makes any suggestions
about ways in which that working relationship can be made even better. Kate
Pullen said yes and they talk about some of the potential disconnects to the
community with different groups doing animal investigations. They encourage
strengthening the way it is working and communicating it more to the citizens sa
that the citizens understand the roles that both play.
Animal Protection Society:
Pat Beyle, President of the Animal Protection Society Board, asked about
the fallow-up program and if it will come from Phil Snyder. Kate Pullen said that
it can come from either herself ar Phil Snyder or whomever they feel comfortable
working with. She explained that one of the reasons they do not bring a member
of the regional staff an the team is because there has generally been a
relationship present and it would not be an objective evaluation.
Pat Beyle asked about the SOPs and said that having the staff to do this
along with daily tasks would be prohibitive. She asked if Phil Snyder was expert
in going over the SOPS and fallowing up. Kate Pullen said that they have
created a template of SOPs for basic operations that a shelter would provide.
This is on CD-ROM. The agency can create their own SOP with the template.
She said that this CD would be coming overnight on Tuesday because they could
not get it downloaded.
Pat Beyle read a question as follows: "Can you give examples of other
communities' proactive measures to reach the public? What positionlstaff do you
recommend to reach the community about its animal welfare problems?":
Kate Pullen said that it is important to know where the problems are in the
community by gathering data on zip codes. Also, conducting a general
information survey is a good way to find out what the community knows and
needs.
APS Board member Jesse Kaufman asked if the County would help in the
mare successful programs of outreach. Kate Pullen said that the goal is to
develop the strategic plan and the programs within it in concert with the Board of
County Commissioners. It is hard for municipalities to earmark funds, but same
municipalities are using disciplinary fees and targeting them to preventive
programs instead of "losing" them in the general fund.
Pat Beyle asked if the HSUS has a recommendation for a ratio of staff to
animals. Kate Pullen said that they have a formula that gives the number of staff
to clean and physically take care of the animals. This is in the report.
Pat Beyle asked about the recommendation of size and the kind of facility
recommended for a certain number of animals. Kate Pullen said that there is
also a formula for this. She cautioned that it is based an the anticipated
population growth.
Pat Beyle asked about the task force and who has the responsibility for
this. Kate Pullen said that this is in the report. The detail is not in there, but
there are guidelines for creation of the task force.
Pat Beyle asked about advice regarding best practices regarding
minimizing the impact of evidence animals on the availability of shelter space for
otherwise adoptable animals. Kate Pullen said that you have to look at state law
that says that you would not charge on cruelty, but on being an unfit owner and
failure to provide basic needs. It is a civil process in which the owner is given a
petition and the animal is seized and the judge makes a decision an whether he
or she thinks the owner is a fit ar unfit owner. The animal does not have to be
held far evidence.
Closing Questions:
Commissioner Jacobs thanked HSUS far this dispassionate look at this
issue with an authoritative voice. He has talked to a lot of people that are here
tonight about this issue. He is hopeful that we can move forward in a proactive
way. He was thinking about what the Board of County Commissioners has done
and he is pleased. He thinks that they are in a good position to make some
decisions and he feels confident that the County Commissioners will take control
of the situation. The County Commissioners will work with the Board of Health,
APS, and the general public and make a decision. He feels better about where
we are.
b) Synopsis of Preliminary Staff Report on Animal Shelter Operations
John Link said that they are trying to respond to the Board of County
Commissioners' questions and what other models there are in North Carolina.
This presentation will also show haw the staff has responded to the preliminary
report.
Assistant County Manager Gwen Harvey and Health Director Rosemary
Summers made the PowerPoint presentation. This is the handout entitled
"Preliminary Staff Report -Animal Shelter Operations."
Current Structure:
o All animal control officers utilize the County Shelter
o Orange County Animal Shelter built in 1979 -owned by the County and
operated by APS on land leased by the Town and awned by UNC
o Scheduled for replacement by 2006
Recent Improvements Since Interim HSUS Report:
o General shelter medicine and health care (i.e., vet spends every
afternoon there treating animals, SOPS are being evaluated, and three
new computers have been added with Chameleon software for Animal
Control and APS)
o Disease control and sanitation
o Isolation, incoming animals, vaccinations
o Ventilation
o General repairs
Gwen Harvey said that it was at the County's request to have the preliminary
report as it related to disease management because it was the most immediate and
pressing need.
Shelter Siting and Construction:
o Twa sites under active consideration for replacement facility -Chapel Hill
property near proposed Town Operations Center off Millhouse Road and
the County landfill property off Eubanks Road
o Project Timeline -must vacate current site by December 31, 2006 and
project planning for new shelter should begin January 2004
Models of Organizational Arrangements:
o All 100 counties in North Carolina were surveyed and 62 responded
o They found various models on how APS is conducted - 40% has the
responsibility under the health department and 23% are independent
departments under a County Manager. 10% are implemented through a
humane society.
Potential Model -Assumptions:
o Continue present operational hours of the shelter
o Must staff shelter 7 days a week to care for animals
o Includes after hours response on a limited basis
o Assumes limited reliance on volunteer staff
o Contracts for spay/neuter of adopted animals
Potential Budget
o Current arrangement, APS Contract -annual contribution - $428, 818
o County administration -First year estimated cost ($1,108,038 -includes
19 positions and start-up equipment)
o Second year estimated cost $964,943
Transition Models
0 1St model: Transfer APS non-management and establish interim
management (timeline of 4-5 months)
0 2"d model: open recruitment with staff hiring by Animal Services Director
(timeline of 8-10 months)
0 3rd model: open recruitment with concurrent County hiring of Director and
staff (timeline of about 6 months}
o Equipmentlsupplies
o Program services
o Veterinary services
o Wildlife care
Next Steps
o August 28t" -refer HSUS and staff reports to County Manager
o September 2"d -APS contract extension of month to month
o September 16t" -composite report from County staff, BOCC gives staff
direction and sets date for discussion (October 21St or November 6tn)
o September 18t" -public hearing, County staff continues to develop final
report
Commissioner Jacobs asked about the cost of County operations and if
the $1.1 million was in addition to what the County is already designating. Rorie
Summers said that it does not include the $428,000 current contract. It is a pure
number and does not include animal control services. It is not in addition to the
$428,000.
Commissioner Jacobs said that the timeline does not contemplate the
nation of a task force. He hopes that when the staff comes back that this is
contemplated sa that it is a package.
Commissioner Jacobs assured the people that live on Rogers Road that if
there is an animal shelter there or anywhere, that the County will do it in a public
manner and people will have an opportunity to comment and express their
concerns.
An unidentified audience member asked if the projected estimate far the
County taking over include vet services for contracts for veterinary care and
Rorie Summers said that it does include contracts for veterinarian services, far
spay/neuter of adopted animals only for the shelter, and far medical care of
animals within the shelter. The model proposed also has the Executive Officer of
the shelter being a veterinarian.
A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by
Commissioner Halkiotis to adjourn the meeting at 9:50 p.m.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
Margaret Brown, Chair
Donna S. Baker
Clerk to the Board