My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
3/14/1995
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1995
>
3/14/1995
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:05:10 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 2:19:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
03/14/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
83
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
BOOK 94 Fpaft <br />Chairman Macht asked if it was totally impractical to try to <br />recover some of the costs from the owners of animals and <br />Administrator Chandler advised of current redemption and "penalty" <br />fees and a resultant income of approximately $6,000. Over a year <br />ago, staff presented the possibility of increasing the fees, making <br />a greater penalty for multiple offenders, but the Board felt that <br />if the increases were too much, there was a possibility people <br />would not claim the animals. It remains an alternative. <br />Chairman Macht summarized that it was the taxpayer who had to <br />pay for irresponsible citizens, to the tune of nearly a half a <br />million dollars for animal control. Administrator Chandler pointed <br />out there was only a 7.4% increase ($209,000 current budget) in the <br />Animal Control operating expense. <br />Commissioner Adams observed that the number of animals had <br />remained rather constant and it seemed to her they should be paid <br />at least at cost for the mandatory five days, because if the Humane <br />Society was to not do it, then the County was looking at a greater <br />responsibility/ cost for animal care. Money was the only issue; she <br />did not know the solution. <br />OMB Director Joe Baird explained that he was recommending, <br />based on their 1993/94 audited numbers, to increase the fee to <br />$30/animal which should bring them to a break-even situation. He <br />continued that it is a difficult situation because the County is <br />not experiencing a growth of revenues either, yet the expense <br />demands continue. It was a tough decision to even recommend a <br />$55,000 increase when other agencies were not increased. <br />Commissioner Bird summarized the complicated situation, that <br />staff was recommending that the FY 95/96 year allocation be <br />increased by $55,073, to bring the cost per animal up to $30.15 <br />even though the Humane Society is saying their basic cost of <br />providing services to animals for the County is around $40. He <br />understood the Humane Society is asking that the $40/animal figure <br />be attained within a certain prescribed number of budget years or <br />time, and staff is saying it was very difficult to guarantee that <br />because of budget unknowns. If everyone could agree that <br />$40/animal is a reasonable figure to strive to attain, then we will <br />work towards attaining that goal. While we cannot commit to <br />reaching that goal in one year or two years, we would work together <br />to try to attain it. <br />Commissioner Eggert and Chairman Macht agreed with <br />Commissioner Bird's summarization and that a future budget <br />commitment could not be made. <br />64 <br />March 14, 1995 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.