IN THE NEWS - 2005

Culver City News
June 9, 2005

Animal Group Organizes

What had been a local Raintree animal welfare group is now a city-wide organization called Friends of Culver City Animals, according to one of its, founders, Deborah Weinrauch.

Members of the group are to speak at the Culver City Council meeting Monday night. The Council is scheduled to discuss renewal of its contract with the Los Angeles County Department of Animal Care and Control. Weinrauch said the Friends want a local animal shelter and animal control officer.
top

The Independent
June 16, 2005

City Council to Consider Agency for Pet Control
By Mary Frances Gurton

A group of 27 Culver City residents calling themselves "Friends of Culver City Animals" asked the City Council Monday to create a local animal control agency.

Deborah Weinrauch and several other residents complained before the council of the "up to one-hour response time" required for a Los Angeles County Department of Animal Control agent to respond to a call, and of a specific instance where an opossum was left on a street for two days.

"The cost of such a program is greatly outweighed when compared with the benefits a local program would bring to the city," Weinrauch said.

For seven years the city has been contracting with the Los Angeles County Animal Control Dept. for field services, sheltering services in Carson and licensing services. Also, the department conducts an annual rabies clinic in Culver City.

"The yearly revenues from licensing dogs in Culver City would pay for the costs of one full-time officer, a part-time assistant and other costs of running a local service," said Culver City Postmaster Russ Knowland.

This year, the cost for LA County Animal Control services was $58,754 minus revenues for license fees, penalties, and housing of $32,482, which brought the net payment to Los Angeles to $26,272.

The city's recently adopted dog license fees alone could bring in almost $13,000 to offset the cost of the existing program, according to staff reports, but that would still not be enough to cover the costs for a new animal care and control program.
top

Culver City News
June 16, 2005

Animal Group for Local Control

Members of Friends of Culver City Animals urged the City Council on Monday night to plan ahead for an animal control officer to work out of the Culver City Police Department.
The Council took renewal of its contract with the L.A. County Animal Care and Control Department off of its agenda before the meeting, but Mayor Albert Vera gave time to a few members of Friends to make their case.

Co-founder Deborah Weinrauch told the Council her relatively new group has gathered 700 signatures so far in support of localizing animal control. She said the group recognized that the city must renew the contract with the County Department for a year because the current agreement expires at the end of June. "What we're asking is that you consider how our Police Department can begin providing animal control field patrol and how the general fund budget for this basic government function can be restored to what it was for the 1998-1999 and 1999-2000 fiscal years" to make way for a local control patrol officer, Weinrauch said.

She asked for a Police Department or staff report on how such an officer could be implemented into the community.
Jim Berland told the Council: ''A local animal control officer who knows our city, our people and our animals and works closely together with other city departments, will improve the quality of life in Culver City." He said that goal "is within financial reach. Remember, we pay for animal control officers from the County. I don't want to see us spending
$57.02 an hour on an animal control officer stuck in traffic on the 405 when he or she could be driving the streets of Culver City."
top

Culver City News
June 23, 2005
Letters to the Editor

For Local Control

I was shocked to learn that LA County animal control officers based in Carson can come from as far away as Rolling Hills or Beverly Hills are responding to a call from Culver City. What a terrible waste of time and money!

Not to mention the fact that by the time they arrive in Culver City, it may be too late. We have a very fast response time from the Culver City Police Department for things like muggings; why not for dog attacks that can be even more dangerous?

Kim King
Culver City

Dead Animal Hazard

As a doctor and long time resident of Culver City, I am sick and tired of seeing dead animals lying in our streets for a prolonged period of time. Besides being hideous to look at, these animals are prey for other animals and rodents and are a health hazard.

I say that we need someone in town whose job it is to dispose of dead animals immediately, before they pose a health threat to the rest of us. Better yet, how about an animal control officer who can pick up stray animals and return them to their homes before they become a hazard to drivers, or road kill?

Michael S. Harwood, MD
Culver City
top

Culver City Observer
June 23 - 29, 2005
Letters to the Editor

I was one of several persons that attended the Culver City Council meeting on Monday, June 13, 2005. Several members of the Friends of Culver City Animals were given the opportunity at this meeting to speak to the Council about the need for local animal control in the form of an animal control officer in Culver City to handle the myriad of animal-related issues that every city encounters, Culver City included.

Culver City residents are getting the same animal control service as residents of unincorporated LA County, but we are paying 33 percent more in dog license fees. We are paying the same as in cities like EI Segundo, Redondo Beach and Torrance. In those cities, they currently have city-based animal control officers. These cities don't rely on the County. In El Segundo and Redondo Beach, they have well-established, city-maintained dog parks. In Torrance, dogs are allowed on-leash in every city park.

Here in Culver City, we are paying more than residents of Manhattan Beach, where they have 3 animal control officers in their police department, and an area in a park for off-leash dogs. We are paying more than residents of Santa Monica and their police department has animal control officers as well as an animal shelter.

This City Council determines how much residents pay in dog license fees, and the level of service that residents receive. I think it's fair to say that responsible dog owners, who are residents of Culver City, are being ripped off because they wind up paying the bulk of the license fees while other residents shirk their license responsibilities and don't pay the fees. I understand that there has been talk about using dog license fees to pay for a dog park, but until we have city-based animal control officers or a dog park in place, we are paying more without getting more.

Wendy A. Wilson
Culver City
top

I am a resident of Culver City. I recently have been witness to the lack of animal assistance and control officers in this city. For about one whole week there has been a dead cat and a possum on Jefferson near Culver City Park where I walk my dogs.

I have called in to animal control in Carson where our city is contracted out to report it. I have not seen any results and the removal of strays and dead carcasses like this is not happening in a timely manner.

For the health of youth too young to know better and for the health of my own animals this must change. Yesterday I was witness again to the compounded disgust when a car was parked on top of the carcass of the dead cat. I do not think it is fair to assume its ok to the driver of the parked car or any resident walking by in this city to have dead animal carcasses not being removed for weeks.

What's more is that the animal control we lack here is unnecessary. There needs to be a city division of the animal control system in Culver. This is an important endeavor for our city and hopefully we can see results for the requests we have been making. I am not the only one who feels this strongly and we all hope the city decides what is best.

Karyn Gatt
Culver City
top

The Independent
August 11, 2005

Friends of Animals happy that council will look for closer animal control site

by Mary Frances Gurton

Members of Culver City's Friends of Animals were appeased Monday when the City Council promised to look into methods for getting local animal control services faster and closer to home.

"I find it disheartening to hear the same complaints tonight that we heard two years ago," said Councilman Alan Corlin, "and to have the animal control people present again saying they know nothing about it."

After hearing complaints from residents and input from county animal control officials, the council unanimously passed a motion agreeing to, among other things, discuss with the City of Santa Monica about possibly contracting with them rather than Los Angeles County Animal Control's faraway Carson center for local services.

They also said they would look into the possibility of setting up a telephone hotline service that would ensure faster response times.

Culver City Friends of Animals has repeatedly requested that the city set up its own animal service center.

"There is no response from [the Carson animal control center]," said Dena Snedder, who also read a long list of services the center is obligated to but never undertakes. "You can violate animal laws in Culver City and not be cited. What is it going to take for the city to get local control to protect us?"

Other residents described dead animals left for days after being reported despite the agreed upon pick-up time being "within an hour."

Laura Stewart described a large, hungry dog who roamed freely around her neighborhood for over three weeks with literally no response from the Carson center, including answering the phone.

Other residents also said when they called the center the phone rang with no answer.

"We pay the highest fees of any city in the area," said Stewart, "but we receive the poorest services."

Joining those who complained about the center's lack of phone response, Corlin, who initiated the motion, said, "I called the Carson animal center two or three times this week and got no answer."

When questioned by Corlin about various expectations regarding dead or dangerous animals and call and response times, officials from the county control center who were invited to offer information regarding the complaints were of little help.

"The center is pulling together a call dispatch center that might help with the phone problems," said one official. "I was not aware of the problems being discussed here. I will look into them."

Neither officer offered explanations nor solutions.

The main obstacle to the creation of a city-run animal control center was funding, according to officials.

Chief Administrative Officer Jerry Fulwood explained that the contract currently costs the city $62,000, a surprising decline from last year's cost of $74,000.

Fees would have to be tripled, he said, to meet the expected cost of up to $300,000 for creating a new center, which would include hiring at least one animal control official and setting up an animal control facility.

Carol Gross, who paused when organization members became audibly disgruntled regarding her comments, echoed Fulwood's cautionary financial comments.

She said, "Like anybody in the audience, the city only has a finite amount of money to make choices with."

City staff will return to the council within 90 days regarding their findings.
top

Culver City Observer
August 11 - 17, 2005
By Sue Chehrenegar
Observer Reporter

At Monday night's Council meeting more than 20 members of the audience wore tags bearing the slogan "Friends of Culver City Animals." The "Friends" counted among their membership both new and long-time Culver City residents. Their organization appeared to include members of many different age groups, and their supporters represented many different ethnicities.

Their diversity underscored the breadth of the City's community of animal lovers. Some of the voices of those tag wearers spoke up during the first of the agenda's public comment sections.

The first comment addressed the issue that had brought the large audience - the City's decision to use contracted animal control services. Deborah Weinrauch and two other "Friends" detailed the results of their own investigation into ways that the City could correct the absence of a City animal control officer. Ms. Weinrauch made reference to the willingness of one agency to donate a truck for use by such an officer. She also said, "There is an animal shelter in Los Angeles that is interested in relocation to Culver City."

Ms. Weinrauch returned to the podium when the Council took-up Action Item A-3, a consideration of removal of the City's contract with L.A. County Animal Control and Canvassing Programs. She made reference to her earlier appearance on June 13. Alluding to others who had shared her views on that evening, she said, "Many of our speakers expressed concerns about health and safety issues."

Ms. Weinrauch had some questions for the Council. She asked, "How much would it cost Culver City to hire our own control officer?" Then speaking for many of the "Friends," she said, "Our resident dog owners need to know why they are paying for dog licenses." Finally, showing that she had done her home work, she said, "A dog control program would cost less than 0.1 % of our [City's] annual budget."

Jay McDaniel came to the podium with more information about the needs of all the "Friends." He said, "Animal control is control of all animals, not just dogs. Who benefits from animal control?" Mr. McDaniel answered his own question by offering a long list of animal control services including animal vaccinations, pet store inspections, resolution of accidents caused by animals and control of abandoned animals. He concluded by saying, "Residents of Culver City will benefit from local control".

Two younger City residents emphasized a problem that seemed to catch the attention of Alan Corlin. A small girl named Terri spoke about making daily trips to Carson to inquire about a lost cat. She recounted how she had gotten conflicting information from the workers at the Carson facility. She complained about having to wait in a long line, and about later discovering that the answer she sought had escaped notice of the Carson employee charged with entering information into the computer database.

Another young girl, Yvonne, echoed many of Terri's complaints. She had encountered problems while searching for a dog that had disappeared. The appearance of both girls stood out, because each made an excellent presentation, while a parent watched proudly in the background.

Following the public comments CAO Jerry Fulwood said, ''The issue of animal control surfaced about a year ago." After providing some figures to underline the extent of the problem, Mr. Fulwood said, "We need to look at ways that we can work with the community. We have a very difficult budget to balance this year."

Steve Rose said, "Adding a program is always a difficult issue...To have a proper animal control program, it'll take four to five employees to make it a 24-hour program."

Carol Gross had similar thoughts. "I think Mr. Rose has been reading my notes," she said.."There could be dogs loose from outside our City; they don't recognize the City boundaries. It would be very nice if we could have our own shelter ...Right now we have not been able to restore some of the services that were cut."

Gary Silbiger added another thought. "When we talk about animal control officers.. it is one of safety and control," he said.."Of the 8 cities surveyed, six of eight have their own program."

Silbiger moved that Culver City hire its own animal control officer.

Corlin asked the representatives from the County to come to the podium. Then Mr. Corlin asked the County employee to respond to the problems detailed in the public comments. The County representative said, "I'm not aware of these problems."

Corlin said, "That's your answer?!" Corlin then tried to get other information from the County employee. He said, "We asked for a separate line. Perhaps you could give us information on that."

The County representative said, ''The staff who are answering the phones have other duties."

Corlin asked, 'What is a reasonable number of rings that I should get?"

The answer: "All calls should be answered within a minute."

Corlin: "What percent of time is related to animals other than canine?"

The answer: :We take care of dead animals and animals other than canine."

Corlin: "Right now it's a quarter to nine. How many officers are on duty?"

The answer:: "two people."

Corlin: "And 12 hours from now, how many people?"

The answer: "five or six."

Corlin then said, "Someone should call a shelter closer than you are." He went on to present his suggestions. First he said, ''The path into trouble is not necessarily the same path out of trouble." Then he addressed the Staff and said, ''There's a 45 day grace period if we want to break this contract, is that correct?"

A member of City staff said, "Actually it's 90 days."

Corlin said, "I would hope that Culver City is not the lone island of this complaint.. Contact those cities close to us. Let's find out if we can get the dogs impounded dropped-off somewhere other than Carson. When a dog is picked-up, it should be inputted in the computer. I move that we go ahead with the contract, but arrange for licensed dogs to be closer for a pick-up. Mandate canvassing in Culver City."

Carol Gross said that she was willing to second Corlin's motion, if it also recognized the CAO's suggestion that City staff look at ways to work with the community. Corlin agreed to amend his motion to include that suggestion.

Corlin said, "I want our staff to interact with the County."

Silbiger said, "We want to resolve this as quickly as possible."

Corlin said, "I want to address the individual problems that people have."

Mayor Vera, finally provided an opportunity to speak, said, "Most of the things you want to say, they said already. I want staff to go ahead and give us reports and also to work with a committee."

Rose, speaking to the CAO asked, "When is the next COG meeting?" Mr. Fulwood said, "The 29th.

Then the Mayor addressed the audience, specifically the "Friends," and I said, "This Council will get back to you."

All five Council members voted in favor of the motion made by Corlin. The Council had thus reached a decision on the item that had been the focus of the first public comments.
top

Culver City Observer
September 1 - 7, 2005
Letters to the Editor

Two weeks ago, an open meeting of the Culver City Council was held, where the principle part of the evening was spent in the discussion of animal control services for our city. A number of people took part in expressing their desire for a city-based animal control officer and shelter and their reasons for the request. The Council, to their credit, expressed concern that this issue is now recurrent, having been introduced less than two years ago and clearly inadequately addressed by the County that currently does the animal control duty in Culver City.

They also expressed concern about additional expense that would be incurred by taking animal control in-house. I also took part in the discussion. However, due to time constraints, I was unable to present financial data that I had put together for the meeting that would address in some measure those fiscal concerns. I would like to present some of the data here.

As of the 2000 census, 5,249 dog owning households were recorded in Culver City. I realize that is five years old however, it is in all probability a safe bet that the number is approximately the same now. Given a $30 average of the combined license fees of $40 and $20 per dog - based on fees for non-neutered and neutered dogs respectively -- that amounts to $157,470 in license fees per year.

Let us also consider that a number of these dog-owning households own more than one dog. This is plenty to pay for a Culver City Animal Control Officer, who again, is in a better position to actually collect those fees and additional revenue from citations than a county officer who must split his or her time between animal emergencies in 32 city and county areas. I will add that in the first six months of 2005, only 422 licenses were paid up and for the entirety of 2004 only 2015 license fees were paid.

In addition, I would like to suggest that a city-based Animal Control Officer would be more cost effective. As it stands, a larger portion than should be of the hourly field service fees are being spent on mileage - time on the road - instead of on the call, and vehicle wear and tear. All of these expenses will be reduced by having a local officer.

In short, I hope that the possibility of increased revenues and lower costs will be examined as the Council moves forward on this issue.

Katherine Barlow
Culver City
top