Sunday, March 30

To Be or Not To Be - Readers Write 3/27 - The Courier

In last week’s Courier, I was quoted as saying that I was "sorely disappointed" in the outcome of the recent Board of Commissioners monthly meeting. Well, duh!

"Sorely Disappointed" may have been the politically correct way of expressing it , but, it does not even come close to expressing my frustration with some of our county commissioners.

What really ticks me off is their naivete in the political bushwhacking of a year or so’s worth of sincere effort by some dedicated folks to address the long neglected animal welfare problems of Hardin County, in a meaningful and progressive way.

You want to talk about taking three steps forward and then getting knocked back, you should be trying to keep up with the proposed development of animal welfare in Hardin County, especially after the March meeting of the Hardin County Board of Commissioners.

It is said that "a thousand words will not leave so deep an impression as one deed." That has never been so true as it has with the way about half of our county commissioners have handled the development of even a minimal animal control program for Hardin County. A lot of rhetorical words and no action.

Talk about a dysfunctional and confusing organization. There have been several times over the last few years when the chairman of the county commission (Mayor Davis) has felt it was necessary to advise me that the Thursday night planning meeting was the time to discuss the pros or cons of the business on the agenda, and the Monday night regular meeting was the time to vote or take whatever action they were going to take. He usually backs it up with a two minute egg timer.

I must have gone through a time warp. The matter before the commission this month was for discussion and possible action on the unanimous recommendation of the Animal Control Committee that a full-time director of animal services be hired to work with the committee to create a working, affordable program.

On Thursday night there was not the first comment from any of the commissioners, except Commissioner Bryant’s inquiry as to whether or not they were going to vote on it tonight. I’m not sure of the reasoning behind the question, but you would have thought that after all this time Commissioner Bryant would know that the voting takes place on Monday, not at the planning meeting on Thursday.

A little history might be in order. If you will remember, after several of negative ads and Readers Writes articles in The Courier last year, animal control was finally put on the commission’s agenda in July with the budgeting of $50,000 and appointment of a Hardin County Animal Control Committee, with representation from both the public and private sectors.

The whole purpose of having representation from both the public and private sector was to remove politics from the equation and come up with the best people and affordable programs possible to establish a meaningful and functional animal welfare operation in Hardin County.
Guess what? It didn’t work.

This committee is composed of the county mayor and three members of the Hardin County Commission, three members representing the City of Savannah, and one member from the Hardin County Health Department, Horse Creek Wildlife and Animal Sanctuary and the Hardin Metro SPCA.

Without going into a lot of details of their recommendations here, suffice it to say, the end result was a lengthy comprehensive report, including executive reviews of extensive reference material that presented the obvious results.

That obvious goal was to change the behaviors of our residents by encouraging the community, including our local governments, to abide by or obey state law, to care properly for its animals and spay and neutering is the answer to animal control .

Little did they know, or didn’t want to say, that changing the behavior of some of our county commissioners by separating politics from progress was also going to be critical. The commissioners all took an oath of office to uphold the laws of the state of Tennessee, but some of them have their own personal agenda instead of the citizens’ agenda.

It is sad to say, but, several of the commissioners admitted at, or after, the December meeting that they had not even read the report and voted against it because they didn’t understand it.

Commissioner Stacey Stricklin and Commissioner Wally Hamilton, who supported the committee’s recommendation to put a director of animal services in place to develop a program at the commission meeting in December, seem to have come out of a coma to become a pot-hole obstacle in getting an effective animal services department started in Hardin County, sooner rather than later.

Commissioner Stricklin, along with Commissioner Jerrolds and others, now contend it is inappropriate to hire a director without already having a fully designated animal control plan in place. That’s a complete 180 on the chicken or the egg question.

When asked by one of the other commissioners, just who on the county commission is supposed to put the animal control plan together, Commissioner Stricklin, who voted to establish the Animal Control Committee, replied, "the Budget Committee, I guess." Now that is a scary thought. This is the same committee that bushwhacked the last animal control efforts by the county. Their solution would probably be, "Here is $10 dollars, go make it work or get the private citizens to pay for it."

Commissioner "Get-A-Shotgun Animal Control" Cagle, who opposes the use of any county funds for any animal control program, seems to think that animal control should be funded by the community "holding fund-raisers and be operated by volunteers, like the Hardin County Fire Department does." He must have forgotten that the Hardin County Fire Department has a full time fire chief (director) and support staff. I think that is what one would call forced reasoning.

Then you have Commissioners "Jam-Up" Bryant and Jerrolds who still seem to have an issue with consolidating the schools in their district and have assumed the roles of obstructionists, even though they both profess their concern for stray animals and animal welfare.

Commissioner Jimmy G. Grisham professes that there are no animal problems in District 5, which is the Morris Chapel area. This could be because some of his family members are in the animal breeding business and he fears the suggested registration and licencing of breeders of dogs—or that he wouldn’t recognize an animal problem if a rabid stray was chewing on his leg.

After all was said and done, although nine of the commissioners present voted against the recommendation of the Animal Control Committee nominee, five of the same commissioners voted against Commissioner Howard’s nominee, too.

If you would like to see the complete recap of the commissioners’ vote, you can find it at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheNewSavannahJournal/. I think you will find it, as Mr. Pickard noted, "at best a fiasco."

Speaking of Mr. Pickard—a private citizen with a deep seated passion for animal welfare in Hardin County, who puts his money where his mouth is—has paid for 6,573 animals, as of the end of February, to be spayed or neutered for the citizens of Hardin County.

Can you imagine the animal population of Hardin County if Mr. and Mrs Pickard, through Horse Creek Wildlife and Animal Sanctuary, had not volunteered this help to the citizens of Hardin County? Especially since low cost spay and neutering is one of the recognized essential programs in any effective public animal control program by our local government.

In closing, I would challenge all those citizens who have taken advantage of Mr. and Mrs. Pickard’s generosity, or have an appreciation of their effort, to step out of the shadows and contact your county commissioner to demand that an Animal Services Department be established and fully funded by Hardin County government, sooner rather than later.

Respectfully Submitted for Your Consideration.

Uncle Ted

No comments: