Thursday, October 27

Out of Step for County-Wide Animal Control Program

For you folks that don't read The Courier on a regular basis, the following is a Readers Write Opinion letter this week.  Comments are encouraged.

Uncle Ted


Batter Up, Mr Mayor and County Commissioners, it’s time for another chat, I see.

The way the county animal control efforts are proceeding not only violate basic good business practices, it totally guts prior efforts that the full commission approved in 2008.

As noted in The Courier, after not meeting for months and months, the Mayor had two no notice secret meetings of the animal control committee, in early September.

I got wind that Mayor Davis was going to have another little no notice secret get together before the this months commission planning meeting and I made it a point to attend.

I had asked for a copy of their agenda at the mayor’s office, but was advised they had no published agenda. Go figure.


The fact is, I really don’t think they, the animal control committee, lead by Mayor Davis, of course, have any idea of what they are really doing and yet they want to draw up plans and specs and commit a half a million taxpayer dollars to do it, which in reality is only about 60% of the estimated average per square foot construction costs for their plan.

I wonder what they are not going to include!

But then again, as I have said in the past, if I really wanted to see organized confusion with very little organization at work in Hardin County, all I really had to do watch our Mayor and our Board of County Commissioner’s decision making process at work.

The latest public example of this organized confusion is, of course, their backward attempt to move forward with the long promised reasonable and effective county- wide Animal Control program.

Before we get into that, let’s take a little look back.

In 2008, after almost a year long public campaign to get the county involved in animal control, a silk stocking and text book designed task force was put together to develop a comprehensive plan for animal control in Hardin County that involved all of the stakeholders, including both the public and private sectors.

It took months of research, meetings, more research and more meetings, and finally the plan development.

I think I know why Mayor Davis doesn’t like to let the public know when he plans on getting together with one of his committees to officially rubber stamp his efforts.

Watching Mayor Davis try to organize or re-plan an Animal Control Program for Hardin County reminds me of a sea-story they tell in boot camp.

It goes something like this.

Proud momma and daddy were going all the way up to Great Lakes, Illinois to watch their son graduate from boot camp.

He had left Savannah almost 3 months earlier and Maw and Paw just couldn’t hardly wait to see him.

Young Kev had written them several times over the months and said that he really liked the marching with his friends part of the up coming ceremonies and that he had gotten real good at it.

Well, the time comes when young Kev and his 100 or so fellow recruits came by the reviewing stands and all could hear momma in a really loud prideful voice say, "Look Paw, there’s our Kev and wouldn’t you know it, he is the only one in step."

Strike One - Out of step, completely, with the comprehensive plans developed by the task force and approved by the county commission in 2008. Note: Approved by the full commission but vetoed by the budget committee. Yah, I know, that is a little backward, but this is Hardin County, you know?

Strike Two - Out of step with any experienced local, regional or national groups on the development process for a reasonable animal control program and facility. One of the golden rule lessons that has been learned by others is: Good business practice - Plan your work and work your plan and public animal control programs - Plan and define the animal control program BEFORE you design the facility.

Strike Three - Out of step with the budget for building costs of any national recognized average estimates.

Example - The total budgeted funds will only fund about 60% of the industry recognized estimated per square foot cost of developing or constructing a similar sized facility. What is going to be left out?

Strike Four (Just for good measure) - Out of step with the recognized need for a professional approach to facility planning and design by having the mayor and a local land surveyor develop the plans for this specialized building.

The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) strongly recommends that local architects hired to build a new shelter consult with an architect experienced in successful shelter design.

We don’t even have an architect, let alone an experienced architect, we have a land surveyor, as best I can tell.

Experiences across the country has taught that the pre-construction planning phase is absolutely crucial to building a good animal shelter. The HSUS advises animal care and control agencies to spend as much time as necessary to identify their needs and those of their communities before planning a new facility.

The experts say that doing so will help achieve the objective of providing a humane, secure environment for animals and avoid costly errors in the process. The 2008 task force did that for the county, but that business approach was rejected. Go figure.

It should be pointed out, I guess, that on the Best Friends Society’s list of "Biggest Mistakes Made by Groups Building New Shelters," so far Mayor Davis and his animal control committee’s program has got the top three or four mistakes nailed.

Makes one wonder what they have been doing for the last three years, don’t it.

I find the comments in last weeks’ Courier need another viewpoint.

Like Mayor Davis throwing in the towel as far as reaching an agreement with Savannah to operate a joint animal shelter, for example, coupled with the comment about Savannah officials rejecting the county’s "bona fide" offer to pay half the expenses of a combined operation.

Why should Savannah have to pay anything extra for county-wide services that are suppose to be for the benefit of all county citizens? The Savannah citizens have duel citizenship, so to speak, of Hardin County, first, and also the City of Savannah, by choice.

That would be like saying, about 70% of the county population live outside Savannah, so a bona fide offer would be for Savannah citizens to pay, first, 50% of the operating expenses with their city tax dollars while paying another 15% of the county’s 50% with their county tax dollars.

Mr. Mayor, records show that the county accounted for over 70% of the 2,500 to 3,000 animals that passed thru during the last year of combined operation of the shelter and in your mind, agreeing to pay for 50% of the operating expenses, and nothing else, is a bona fide offer? Give me a break.

All this after recognizing, in 2008, that the program had to be a county wide effort with Savannah making a voluntary contribution for an enhanced level of services with-in the city limits.

That offer was on the table in 2008. It is not there now because Savannah has moved on after being rejected by the county. What did you expect them to do? Wait on the county, again?

As to Commissioner Berry’s observation that it is impossible to persuade the county commission to help fund the city proposed sportsplex project as city officials wanted in exchange for a cooperative animal shelter agreement.

I don’t remember it ever coming before the commission for discussion or debate but he may be right.

The commissioners can not seem to get their arms around the concept of inter-local government projects and the fact that county citizens account for about 70% usage of the city’s parks and recreational facilities, at no cost to the county taxpayers.

Ted G. Cook
Hardin County, Tennessee