HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05222012 - SD.3RECOMMENDATION(S):
APPROVE the response to Civil Grand Jury Report No. 1205, entitled, "Animal Shelters in Contra Costa County,
Tail of Two Shelters" and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to forward the response to the Superior Court no later than
June 25, 2012.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
On April 25, 2012 the 2011/12 Civil Grand Jury filed the above-referenced report, which was received by the Board
of Supervisors on May 8th and subsequently referred to the County Administrator for response. The attached
response clearly specifies:
Whether a finding or recommendation is accepted or will be implemented;
If a recommendation is accepted, a statement as to who will be responsible for implementation and by what
target date;
A delineation of the constraints if a recommendation is accepted but cannot be implemented within a six-month
period; and
The reason for not accepting a finding or recommendation.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 05/22/2012 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:See Addendum
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: Dorothy Sansoe,
925-335-1009
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: May 22, 2012
David Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
SD. 3
To:Board of Supervisors
From:David Twa, County Administrator
Date:May 22, 2012
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Response to Grand Jury Report 1205 - Tail of Two Shelters
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
In order to comply with statutory requirements, the Board of Supervisors must provide a response to the Superior
Court no later than June 25, 2012. The last Board meeting prior to the deadline is on June 5, 2012. The Board
must take action by that date in order to comply with the statutory deadline.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
Not Applicable.
CLERK'S ADDENDUM
Chair Piepho noted that the verbal staff report included valuable details in regard to Findings 3 and 4, and
indicated she would like the written response to also include the same information. APPROVED the response
as amended today; and DIRECTED the Clerk of the Board to forward the response to the Superior Court no
later than June 25, 2012.
ATTACHMENTS
Response to Report 1205
1
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RESPONSE TO
GRAND JURY REPORT NO. 1205:
Tail of Two Shelters
FINDINGS
1. The Antioch Shelter currently has an insufficient number of volunteers to provide
adequate time out of the kennels for training, socialization, playtime or exercise for
the animals each day, which is part of the humane treatment of the animals.
Response: This requires a response by the City of Antioch.
2. The Antioch Shelter’s spay/neuter fees are higher than fees charged for comparable
services by nearby shelters and, for this reason, may discourage adoption from this
shelter.
Response: This requires a response by the City of Antioch.
3. The cost differences between the two shelters (as shown in Table 1) are great enough
to merit closer examination for cost effectiveness.
Response: Respondent agrees with the finding.
4. Neither shelter has an advisory council to work with management to develop plans to
meet space, population, and fiscal issues.
Response: Respondent agrees with the finding. Contra Costa County does not have
an advisory council for the state purpose.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Antioch Shelter should explore ways to increase the number of volunteers to
ensure the humane treatment of the animals and that each animal receives adequate
personal attention (walking, socialization) each day.
Response: This requires a response by the City of Antioch.
2. The Antioch Shelter should explore options to provide lower cost spay/neuter fees for
newly adopted animals.
Response: This requires a response by the City of Antioch.
2
3. Each shelter should examine its cost per animal to ensure that the amount being spent
provides for efficient, effective, and humane treatment for the animals.
Response: The recommendation has not yet been implemented by the County
Animal Shelter, but will be implemented in the future. We believe that the Contra
Costa Animal Shelter already provides for the efficient, effective and humane
treatment for the animals. However, the County also believes it is a good idea to
review performance from time to time. An analysis of this type takes significant staff
time. Due to vacancies in several positions in the Contra Costa County Animal
Services Department, staff is not currently available to perform this work. When
these vacancies are filled and staff is available, a review will be performed. The
Department will make every effort to complete the review no later than October 15,
2012.
4. The County Shelter and the Antioch Shelter should consider establishing advisory
councils to provide direction and suggest priorities for each shelter.
Response: The recommendation will not be implemented for the County Animal
Shelters as it is not warranted. The County has been looking at its advisory boards as
a part of the entire County structure and has found that there some that are
duplicative, have not been effective, or are cost and staff intensive. In an effort to
streamline process, increase effectiveness, and reduce unnecessary expenses, the
Board of Supervisors has eliminates those bodies no longer necessary. This proposal
is counter to the streamlining and the restructuring that the County has been doing for
the past seven years. The County Animal Services Department works closely with a
number of organizations who provide advice and input into the operations of the
shelter. A new advisory council is not needed to provide this service.