Loading...
CC - Item 4C - Stray Cat Drop-Off FeeROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: JEFF ALLRED, CITY MANAGER DATE: SEPTEMBER 25, 2012 SUBJECT: STRAY CAT DROP -OFF FEE SUMMARY A resident who routinely traps stray cats and drops them off to the Public Safety Center has complained about the City's stray cat drop -off fee of $10. This fee provides the City will only partial cost recovery of the average cost of $120 to $140 that the City pays to the Los Angeles County Animal Shelter to accept, house, feed and in most cases euthanize the cats. The resident argues that the costs paid to the County by the City are covered by the taxes that he pays, which is not accurate. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council uphold the existing $10 stray cat drop -off fee as partial cost recovery of charges by the Los Angeles County Animal Shelter. ANALYSIS A Rosemead resident has complained about the City's $10 cost recovery fee for cats surrendered to the Public Safety Department. The fees serve only as a minimal cost recovery of the average fee of $120 -$140 charged to the City by the Los Angeles County Animal Shelter for required housing, care, medical treatment and in most cases euthanasia. During a prior City Council meeting, the resident stated that Los Angeles County is confronted with a problem with an outbreak of typhus and he is acting to protect the health of the community. He also stated that he can recognize sick animals by their actions and appearance. Even though cats by nature are free roaming animals, he insisted that the cats that he captures are feral and not owned by his neighbors. He stated that the cats that he has trapped lacked collars as validation that the cats were not cared for. At the meeting he stated that he has captured 36 cats for care by the City. If this were accurate it would equate to costs in excess of $4,000 to his fellow citizens of the City. During his statements before the Council he also made a comment about possibly poisoning cats as opposed to capturing them, which is not consistent with City policy or humane standards. ITEM NUMBER:__ City Council Meeting August 14, 2012 ° Page 2 of 3 The Public Safety Department reports that the vast majority of the cats surrendered by the resident appeared to be domesticated and not "wild" or feral as he has claimed. Public Safety Department staff has contacted the Los Angeles County Acute Disease Control and inquired about the risks posed by typhus as claimed by the citizen. Staff was informed that there has been a slight increase of reported cases of typhus infection in 2012 which equates to 20 total cases from a population of 10 million people. Over the last 50 years, Los Angeles County normally has approximately 10 to 15 reported typhus cases annually. However, the slight increase to 20 cases County-wide can be attributed to education programs targeting both the community and medical professionals in recognizing the signs of infection. The contact at County Disease Control stated that typhus is carried by infected fleas and that Disease Control efforts are focusing upon the "flea problem" rather than animals in general. The infected fleas can be carried by wild animals, opossums, cats, rats, squirrels and raccoons. The contact stated that in addressing the "cat issue ", they recommend not feeding feral cats and using spayed /neuter to control the population as opposed to euthanasia. The resident has also cited an example in Santa Ana of encountering a problem with infected feral cats. The article that he provided to the City Council addressed infected cats at two school sites as opposed to a city -wide alert or concern. The resident stated to the City Council that the City of Los Angeles rewards the surrender of stray cats with a "bounty of $5 rather than penalizing them with a $10 fee'. The actual fact is that a group called "Found Animals" is offering $5 for each cat a person brings in to be spayed /neutered in part nership with 'The Spay Neuter Project Los Angeles ". The group also will monitor the program to prevent abuse where a party brings in multiple cats. The Public Safety Department has reviewed calls for service from 8343 Whitmore Street, the residence of the involved citizen. The service calls record may be incomplete and is based solely upon the reporting address: Trapped Cats: 22 Captured Dogs: 2 Dead Cat 1 Total Service Calls 25 Of the total cats surrendered the resident identified one cat as a "mean one" and only another as a "wild cat ". This information provided by the resident supports the recollections of Public Safety Department staff members who recall that the vast majority of cats surrendered by the citizen appeared to be domesticated rather than "wild or feral". City Council Meeting August 14, 2012 Pape 3 of 3 City costs for treatment/housing of 22 cats dropped -off by the resident have been in excess of $2,640. The actual costs could be much higher as the involved resident has stated that he has captured and surrendered 36 cats to the City's Public Safety Department. Finally, at the Council meeting the resident stated that the taxes he pays cover the costs of surrendering animals to the City and charges levied by the County. This certainly is not the case. Total General Fund tax revenues that the City will receive in the current Fiscal year are an estimated $12,414,900. Conversely, the total demand for services covered by the City's General Fund Budget is an estimated $17,349,500. The combined costs to the City's General Fund for the three most costly departments, Le, Public Safety ($7,519,900), Public Works ($2,762,300), and Parks & Recreation ($2,413,300) alone total a combined cost of $12,695,500. Consequently, the combined cost of only three City departments exceed the total tax revenues received by the City. (Refer to the attached Fund Balance Summary in the City's current 2012 -13 Fiscal Year Budget.) Clearly, the taxes paid by residents do not cover costs charged by the County Animal Shelter for surrendered cats. The partial cost recovery of a $10 cat drop -off fee are justified and warranted. Attachment w O O O O O O W N•• N• m. O M m 0 0 N N p p , m � [V y N h N Oi l0 y N U U' O N ( Q N 6l m O 0 O O O 0 0 O ° o 0 ° o ° m J � v_ 0 S O O O O O O O C � Q N 10 N IU m O O O O O O O 7 n �° ••• Ir O O N O m O O N o f/J N N Q m V Q N N N Q Q N U ° o• o O ° O o o O • o ° ¢ a I OJ lV 0 C O o• . i i . • O O O (, � J� • O • • O o O O L4. F y r yy o ° o ° o ° o ° o •� W f0 [O • O O N •••• m 0 ° N O O N N• N N r m 0 O N N h N • I N • N N O N N N N C N O N A q C U O 6 d U a U O N O_ v p C N C C C N J _ `. O 1 . U � • > m c E�E`EE K 2 m o y v� > > r U E E o m 2 m E a N o f u m n K K F r E_ E °� rn Q' I q m u `° o `m m a w m $ u� W r 5 JU IL W 50 K�UinUa aa U O L i E O N d OI U a m o ° c a o y C � n� a v ° a 2 w c c i O N 0 l v m a a c e 'a c v a E w n