The County”s side
LAKE COUNTY — The future of stray cats and dogs inside Lakeport city limits is uncertain as discussions of past-due bills and discontinued services are at a stand-still between county and city officials.
The Lake County Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 Tuesday, with Supervisor Anthony Farrington opposed, to send the city a letter warning that if the city does not pay nearly $15,000 by June 1, the county will stop providing Animal Care and Control services.
“To take care of it, what do we do ? take the dogs and drop them off on the steps of city hall?” Supervisor Jeff Smith said during the board”s discussion about discontinuing services.
The past-due amount is the difference between the $4,497 monthly rate the city has been paying for the past 10 months and the $5,989 rate the county proposed in a contract renewal in August 2007, according to county Administrative Analyst Doug Willardson.
“They never signed the contract, so we can”t legally force them to pay. Every year in the past, we have provided the services in good faith until they have paid. With the new administration, they decided not to pay this year,” Willardson said.
Willardson said after he sent the contract renewal to the city on August 17, 2007 with the higher rate, he got no response until a November 2007 e-mail from Lakeport City Clerk Janel Chapman. In the e-mail, Chapman requested a report regarding services provided, including how many animals were picked up in Lakeport, according to Willardson.
Willardson said Lakeport City Manager Jerry Gillham called him in January to say the city would not sign the contract renewal, and that he would contact the city attorney and send the county a letter stating the city wanted to stop getting Animal Care and Control services from the county. Willardson said he still has not received that letter.
“They have been paying, but they are paying at an old rate, and it”s not enough to cover the county”s cost. In the meantime, we”re hearing news reports that they are considering discontinuing their contract with the county and providing their own animal control services after July 1, 2008. If they do, we just need to know, because there are adjustments we need to make in our final budget,” County Chief Administrative Officer Kelly Cox said.
Farrington said rather than sending letters, he would prefer to call a joint meeting with the city council and the board of supervisors to work out the problem. Cox said he has contacted Gillham to set up a meeting.
Farrington raised concerns to the board during Tuesday”s discussion, referring to the city”s debt of more than $1 million. “How they are going to provide their own animal care and control services is part of the dialog, and how they are going to pay this debt will also be part of the dialog,” Farrington said.
Contact Tiffany Revelle at trevelle@record-bee.com.
By Elizabeth Wilson–Record-Bee staff– The City”s side
LAKEPORT — Reigning cats and dogs. The city has no animal control or code enforcement officer. Code enforcement is shared by various departments. For the past 20 years, the city has paid the county to round-up its loose animals. But that”s about to end, and the city must devise a new, affordable method of controlling its pets.
The county Board of Supervisors Tuesday decided to send a letter to the city of Lakeport stating it will no longer provide animal control services to the city if the county does not receive back payments of almost $15,000 by June 1. The city planned since last fall to end the contract, and hire its own animal control officer.
But a potential $1 million 2008/09 budget shortfall means animal control is “just one in a dozen” of services the city plans to re-examine in order to shave costs, City Manager Jerry Gillham said. And if the budget won”t accommodate hiring an animal control officer, that plan will be delayed.
“I”m uncomfortable paying the county $70,000-plus [annually] for animal control without more analysis. I”m not going to be backed into a corner by a letter or anything until we”ve finished all the legal and financial analysis,” Gillham said.
“I don”t see many loose animals here,” Councilman Ron Bertsch said. “I can”t imagine the city has that many animals each month.”
According to County Administrative Analyst Doug Willardson, last year there were 497 animals picked up in the city of Lakeport. The year before there were 644.
The city received its animal control contract from the county in August. If it had signed it, the city would have paid the new 2007/08 increased fees for monthly services of $5,989. Instead, it continued to pay the previous years” service fees of $4,497 per month.
The county continued to provide animal control services “in good faith” beginning in July 2007, and continues to do so, even though the city owes $14,920 ? the difference in the increased fees from last year to this year, according to Willardson.
With plans to hire an animal control officer on the back burner, Gillham said the city will “either negotiate a new contract with the county or a contract with someone else ? probably with SPCA.”
He said he will not respond to the letter. “There”s been no effort made to say, ?how can we help you?” [Instead] they”ve told us what”s going to happen ? the county wants $15,000, well I don”t have it. I”m trying to hold on to paper clips for next year.”
He said legally the city must have animal control services, but that the ordinance “can be re-configured.”
“We have until June first I guess. My perspective is I”ve got 40 days to come up with the answer,” Gillham said.
Willardson said one third of the charges to the city are for shelter operations, and the remaining two-thirds are for field services. “We charge that based on what percentage of animals come from the city, the other [field services] is based on the city”s square mileage.”
About 12 percent of the animals in the shelter come from Lakeport each year, for the past three years, Willardson said, but the county charges Lakeport for seven percent of its budget. “A lot more animals come from Lakeport than seven percent. I think they”re getting a very good deal.”
Animal Control Care and Control dispatcher Katie Bennett said the city of Lakeport “really isn”t a problem area ? it”s mainly pick-ups and dogs running loose.”
Councilman Roy Parmentier said, “The county raised our prices to a point where it”s more affordable for us to do it. We didn”t want to get into the dog business, but we”ll supply it.”
Contact Elizabeth Wilson at ewilson@record-bee.com. To comment on this story or others, please visit www.record-bee.com.
