Stayin' Alive Long Beach Animal Welfare Information Guide - 2014
The following are Stayin' Alive Long Beach's Candidate Picks for the April 8, 2014 Long Beach Primary Nominating Election. These ratings are based on responses to Stayin' Alive Long Beach's Municipal Election Candidate Survey and interviews with the candidates. We provide this information for Long Beach voters who support the creation of a full adoption program and other responsible programs at the Long Beach Animal Care Services shelter through an act of City Council. This will create sustainable programs and policies that will protect Long Beach's shelter animals from killing for decades to come. These ratings represent the analysis and opinion of Stayin' Alive Long Beach. Click here to go directly to Candidate's responses.
Candidates were given ranks from 1 to 4 PAWS, with 4 being the highest. The criteria for assessing candidates were their openness to the implementation of innovative and proactive lifesaving programs at the Long Beach Animal Care Services animal shelter. Our goal is to end the killing of shelter animals in Long Beach through the implementation of responsible programs, including a full adoption program, that have been proven to increase the save rate of animals in communities across the United States.
Stayin’ Alive Long Beach advocates politically to decrease the City’s 50% shelter animal kill rate by advocating for the use of lifesaving programs at the Long Beach Animal Care Services animal shelter. The following are our candidate picks for the Long Beach 2014 primary nominating election.
Dr. Robert Garcia and Rosemary Chavez - 4 PAWS
Dr. Robert Garcia (M)* has stood out among the candidates in his support of Long Beach’s shelter animals. He demonstrates insight, fairness and a willingness to examine shelter policies and data to make informed policy decisions. Long Beach voters can feel confident that Dr. Garcia will advocate for Long Beach’s shelter animals in a way that will move the shelter toward a 90% save rate. Rosemary Chavez (CP) shows a clear understanding of the changes needed at Long Beach Animal Care Services to increase the City’s shelter animal save rate. We appreciate her interest in animal welfare, and we believe she would work vigorously not only to prosecute cases of animal cruelty but also to support changes that will protect animals and help transform LBACS from an animal-control dominated agency to one that also authentically engages in animal care.
Teer Strickland and Thomas Sutfin - 3.5 PAWS
As proud guardian of a rescued terrier named “Rusty,” Teer Strickland (7) understands that effective programs are key to lifesaving at the LBACS animal shelter. Her support of a comprehensive adoption program and willingness to review existing LBACS policies demonstrate her commitment to creating a proactive animal shelter that is truly a safe haven for LB’s lost and homeless pets. Thomas Sutfin’s (5) belief that euthanasia should be viewed as a last resort, combined with his support of a review of LBACS’s current weak adoption program, lead us to believe that he would approach the problem of the City’s 50% euthanasia rate thoughtfully and with care.
Gerrie Schipske, Stacy Mungo and Doug Otto - 3 PAWS
Although meeting with animal advocates did not appear to be among her priorities, Gerrie Schipske (M) has shown some interest in Long Beach’s animals, having recently worked on a new dog park. Her belief in reducing the unnecessary killing of homeless pets is encouraging, and the fact that she favors increased public access to shelter statistics as well as low-cost spay/neuter programs gives cause for cautious optimism. Stacy Mungo (5), who has experience with LA County Animal Care and Control as a budget officer, seems driven and hard-working, but we do have concerns that she comes from a high-kill shelter system and has a law enforcement background. It may be too soon to tell whether she will come out in favor of moving LBACS toward a 90% save rate, but if she does, she appears qualified to do so. Doug Otto (M) appears to support shelter animals, but his extreme lack of availability to advocates makes us wonder about his level of commitment.
Bonnie Lowenthal, Damon Dunn, Pilar Pinel, and Misi Tagaloa - 2.5 PAWS
Although Bonnie Lowenthal (M) has supported some animal-related legislation as an Assemblywoman for the 70th District, she doesn’t yet seem to have a strong enough grasp of the problems facing Long Beach’s homeless animals to take a stand on their behalf. She is somewhat amenable to reviewing LBACS’s performance and current programs, but we are not sure whether she has it in her to truly advocate for Long Beach’s shelter animals. We agree with Damon Dunn (M) that euthanasia is a “violent and disturbing practice,” and are glad to hear that he wants to learn more and get involved. Though he needs to learn more about the LBACS programs and policies that are currently causing 50% of LB shelter animals to be put to death, we believe his heart is in the right place. Both Pilar Pinel (1) and Misi Tagaloa (1) are in favor of reviewing and restructuring lifesaving programs at the shelter, while making sure that the public has input in the process. They have genuine interest in improving programs for our community’s shelter animals and given additional information, we think they would advocate for lifesaving changes at LBACS.
Jana K. Shields, James Johnson, Jack Rosenberg - 2 PAWS It’s not clear whether Jana K. Shields (M) would advocate fully for LB’s shelter animals; her responses were positive but didn’t show much specific support for policy and program reform at LBACS. James Johnson (CA) shows a commitment to transparency, which is key to ensuring that LBACS policies are accurately evaluated. Pet licensing fees paid by animal guardians should go back to LBACS at least in part, and Johnson may be a source of support for this; however, his support may be more for good government in general rather than specific support of LB’s shelter animals. Jack Rosenberg (3) took the time to meet with animal advocates, but seemed unconvinced that reaching a goal of saving 90% of LB’s shelter animals was possible.
Ben Daugherty, Charles Parkin, Rex Richardson, Steven Mozena, and Jim Lewis - 1.5 PAWS
Ben Daugherty’s (9) open stance toward creative solutions is commendable, but we would like to see him become more informed about the issues affecting LB’s shelter animals. We liked Charles Parkin’s (CA) support of transparency in government, but we have concerns that he may not give the issue of shelter animal welfare the importance that is its due. Although Rex Richardson’s (9) ideas about shelter animals were often on point, conflicting responses regarding LBACS transparency left us a little perplexed, and his accessibility to advocates was very limited. We liked Steve Mozena’s (M) support of a comprehensive adoption program at LBACS, but would like to see him become more informed about current shelter policies. We appreciated Jim Lewis’s (3) commitment to transparency and his support for setting performance goals for LBACS, but his low expectations for LBACS’s performance (a 60% save rate) were troubling.
Joan Greenwood, Lee Chauser, Stephen Bello, Doug Haubert, Suzie Price, and Ricardo Linarez - 1 PAW
Joan Greenwood (7) has had some experience in animal welfare, but her alignment with regressive “blame the public” views combined with her placement of comprehensive adoption programs at the bottom of the priority list is not what we are looking for in a new era of shelter lifesaving in Long Beach. Lee Chauser (7) thinks lifesaving is important, but the abundance of one-word answers on his survey left us wondering how much time he would put into advocating for this important issue. Stephen Bello (3) appears to be an animal lover but his answers were not responsive to our questions. We appreciate Doug Haubert’s (CP) commitment to prosecuting cruelty against animals but question how he can then support an agency that kills 50% of the animals that come through its doors. Suzie Price’s (3) responses show her largely deferring to shelter bureaucrats on critical policy issues. While Ricardo Linarez (1) did not respond to our survey, he did take the time to meet with us. We appreciated his time, but whether he’ll go the extra mile for LB’s shelter animals remains unclear.
No Response: Richard Camp, Mineo Gonzalez, Eric Rock, Matthew Pappas, Laura Doud, Lena Gonzalez, Martha Flores Gibson, Carl Kemp, Joseph Luyben, and Roberto Uranga
*Numbers in parentheses refer to district the candidate is seeking office in. Letters are as follows: (M) = Mayor; (CP) = City Prosecutor; (CA) = City Attorney
The preceding is Stayin’ Alive Long Beach’s analysis and opinion of the candidates for Long Beach’s 2014 municipal election based on surveys and interviews with candidates. Stayin’ Alive Long Beach is Long Beach’s only animal welfare organization advocating to end the killing of Long Beach’s lost and homeless pets through the implementation of new proven, cost-effective policies and programs that have dramatically reduced shelter killing in communities across America. These ratings are not endorsements.
Candidates were given ranks from 1 to 4 PAWS, with 4 being the highest. The criteria for assessing candidates were their openness to the implementation of innovative and proactive lifesaving programs at the Long Beach Animal Care Services animal shelter. Our goal is to end the killing of shelter animals in Long Beach through the implementation of responsible programs, including a full adoption program, that have been proven to increase the save rate of animals in communities across the United States.
Stayin’ Alive Long Beach advocates politically to decrease the City’s 50% shelter animal kill rate by advocating for the use of lifesaving programs at the Long Beach Animal Care Services animal shelter. The following are our candidate picks for the Long Beach 2014 primary nominating election.
Dr. Robert Garcia and Rosemary Chavez - 4 PAWS
Dr. Robert Garcia (M)* has stood out among the candidates in his support of Long Beach’s shelter animals. He demonstrates insight, fairness and a willingness to examine shelter policies and data to make informed policy decisions. Long Beach voters can feel confident that Dr. Garcia will advocate for Long Beach’s shelter animals in a way that will move the shelter toward a 90% save rate. Rosemary Chavez (CP) shows a clear understanding of the changes needed at Long Beach Animal Care Services to increase the City’s shelter animal save rate. We appreciate her interest in animal welfare, and we believe she would work vigorously not only to prosecute cases of animal cruelty but also to support changes that will protect animals and help transform LBACS from an animal-control dominated agency to one that also authentically engages in animal care.
Teer Strickland and Thomas Sutfin - 3.5 PAWS
As proud guardian of a rescued terrier named “Rusty,” Teer Strickland (7) understands that effective programs are key to lifesaving at the LBACS animal shelter. Her support of a comprehensive adoption program and willingness to review existing LBACS policies demonstrate her commitment to creating a proactive animal shelter that is truly a safe haven for LB’s lost and homeless pets. Thomas Sutfin’s (5) belief that euthanasia should be viewed as a last resort, combined with his support of a review of LBACS’s current weak adoption program, lead us to believe that he would approach the problem of the City’s 50% euthanasia rate thoughtfully and with care.
Gerrie Schipske, Stacy Mungo and Doug Otto - 3 PAWS
Although meeting with animal advocates did not appear to be among her priorities, Gerrie Schipske (M) has shown some interest in Long Beach’s animals, having recently worked on a new dog park. Her belief in reducing the unnecessary killing of homeless pets is encouraging, and the fact that she favors increased public access to shelter statistics as well as low-cost spay/neuter programs gives cause for cautious optimism. Stacy Mungo (5), who has experience with LA County Animal Care and Control as a budget officer, seems driven and hard-working, but we do have concerns that she comes from a high-kill shelter system and has a law enforcement background. It may be too soon to tell whether she will come out in favor of moving LBACS toward a 90% save rate, but if she does, she appears qualified to do so. Doug Otto (M) appears to support shelter animals, but his extreme lack of availability to advocates makes us wonder about his level of commitment.
Bonnie Lowenthal, Damon Dunn, Pilar Pinel, and Misi Tagaloa - 2.5 PAWS
Although Bonnie Lowenthal (M) has supported some animal-related legislation as an Assemblywoman for the 70th District, she doesn’t yet seem to have a strong enough grasp of the problems facing Long Beach’s homeless animals to take a stand on their behalf. She is somewhat amenable to reviewing LBACS’s performance and current programs, but we are not sure whether she has it in her to truly advocate for Long Beach’s shelter animals. We agree with Damon Dunn (M) that euthanasia is a “violent and disturbing practice,” and are glad to hear that he wants to learn more and get involved. Though he needs to learn more about the LBACS programs and policies that are currently causing 50% of LB shelter animals to be put to death, we believe his heart is in the right place. Both Pilar Pinel (1) and Misi Tagaloa (1) are in favor of reviewing and restructuring lifesaving programs at the shelter, while making sure that the public has input in the process. They have genuine interest in improving programs for our community’s shelter animals and given additional information, we think they would advocate for lifesaving changes at LBACS.
Jana K. Shields, James Johnson, Jack Rosenberg - 2 PAWS It’s not clear whether Jana K. Shields (M) would advocate fully for LB’s shelter animals; her responses were positive but didn’t show much specific support for policy and program reform at LBACS. James Johnson (CA) shows a commitment to transparency, which is key to ensuring that LBACS policies are accurately evaluated. Pet licensing fees paid by animal guardians should go back to LBACS at least in part, and Johnson may be a source of support for this; however, his support may be more for good government in general rather than specific support of LB’s shelter animals. Jack Rosenberg (3) took the time to meet with animal advocates, but seemed unconvinced that reaching a goal of saving 90% of LB’s shelter animals was possible.
Ben Daugherty, Charles Parkin, Rex Richardson, Steven Mozena, and Jim Lewis - 1.5 PAWS
Ben Daugherty’s (9) open stance toward creative solutions is commendable, but we would like to see him become more informed about the issues affecting LB’s shelter animals. We liked Charles Parkin’s (CA) support of transparency in government, but we have concerns that he may not give the issue of shelter animal welfare the importance that is its due. Although Rex Richardson’s (9) ideas about shelter animals were often on point, conflicting responses regarding LBACS transparency left us a little perplexed, and his accessibility to advocates was very limited. We liked Steve Mozena’s (M) support of a comprehensive adoption program at LBACS, but would like to see him become more informed about current shelter policies. We appreciated Jim Lewis’s (3) commitment to transparency and his support for setting performance goals for LBACS, but his low expectations for LBACS’s performance (a 60% save rate) were troubling.
Joan Greenwood, Lee Chauser, Stephen Bello, Doug Haubert, Suzie Price, and Ricardo Linarez - 1 PAW
Joan Greenwood (7) has had some experience in animal welfare, but her alignment with regressive “blame the public” views combined with her placement of comprehensive adoption programs at the bottom of the priority list is not what we are looking for in a new era of shelter lifesaving in Long Beach. Lee Chauser (7) thinks lifesaving is important, but the abundance of one-word answers on his survey left us wondering how much time he would put into advocating for this important issue. Stephen Bello (3) appears to be an animal lover but his answers were not responsive to our questions. We appreciate Doug Haubert’s (CP) commitment to prosecuting cruelty against animals but question how he can then support an agency that kills 50% of the animals that come through its doors. Suzie Price’s (3) responses show her largely deferring to shelter bureaucrats on critical policy issues. While Ricardo Linarez (1) did not respond to our survey, he did take the time to meet with us. We appreciated his time, but whether he’ll go the extra mile for LB’s shelter animals remains unclear.
No Response: Richard Camp, Mineo Gonzalez, Eric Rock, Matthew Pappas, Laura Doud, Lena Gonzalez, Martha Flores Gibson, Carl Kemp, Joseph Luyben, and Roberto Uranga
*Numbers in parentheses refer to district the candidate is seeking office in. Letters are as follows: (M) = Mayor; (CP) = City Prosecutor; (CA) = City Attorney
The preceding is Stayin’ Alive Long Beach’s analysis and opinion of the candidates for Long Beach’s 2014 municipal election based on surveys and interviews with candidates. Stayin’ Alive Long Beach is Long Beach’s only animal welfare organization advocating to end the killing of Long Beach’s lost and homeless pets through the implementation of new proven, cost-effective policies and programs that have dramatically reduced shelter killing in communities across America. These ratings are not endorsements.
Click on the Candidate's name below to read his or her responses to our survey
Mayoral Candidates
Robert Garcia - 4 PAWS
Gerrie Schipske - 3 PAWS
Doug Otto - 3 PAWS
Bonnie Lowenthal - 2.5 PAWS
Damon Dunn - 2.5 PAWS
Jana K. Shields - 2 PAWS
Steven Mozena - 1.5 PAWS
District 1 Candidates
Pilar Pinel - 2.5 PAWS
Misi Tagaloa - 2.5 PAWS
Ricardo Linarez - 1 PAW
District 3 Candidates
Jack Rosenberg - 2 PAWS
Jim Lewis - 1.5 PAWS
Stephen Bello - 1 PAW
Suzie Price - 1 PAW
District 5 Candidates
Thomas Sutfin - 3.5 PAWS
Stacy Mungo - 3 PAWS
District 7 Candidates
Teer Strickland - 3.5 PAWS
Lee Chauser - 1 PAW
Joan Greenwood - 1 PAW
District 9 Candidates
Ben Daugherty - 1.5 PAWS
Rex Richardson - 1.5 PAWS
City Attorney
James Johnson - 2 PAWS
Charles Parkin - 1.5 PAWS
City Prosecutor
Rosemary Chavez - 4 PAWS
Doug Haubert - 1 PAW
No Response: Richard Camp, Mineo Gonzalez, Eric Rock, Matthew Pappas, Laura Doud, Lena Gonzalez, Martha Flores Gibson, Carl Kemp, Joseph Luyben, Roberto Uranga
These ratings are not endorsements.
Robert Garcia - 4 PAWS
Gerrie Schipske - 3 PAWS
Doug Otto - 3 PAWS
Bonnie Lowenthal - 2.5 PAWS
Damon Dunn - 2.5 PAWS
Jana K. Shields - 2 PAWS
Steven Mozena - 1.5 PAWS
District 1 Candidates
Pilar Pinel - 2.5 PAWS
Misi Tagaloa - 2.5 PAWS
Ricardo Linarez - 1 PAW
District 3 Candidates
Jack Rosenberg - 2 PAWS
Jim Lewis - 1.5 PAWS
Stephen Bello - 1 PAW
Suzie Price - 1 PAW
District 5 Candidates
Thomas Sutfin - 3.5 PAWS
Stacy Mungo - 3 PAWS
District 7 Candidates
Teer Strickland - 3.5 PAWS
Lee Chauser - 1 PAW
Joan Greenwood - 1 PAW
District 9 Candidates
Ben Daugherty - 1.5 PAWS
Rex Richardson - 1.5 PAWS
City Attorney
James Johnson - 2 PAWS
Charles Parkin - 1.5 PAWS
City Prosecutor
Rosemary Chavez - 4 PAWS
Doug Haubert - 1 PAW
No Response: Richard Camp, Mineo Gonzalez, Eric Rock, Matthew Pappas, Laura Doud, Lena Gonzalez, Martha Flores Gibson, Carl Kemp, Joseph Luyben, Roberto Uranga
These ratings are not endorsements.
Dr. Robert Garcia
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
I am supportive of reviewing our city departments to make sure the public is being well served. It should be an ongoing process. I believe in open and transparent government and welcome public input and participation in all areas, including ACS.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
As the guardian of a rescue cat, Tommy, from our animal shelter I am hopeful we can save many more companion animals then we do today. We should try to save as many animals as possible and we should always look to improve our percentage of animals saved.
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
As stated previously, I am supportive of reviewing our city departments to make sure the public is being well served. As I believe in open and transparent government and public participation, I would welcome and encourage their involvement in this process as well.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
All of these are important programs and difficult to rank.
2 Comprehensive Adoption Programs
9 Collaboration with Rescue Groups
11 Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats
6 Foster Programs
8 Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs
5 Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation
7 Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines)
12 Public Relations and Community Involvement
4 Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially)
3 Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter
1 A Compassionate, Hard-working Director
10 Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
As city revenues have increased, we should restore funding to this valuable program. Clearly by reducing the number of unwanted animals, we can reduce the number of animals that we must find homes for.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
I would strongly support. I believe all non-confidential information should be online and available to the public. Information concerning our care and treatment of companion animals should not be exempted.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
I am always support of study sessions for City departments.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Dr. Robert Garcia, Mayor of Long Beach
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Very Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
I am supportive of reviewing our city departments to make sure the public is being well served. It should be an ongoing process. I believe in open and transparent government and welcome public input and participation in all areas, including ACS.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
As the guardian of a rescue cat, Tommy, from our animal shelter I am hopeful we can save many more companion animals then we do today. We should try to save as many animals as possible and we should always look to improve our percentage of animals saved.
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
As stated previously, I am supportive of reviewing our city departments to make sure the public is being well served. As I believe in open and transparent government and public participation, I would welcome and encourage their involvement in this process as well.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
All of these are important programs and difficult to rank.
2 Comprehensive Adoption Programs
9 Collaboration with Rescue Groups
11 Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats
6 Foster Programs
8 Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs
5 Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation
7 Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines)
12 Public Relations and Community Involvement
4 Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially)
3 Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter
1 A Compassionate, Hard-working Director
10 Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
As city revenues have increased, we should restore funding to this valuable program. Clearly by reducing the number of unwanted animals, we can reduce the number of animals that we must find homes for.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
I would strongly support. I believe all non-confidential information should be online and available to the public. Information concerning our care and treatment of companion animals should not be exempted.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
I am always support of study sessions for City departments.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Dr. Robert Garcia, Mayor of Long Beach
Gerrie Schipske
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
I would. Anything that helps us improve our services and saves animals needs to be done.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
Yes, of course. Anything to improve the rate of adoptions. I just funded a dog park and I am asking ACS to post a sign that directs people where they adopt animals.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
Yes. We also need a report indicating whether or not owners have requested assistance and were turned away for lack of funding.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
I have championed open and transparent government. ACS stats need to be fully open to the public.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes. I have consistently advocate for performance measures.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Yes and community meetings.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Gerrie Schipske Mayor of Long Beach
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Very Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
I would. Anything that helps us improve our services and saves animals needs to be done.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
- 90%
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
Yes, of course. Anything to improve the rate of adoptions. I just funded a dog park and I am asking ACS to post a sign that directs people where they adopt animals.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
- Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially) 12
- Public Relations and Community Involvement 11
- Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines) 10
- Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation 9
- Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs 8
- Foster Programs 7
- Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats 6
- Collaboration with Rescue Groups 5
- Comprehensive Adoption Programs 4
- Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter 3
- A Compassionate, Hard-working Director 2
- Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes 1
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
Yes. We also need a report indicating whether or not owners have requested assistance and were turned away for lack of funding.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
I have championed open and transparent government. ACS stats need to be fully open to the public.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes. I have consistently advocate for performance measures.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Yes and community meetings.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Gerrie Schipske Mayor of Long Beach
Doug Otto
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes, I would support all of these programs and initiatives. I believe animals should be treated with respect and dignity and we must do all we can to avoid euthanasia as a solution. The city should partner with local non-profits to build private resources so that Long Beach can move towards being a euthanasia-free city.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
Yes, I support a review and restructuring especially with adoption-friendly office hours. I would also support the participation of the public in the adoption process. Again, I strongly support a partnership between the city and the neighborhoods and nonprofit community to increase the adoption of pets, increase resources to fund the spaying and neutering of animals, and create a public awareness program to make pet adoption a city priority. The city should help spur private fundraising efforts and volunteer recruitment programs to enhance the ability of the city and nonprofits to provide humane life-saving treatment to animals.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
Yes, I would support an increase and I am a strong advocate of spay and neuter programs.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
Yes, all agencies should be responsive to the public and give accurate numbers the best way to know there is a problem and alleviate it is through transparency.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes and I will work with Stayin’ Alive to establish performance goals
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Yes, I strongly support this.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Doug Otto for Mayor of Long Beach
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Very Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes, I would support all of these programs and initiatives. I believe animals should be treated with respect and dignity and we must do all we can to avoid euthanasia as a solution. The city should partner with local non-profits to build private resources so that Long Beach can move towards being a euthanasia-free city.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
- 90%
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
Yes, I support a review and restructuring especially with adoption-friendly office hours. I would also support the participation of the public in the adoption process. Again, I strongly support a partnership between the city and the neighborhoods and nonprofit community to increase the adoption of pets, increase resources to fund the spaying and neutering of animals, and create a public awareness program to make pet adoption a city priority. The city should help spur private fundraising efforts and volunteer recruitment programs to enhance the ability of the city and nonprofits to provide humane life-saving treatment to animals.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
- Comprehensive Adoption Programs 1
- Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter 2
- Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially) 3
- Public Relations and Community Involvement 4
- Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation 5
- Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes 6
- A Compassionate, Hard-working Director 7
- Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs 8
- Foster Programs 9
- Collaboration with Rescue Groups 10
- Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats 11
- Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines) 12
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
Yes, I would support an increase and I am a strong advocate of spay and neuter programs.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
Yes, all agencies should be responsive to the public and give accurate numbers the best way to know there is a problem and alleviate it is through transparency.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes and I will work with Stayin’ Alive to establish performance goals
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Yes, I strongly support this.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Doug Otto for Mayor of Long Beach
Bonnie Lowenthal
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
I would support a public review of the current ACS practices and results. A common, easy to understand baseline needs to be established to find out how we move forward. Let's look at what ACS does well, and where they are falling short. Then, we can move forward on a sustainable future for ACS and its programs. Committing to a restructuring plan before getting the data is premature and could end up wasting already scarce resources. I always support public participation in decision making.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
As stated in my response to Question 2, I would support a public review of current ACS practices and results. If those results lead to restructuring or additional programs, it will be with broader public support than any changes without thoughtful, public review and participation.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
I would support an increase in low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach. The study mentioned above should give us a better understanding of the program costs, any shift in funding to other programs, and whether or not our non-profit or other agency partners can do this more efficiently.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
While I feel such information is important, and I agree the public has a right to know, I want to examine the cost of such a program before diverting funding from other possibly life-saving programs.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Yes
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Bonnie Lowenthal, Mayor of Long Beach
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Very Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
I would support a public review of the current ACS practices and results. A common, easy to understand baseline needs to be established to find out how we move forward. Let's look at what ACS does well, and where they are falling short. Then, we can move forward on a sustainable future for ACS and its programs. Committing to a restructuring plan before getting the data is premature and could end up wasting already scarce resources. I always support public participation in decision making.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
- 90%
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
As stated in my response to Question 2, I would support a public review of current ACS practices and results. If those results lead to restructuring or additional programs, it will be with broader public support than any changes without thoughtful, public review and participation.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
- Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially) 1
- Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter 2
- Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs 3
- Foster Programs 4
- Collaboration with Rescue Groups 5
- Comprehensive Adoption Programs 6
- Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines) 7
- A Compassionate, Hard-working Director 8
- Public Relations and Community Involvement 9
- Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes 10
- Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation 11
- Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats 12
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
I would support an increase in low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach. The study mentioned above should give us a better understanding of the program costs, any shift in funding to other programs, and whether or not our non-profit or other agency partners can do this more efficiently.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
While I feel such information is important, and I agree the public has a right to know, I want to examine the cost of such a program before diverting funding from other possibly life-saving programs.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Yes
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Bonnie Lowenthal, Mayor of Long Beach
Damon Dunn
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
I think it is morally important for us to protect the lives of dogs and animals that enter shelters. Euthanizing animals is a violent and disturbing practice. We need to be more vigilant to market animals, create volunteer programs, and work with our public officials to increase public awareness.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
Yes, I would support a review and restructuring of the Adoption program. I'm not an expert in how to improve the process, but if there are remedies available to save more animal lives then i want to learn and help.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
I'm in favor of providing this low cost option. We have one time revenues each year to the general fund that we could offer a portion of help with cost.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
I need to understand the current policy, the reasons for it, and the subsequent results.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
I'm in support of the city offering specific funding for low cost spade/neuter programs.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
yes. this seems reasonable. this is an important issue and it should be heard in a public forum.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Damon Dunn, Mayor
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Very Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
I think it is morally important for us to protect the lives of dogs and animals that enter shelters. Euthanizing animals is a violent and disturbing practice. We need to be more vigilant to market animals, create volunteer programs, and work with our public officials to increase public awareness.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
- 100%
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
Yes, I would support a review and restructuring of the Adoption program. I'm not an expert in how to improve the process, but if there are remedies available to save more animal lives then i want to learn and help.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
- Comprehensive Adoption Programs 1
- Foster Programs 2
- Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs 3
- Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter 4
- Collaboration with Rescue Groups 5
- Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes 6
- A Compassionate, Hard-working Director 7
- Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially) 8
- Public Relations and Community Involvement 9
- Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats 10
- Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation 11
- Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines) 12
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
I'm in favor of providing this low cost option. We have one time revenues each year to the general fund that we could offer a portion of help with cost.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
I need to understand the current policy, the reasons for it, and the subsequent results.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
I'm in support of the city offering specific funding for low cost spade/neuter programs.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
yes. this seems reasonable. this is an important issue and it should be heard in a public forum.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Damon Dunn, Mayor
Jana K. Shields
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes. Expanding the program will depend on recruiting more volunteers as they have contacts within the community to find homes for the animals.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
I support and invite input from the public in all aspects of government. The public needs to be very involved in finding homes for homeless pets. With a solid structure in place using volunteers and nonprofit organizations government programs can be modified to work with that structure.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
Preventing unwanted pets is much more cost effective than dealing with abandoned pets.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
transparency is needed at all levels of government. The public needs to know the truth.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Performance goals need to be restored at all levels of government.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Important to do.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Jana K Shields, Office of Mayor
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Very Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes. Expanding the program will depend on recruiting more volunteers as they have contacts within the community to find homes for the animals.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
- 80%
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
I support and invite input from the public in all aspects of government. The public needs to be very involved in finding homes for homeless pets. With a solid structure in place using volunteers and nonprofit organizations government programs can be modified to work with that structure.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
- Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes 12
- Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially) 11
- Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines) 10
- Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation 9
- Foster Programs 8
- A Compassionate, Hard-working Director 7
- Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats 6
- Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs 5
- Collaboration with Rescue Groups 4
- Comprehensive Adoption Programs 3
- Public Relations and Community Involvement 2
- Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter 1
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
Preventing unwanted pets is much more cost effective than dealing with abandoned pets.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
transparency is needed at all levels of government. The public needs to know the truth.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Performance goals need to be restored at all levels of government.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Important to do.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Jana K Shields, Office of Mayor
Steven Mozena
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes. If we are to make positive moves to save animals we need the support of the residents of Long Beach.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
The public support is what is needed to assure the program's success. I will be an advocate of public involvement.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
Many senior residents and others do not have the funds to pay for this important procedure so the city needs to increase its funding to meet this important need.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
The public needs to know the full accounting of funds regularly. More often than monthly would be better.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
This is an excellent idea and I support it. The more information the public has the better they will understand the condition, treatment, and scope of the problem our animals face..
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Steve P. Mozena seeking the office of Mayor of Long Beach
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Very Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes. If we are to make positive moves to save animals we need the support of the residents of Long Beach.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
- 100%
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
The public support is what is needed to assure the program's success. I will be an advocate of public involvement.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
- Comprehensive Adoption Programs 1
- Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes 2
- Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter 3
- Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially) 4
- Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats 5
- Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation 6
- Foster Programs 7
- Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs 8
- Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines) 9
- Collaboration with Rescue Groups 10
- Public Relations and Community Involvement 11
- A Compassionate, Hard-working Director 12
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
Many senior residents and others do not have the funds to pay for this important procedure so the city needs to increase its funding to meet this important need.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
The public needs to know the full accounting of funds regularly. More often than monthly would be better.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
This is an excellent idea and I support it. The more information the public has the better they will understand the condition, treatment, and scope of the problem our animals face..
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Steve P. Mozena seeking the office of Mayor of Long Beach
District 1
Pilar Pinel
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes I would support a review and restructuring and deem it important that the public participate in this process. Animal ownership is as important to individuals as is; homeownership, raising a family, bringing a spirit of healing, companionship. The public can and will be the ACS's strongest advocate in reaching council support.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
I am in support of the review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at LB ACS's to include the elements mentioned above. However, I would be inclusive to existing nonprofits or programs that currently offer adoption services mentioned above. Yes, I would be inclusive to the public (1) public is our strongest advocate in assuring elected officials are responsive to municipal governances to benefit constituencies and quality of life issues. (2) The Love people embrace their animals with is a protective and uncompromising relationship (3) Being equipped with these options opens a paradigm shift for animal ownership reflective of the 21st Century.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
Yes. The City's role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents is not only humane, but economically responsible. Persons of all socio-economic levels own or hope to own an animal(s). Having a low-cost spay/neuter program available proactively addresses unmet needs that assure humane behavior and advocacy for animals and their owners. That might otherwise be neglected due to economic ability.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
Yes, I would support a City Council mandate that the ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics on the ACS website. It important to know these stats in assuring the public has access to a decision process and to assure adequate funding to continue to offer these types of programs and services to the community. Additionally, this transparency will provide an accurate and fair decision making process to benefit both animals and individuals in selection and determination processes.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes. Publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate demonstrate a responsible and transparent collaborative that is in line with public interest and support.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Absolutely!
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Pilar Pinel 1st District City Council
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Very Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes I would support a review and restructuring and deem it important that the public participate in this process. Animal ownership is as important to individuals as is; homeownership, raising a family, bringing a spirit of healing, companionship. The public can and will be the ACS's strongest advocate in reaching council support.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
- 80%
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
I am in support of the review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at LB ACS's to include the elements mentioned above. However, I would be inclusive to existing nonprofits or programs that currently offer adoption services mentioned above. Yes, I would be inclusive to the public (1) public is our strongest advocate in assuring elected officials are responsive to municipal governances to benefit constituencies and quality of life issues. (2) The Love people embrace their animals with is a protective and uncompromising relationship (3) Being equipped with these options opens a paradigm shift for animal ownership reflective of the 21st Century.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
- Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter 1
- Comprehensive Adoption Programs 2
- Collaboration with Rescue Groups 3
- Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially) 4
- Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes 5
- Foster Programs 6
- Public Relations and Community Involvement 7
- Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs 8
- Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation 9
- Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats 10
- A Compassionate, Hard-working Director 11
- Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines) 12
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
Yes. The City's role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents is not only humane, but economically responsible. Persons of all socio-economic levels own or hope to own an animal(s). Having a low-cost spay/neuter program available proactively addresses unmet needs that assure humane behavior and advocacy for animals and their owners. That might otherwise be neglected due to economic ability.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
Yes, I would support a City Council mandate that the ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics on the ACS website. It important to know these stats in assuring the public has access to a decision process and to assure adequate funding to continue to offer these types of programs and services to the community. Additionally, this transparency will provide an accurate and fair decision making process to benefit both animals and individuals in selection and determination processes.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes. Publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate demonstrate a responsible and transparent collaborative that is in line with public interest and support.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Absolutely!
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Pilar Pinel 1st District City Council
Misi Tagaloa
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes. Yes. Public participation is crucial for all City policies to ensure that they are meaningful, less harmful and life-giving. An informed public will ensure that the lifesaving programs are identified, prioritized and given appropriate funding.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
Most definitely. Yes I would support public participation in the restructuring process. If we as community and city leaders cannot save and defend those who are least able to protect themselves or speak for themselves then those of us that do not help are part of the problem. During these tough economic times a little known fact is that family pets have been abandoned in record numbers, often left at foreclosed homes or left with neighbors when evicted. Long Beach city officials need to incorporate off-site adoptions and many of the common sense proposals advocated by “Stayin’ Alive Long Beach”.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
Yes I would support an increase in funding for low cost spay/neuter programs. As a councilman I would ask that an audit be conducted to see how the funds are being spent and if we can redirect some licensing funds to introduce a new culture at ACS. Secondly, I would work with animal rights advocates and seek their input on ways to improve care, increase adoption rates and subsidize spay/neuter programs to city residents. I think the City should provide leadership in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to its residents.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
Yes. My campaign is based on clear transparency of city operations and ACS would fall into my advocacy of open and honest accounting for government operations.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes. I would work with animal rights advocates to have clear goals and publish/post on the website and make available any information the public wishes to see.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Yes.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Misi Tagaloa, Candidate for City Council District 1
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Very Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes. Yes. Public participation is crucial for all City policies to ensure that they are meaningful, less harmful and life-giving. An informed public will ensure that the lifesaving programs are identified, prioritized and given appropriate funding.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
- 90%
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
Most definitely. Yes I would support public participation in the restructuring process. If we as community and city leaders cannot save and defend those who are least able to protect themselves or speak for themselves then those of us that do not help are part of the problem. During these tough economic times a little known fact is that family pets have been abandoned in record numbers, often left at foreclosed homes or left with neighbors when evicted. Long Beach city officials need to incorporate off-site adoptions and many of the common sense proposals advocated by “Stayin’ Alive Long Beach”.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
- Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially) 12
- Public Relations and Community Involvement 11
- Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines) 10
- Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation 9
- Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats 8
- Collaboration with Rescue Groups 7
- Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter 6
- Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs 5
- Comprehensive Adoption Programs 4
- Foster Programs 3
- Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes 2
- A Compassionate, Hard-working Director 1
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
Yes I would support an increase in funding for low cost spay/neuter programs. As a councilman I would ask that an audit be conducted to see how the funds are being spent and if we can redirect some licensing funds to introduce a new culture at ACS. Secondly, I would work with animal rights advocates and seek their input on ways to improve care, increase adoption rates and subsidize spay/neuter programs to city residents. I think the City should provide leadership in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to its residents.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
Yes. My campaign is based on clear transparency of city operations and ACS would fall into my advocacy of open and honest accounting for government operations.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes. I would work with animal rights advocates to have clear goals and publish/post on the website and make available any information the public wishes to see.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Yes.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Misi Tagaloa, Candidate for City Council District 1
Ricardo Linarez
Ricardo Linarez did not respond to our survey; however, he did take the time to meet with Stayin' Alive Long Beach. We appreciate his time, but whether he'll go the extra mile for Long Beach's shelter animals remains unclear.
Ricardo Linarez did not respond to our survey; however, he did take the time to meet with Stayin' Alive Long Beach. We appreciate his time, but whether he'll go the extra mile for Long Beach's shelter animals remains unclear.
District 3
Jack Rosenberg
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes, one of my platforms is my accessibility to the residents of the 3rd district. I will be holding regular office hours to help address the concerns of every resident of the 3rd District. Therefore, I welcome public participation.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
Yes, all options should be on the table during the decision making process. The current system is not properly working so I will be open to all ideas.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
I would need more details on the budgetary numbers.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
I do want to ensure transparency by making city finances readily available to residents and helping explain to them the budget process. This also applies to other facets of the city as well.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
I would need more information
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Jack Rosenberg 3rd District City Council
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes, one of my platforms is my accessibility to the residents of the 3rd district. I will be holding regular office hours to help address the concerns of every resident of the 3rd District. Therefore, I welcome public participation.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
- 70%
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
Yes, all options should be on the table during the decision making process. The current system is not properly working so I will be open to all ideas.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
- Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter 1
- Comprehensive Adoption Programs 2
- Collaboration with Rescue Groups 3
- Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats 4
- Foster Programs 5
- Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs 6
- Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation 7
- Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines) 8
- Public Relations and Community Involvement 9
- Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially) 10
- A Compassionate, Hard-working Director 11
- Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes 12
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
I would need more details on the budgetary numbers.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
I do want to ensure transparency by making city finances readily available to residents and helping explain to them the budget process. This also applies to other facets of the city as well.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
I would need more information
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Jack Rosenberg 3rd District City Council
Jim Lewis
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes. Public and Corporate engagement is the critical answer to these programs working. While city revenue is stagnated, it is difficult to fund these non-critical city services via tax funding (vs. critical infrastructure and public safety).
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
Yes. Again, public engagement is the critical answer to these programs working when city revenue is limited. I think it will take several years for these multi-faceted programs to ramp up and perhaps in 4-5 years we can get the save rate to 50% or more.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
As funding is available, yes. However, I would leverage current city funding to acquire corporate and foundation grants. An emphasis on private funding is needed to augment the current limitations in public funded revenue streams. City efforts in setting clear policy, advocating for keeping pets in a home, tax incentives, low fees and licensing, and auditing for waste is where the city can immediately act upon.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
Yes. Transparency is always the first - and most critical - action for city government to increase public engagement and use of the city's "voice" in helping people act in their, and their pet's, best interest.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes. Any program worth doing should have clear ends set forth at the outset and specific monitoring of outcomes -- holding staff responsible for performance. Retention of pets in a home is the "lowest hanging fruit" for taking action to see a reduction in shelter intakes -- and thus, lowering the percentage of those euthanized.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Yes. Again, transparency is the best motivation for public engagement.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Jim Lewis, City Council, Third District. Thank you
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes. Public and Corporate engagement is the critical answer to these programs working. While city revenue is stagnated, it is difficult to fund these non-critical city services via tax funding (vs. critical infrastructure and public safety).
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
- 60%
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
Yes. Again, public engagement is the critical answer to these programs working when city revenue is limited. I think it will take several years for these multi-faceted programs to ramp up and perhaps in 4-5 years we can get the save rate to 50% or more.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
- A Compassionate, Hard-working Director 1
- Public Relations and Community Involvement 2
- Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially) 3
- Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes 4
- Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines) 5
- Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter 6
- Collaboration with Rescue Groups 7
- Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs 8
- Comprehensive Adoption Programs 9
- Foster Programs 10
- Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats 11
- Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation 12
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
As funding is available, yes. However, I would leverage current city funding to acquire corporate and foundation grants. An emphasis on private funding is needed to augment the current limitations in public funded revenue streams. City efforts in setting clear policy, advocating for keeping pets in a home, tax incentives, low fees and licensing, and auditing for waste is where the city can immediately act upon.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
Yes. Transparency is always the first - and most critical - action for city government to increase public engagement and use of the city's "voice" in helping people act in their, and their pet's, best interest.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes. Any program worth doing should have clear ends set forth at the outset and specific monitoring of outcomes -- holding staff responsible for performance. Retention of pets in a home is the "lowest hanging fruit" for taking action to see a reduction in shelter intakes -- and thus, lowering the percentage of those euthanized.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Yes. Again, transparency is the best motivation for public engagement.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Jim Lewis, City Council, Third District. Thank you
Suzie Price
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
I believe that al City agencies and programs should be looking for ways to imporve their services. I am in favor of public input regarding ways that an agency can improve its services. We may not always agree regarding the (perceived) problem or the solutions, but input from interested parties is important. The philisophy applies to all public services, not just animal care service. Ultimatley, the position your organization is advocating may or may not solve a perceived problem, but it should be heard and given meaningful consideration.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Respondent skipped this question
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
I would want to discuss each of these options in detail with ACS to determine whether we can implement them in our City given the resources we have. If we are able to do so, I would support making necessary modifications to our current practices in order to improve the services we are providing.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Respondent skipped this question
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
I believe low-cost spay/neuter options are a beneficial public service. I would need to speak with ACS in order to understand the current program and what we can do to enhance this program, if in fact there is a need. I simply don't have enough information from the agency to determine what the funding options are. I am certain that once on Council I will have regualr meetings/updates with ACS to come up with solutions to better serve the animal and animal -owner population in our City.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
I believe transparency is critical in all aspects of government affairs. I would need to meet with ACS regarding what data is currently available and whether there is a way to improve the public's access to data. I would work with the agency to determine what could be done to address the need for access to specific data.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
At this point, I don't have enough information from ACS to answer this question. I have spent some time talking with leadership of your organization, but I have not yest discussed the issues you are concerned about with ACS. I belive it is important to talk to all involved organziations/agencies prior to making a commitment about setting and publishing future goals. This is also true for question #5 and #3. I don't have enough balanced data on these questions to answer the question presented. As a councilwoman I will have access to this information, as well as up-to-date meetings with the staff at ACS regarding best practices in similarly situated cities.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
I believe every oraganization should be permitted to present their position on relevant topics so long as the presentation meets the time and content restrictions applicable to all particpants.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Suzie Price, Third District City Council
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
I believe that al City agencies and programs should be looking for ways to imporve their services. I am in favor of public input regarding ways that an agency can improve its services. We may not always agree regarding the (perceived) problem or the solutions, but input from interested parties is important. The philisophy applies to all public services, not just animal care service. Ultimatley, the position your organization is advocating may or may not solve a perceived problem, but it should be heard and given meaningful consideration.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Respondent skipped this question
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
I would want to discuss each of these options in detail with ACS to determine whether we can implement them in our City given the resources we have. If we are able to do so, I would support making necessary modifications to our current practices in order to improve the services we are providing.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Respondent skipped this question
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
I believe low-cost spay/neuter options are a beneficial public service. I would need to speak with ACS in order to understand the current program and what we can do to enhance this program, if in fact there is a need. I simply don't have enough information from the agency to determine what the funding options are. I am certain that once on Council I will have regualr meetings/updates with ACS to come up with solutions to better serve the animal and animal -owner population in our City.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
I believe transparency is critical in all aspects of government affairs. I would need to meet with ACS regarding what data is currently available and whether there is a way to improve the public's access to data. I would work with the agency to determine what could be done to address the need for access to specific data.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
At this point, I don't have enough information from ACS to answer this question. I have spent some time talking with leadership of your organization, but I have not yest discussed the issues you are concerned about with ACS. I belive it is important to talk to all involved organziations/agencies prior to making a commitment about setting and publishing future goals. This is also true for question #5 and #3. I don't have enough balanced data on these questions to answer the question presented. As a councilwoman I will have access to this information, as well as up-to-date meetings with the staff at ACS regarding best practices in similarly situated cities.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
I believe every oraganization should be permitted to present their position on relevant topics so long as the presentation meets the time and content restrictions applicable to all particpants.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Suzie Price, Third District City Council
District 5
Thomas Sutfin
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
I do not know all of the nuances on this issue. I do know that there appears to be a need to look closer at the information that is being shared. A review of ACS's programs would lead to more understanding. Transparency is important to me and I value open dialogue on most issues. Especially those issues that are prioritized and that we can impact. This is an issue which I believe has lots of potential for improvement. It is unclear if we can make a one time change to significantly impact the loss of animal life or whether we need a strategy that progressively improves the situation for the care of shelter animals. Either way progress can be made on this issue. I would support the involvement of the public in this process.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
I believe the starting point for this problem is creating a clearly stated goal that allows focus on the proper treatment of animals in our ACS programs. Euthanizing should be the last resort. I support a review of the adoption program. Any restructuring would be done as a result of that review. The public should be involved in goal setting and in a collegial fashion during any restructuring process. It is incumbent on the public to keep the process positive and focused on the goal. I would be interested in being a participant in this process.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
I'm supportive of low cost spay/neuter in Long Beach. As the economy returns we can begin to refund the programs that we reduced. I would strongly encourage action on the part of our citizens to support this process. Raising fund through nonprofit groups is a powerful way to make a difference. This is done at some schools in LBUSD and the organized parents are able to provide services beyond what the school can support. I will create 'Community Support' events where any group could share what they are doing to make Long Beach a better place. This would be an ideal source of public support.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
I would be transparent in the statistics that we have in Animal Care. So, yes, I would support collecting that data and making it available to those who would want it. The value in posting the numbers would be powerful and would likely lead to reductions in euthanasia. I am open to more discussion on this.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
I do not know all the details with this but it makes tremendous sense to work towards reducing the percentage of animals killed. Publishing this data would support attaining performance goals for reducing the kill rate. Further, I would support clear definitions of what save rates are (I've seen two) and any other definitions that create miscommunication. Communication is hard enough when we are trying to do the right thing.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
I support an open presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach. I would encourage this dialog at an open session meetings for each city council district and at City Council.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Thomas Sutfin City Council District 5
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Very Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
I do not know all of the nuances on this issue. I do know that there appears to be a need to look closer at the information that is being shared. A review of ACS's programs would lead to more understanding. Transparency is important to me and I value open dialogue on most issues. Especially those issues that are prioritized and that we can impact. This is an issue which I believe has lots of potential for improvement. It is unclear if we can make a one time change to significantly impact the loss of animal life or whether we need a strategy that progressively improves the situation for the care of shelter animals. Either way progress can be made on this issue. I would support the involvement of the public in this process.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
- 80%
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
I believe the starting point for this problem is creating a clearly stated goal that allows focus on the proper treatment of animals in our ACS programs. Euthanizing should be the last resort. I support a review of the adoption program. Any restructuring would be done as a result of that review. The public should be involved in goal setting and in a collegial fashion during any restructuring process. It is incumbent on the public to keep the process positive and focused on the goal. I would be interested in being a participant in this process.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
- Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter 1
- Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially) 2
- Comprehensive Adoption Programs 3
- Collaboration with Rescue Groups 4
- Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats 5
- Foster Programs 6
- Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs 7
- Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation 8
- Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines) 9
- Public Relations and Community Involvement 10
- A Compassionate, Hard-working Director 11
- Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes 12
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
I'm supportive of low cost spay/neuter in Long Beach. As the economy returns we can begin to refund the programs that we reduced. I would strongly encourage action on the part of our citizens to support this process. Raising fund through nonprofit groups is a powerful way to make a difference. This is done at some schools in LBUSD and the organized parents are able to provide services beyond what the school can support. I will create 'Community Support' events where any group could share what they are doing to make Long Beach a better place. This would be an ideal source of public support.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
I would be transparent in the statistics that we have in Animal Care. So, yes, I would support collecting that data and making it available to those who would want it. The value in posting the numbers would be powerful and would likely lead to reductions in euthanasia. I am open to more discussion on this.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
I do not know all the details with this but it makes tremendous sense to work towards reducing the percentage of animals killed. Publishing this data would support attaining performance goals for reducing the kill rate. Further, I would support clear definitions of what save rates are (I've seen two) and any other definitions that create miscommunication. Communication is hard enough when we are trying to do the right thing.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
I support an open presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach. I would encourage this dialog at an open session meetings for each city council district and at City Council.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Thomas Sutfin City Council District 5
Stacy Mungo
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes, I will always be looking for ways to implement best practices in Long Beach. I am a huge advocate of citizen engagement.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
I am in favor of a comprehensive adoption program that allows the public to adopt animals directly. I was a part of creating the County of Los Angeles Lancaster Adoption Center which was a place where animals were 'take home ready'. Take home ready means, spay/neutered, groomed, vaccinated, etc.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
I have personally worked with foundations that make large donations to animal care organizations who are dedicated to providing low cost spay and neuter programs. I would personally advocate for and support city matching funds to implement this program.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
I am an advocate for transparency. Chameleon alone can not provide this information. I would advocate for reporting software that would provide regular and accurate statistics on the website.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Yes, I would be willing to host a study session. I would work to allow all stakeholders time to present.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Stacy Mungo Long Beach City Council 5th District
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Very Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes, I will always be looking for ways to implement best practices in Long Beach. I am a huge advocate of citizen engagement.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
- 90%
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
I am in favor of a comprehensive adoption program that allows the public to adopt animals directly. I was a part of creating the County of Los Angeles Lancaster Adoption Center which was a place where animals were 'take home ready'. Take home ready means, spay/neutered, groomed, vaccinated, etc.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
- Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation 12
- Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats 11
- Collaboration with Rescue Groups 10
- Foster Programs 9
- Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially) 8
- Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines) 7
- Public Relations and Community Involvement 6
- A Compassionate, Hard-working Director 5
- Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes 4
- Comprehensive Adoption Programs 3
- Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs 2
- Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter 1
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
I have personally worked with foundations that make large donations to animal care organizations who are dedicated to providing low cost spay and neuter programs. I would personally advocate for and support city matching funds to implement this program.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
I am an advocate for transparency. Chameleon alone can not provide this information. I would advocate for reporting software that would provide regular and accurate statistics on the website.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Yes, I would be willing to host a study session. I would work to allow all stakeholders time to present.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Stacy Mungo Long Beach City Council 5th District
District 7
Teer Strickland
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes I would support a review and restructuring of ACS's lifesaving programs. As the owner of a rescue dog, I know the importance of good programs to save our abandoned or lost pets. Public participation is critical in forming effective programs to address this issue and solve the problem.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
Yes I would support a review and restructuring of ACS's adoption program. Again, as the owner of a rescue dog, I know the importance of good programs to save our abandoned or lost pets. Public participation is critical in forming effective programs to address this issue and solve the problem. As a community we can come together and do what's needed to take care of our animals.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
I believe the city should play a role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options, however, I would conduct an extensive review of how the program is currently funded and determine if the current budget is appropriately aligned with community needs.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
Yes,I would support such an effort. I believe in transparency and it's important for the public to know how the ACS is faring with regards to the save and euthanasia rates.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Absolutely Yes.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Teer Strickland Long Beach City Council, District 7
Owner of Rusty, a Rescue Jack Russell Terrier Mix
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Very Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes I would support a review and restructuring of ACS's lifesaving programs. As the owner of a rescue dog, I know the importance of good programs to save our abandoned or lost pets. Public participation is critical in forming effective programs to address this issue and solve the problem.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
- 80%
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
Yes I would support a review and restructuring of ACS's adoption program. Again, as the owner of a rescue dog, I know the importance of good programs to save our abandoned or lost pets. Public participation is critical in forming effective programs to address this issue and solve the problem. As a community we can come together and do what's needed to take care of our animals.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
- Comprehensive Adoption Programs 1
- Collaboration with Rescue Groups 2
- Public Relations and Community Involvement 3
- Foster Programs 4
- Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs 5
- Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially) 6
- Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes 7
- Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines) 8
- Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter 9
- Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats 10
- Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation 11
- A Compassionate, Hard-working Director 12
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
I believe the city should play a role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options, however, I would conduct an extensive review of how the program is currently funded and determine if the current budget is appropriately aligned with community needs.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
Yes,I would support such an effort. I believe in transparency and it's important for the public to know how the ACS is faring with regards to the save and euthanasia rates.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Absolutely Yes.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Teer Strickland Long Beach City Council, District 7
Owner of Rusty, a Rescue Jack Russell Terrier Mix
Lee Chauser
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
yes
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
yes
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
yes
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
yes
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
yes
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
lee chauser
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Very Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
- 100%
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
yes
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
- Collaboration with Rescue Groups 1
- Comprehensive Adoption Programs 2
- Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats 3
- Foster Programs 4
- Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs 5
- Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation 6
- Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines) 7
- Public Relations and Community Involvement 8
- Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially) 9
- Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter 10
- A Compassionate, Hard-working Director 11
- Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes 12
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
yes
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
yes
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
yes
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
yes
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
lee chauser
Joan V. Greenwood
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes. Our society is judged by how well we treat not only our at-risk population but also companion animals that suffer the consequences of irresponsible pet-owners. The public is very confused about the "no kill" policy for spcaLA. In addition, public education is key to reducing the the percentage of shelter. As a animals euthanized and to implementing a more effective spay-neuter program. While I would like to save 100%, realistically it is impossible to jump from 50% to 100%. Incremental steps of a 5 to 6% reduction per year is a challenging yet doable goal provided the funding can be found to subsidize foster homes for kittens and puppies under 8 weeks old that must be euthanized by State Law. Also, we need to break the numbers down by those that were companion pets and those that were feral. For Feral cats, we need ACS to support TNR programs by providing drop-down traps and spay-neuter vouchers. TNR programs work.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
Yes. Public is part of the problem and must become part of the solution. One option is to require residential structures such as senior housing that is subsidized by tax dollars should include pet-friendly policies to encourage people to adopt older pets. WE should also have a program that would readily allow people to include ACS in their wills or insurance policies to support a true "no kill" shelter where their pets could live out the remainder of their lives and help save others until they can find forever homes. I put the blame on the Public not the ACS Directors.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
Low-cost spay/neuter is essential in stopping pet overpopulation especially needed to encourage low-income seniors and others on fixed income who would adopt but need low cost medical services much like those offered by Clinico facilities.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
Yes. This report would be analogous to social impact reporting adopted by other non-profits to show how each dollar spent has helped the organization reach its goals.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
I would support all stakeholders be involved in setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate. The City has had compassionate, hard work Directors for several years. What is lacking is funding and strong support from the public and the Council.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Yes, for the purpose of establishing a Commission that would oversee implementation of the Study goals and strategies by ACS, advise Councilmembers and engage the public in the process.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Joan V. Greenwood Long Beach City Council District 7
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Very Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes. Our society is judged by how well we treat not only our at-risk population but also companion animals that suffer the consequences of irresponsible pet-owners. The public is very confused about the "no kill" policy for spcaLA. In addition, public education is key to reducing the the percentage of shelter. As a animals euthanized and to implementing a more effective spay-neuter program. While I would like to save 100%, realistically it is impossible to jump from 50% to 100%. Incremental steps of a 5 to 6% reduction per year is a challenging yet doable goal provided the funding can be found to subsidize foster homes for kittens and puppies under 8 weeks old that must be euthanized by State Law. Also, we need to break the numbers down by those that were companion pets and those that were feral. For Feral cats, we need ACS to support TNR programs by providing drop-down traps and spay-neuter vouchers. TNR programs work.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
- 80%
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
Yes. Public is part of the problem and must become part of the solution. One option is to require residential structures such as senior housing that is subsidized by tax dollars should include pet-friendly policies to encourage people to adopt older pets. WE should also have a program that would readily allow people to include ACS in their wills or insurance policies to support a true "no kill" shelter where their pets could live out the remainder of their lives and help save others until they can find forever homes. I put the blame on the Public not the ACS Directors.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
- A Compassionate, Hard-working Director 12
- Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs 11
- Comprehensive Adoption Programs 10
- Collaboration with Rescue Groups 9
- Public Relations and Community Involvement 8
- Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes 7
- Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats 6
- Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter 5
- Foster Programs 4
- Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially) 3
- Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation 2
- Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines) 1
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
Low-cost spay/neuter is essential in stopping pet overpopulation especially needed to encourage low-income seniors and others on fixed income who would adopt but need low cost medical services much like those offered by Clinico facilities.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
Yes. This report would be analogous to social impact reporting adopted by other non-profits to show how each dollar spent has helped the organization reach its goals.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
I would support all stakeholders be involved in setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate. The City has had compassionate, hard work Directors for several years. What is lacking is funding and strong support from the public and the Council.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Yes, for the purpose of establishing a Commission that would oversee implementation of the Study goals and strategies by ACS, advise Councilmembers and engage the public in the process.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Joan V. Greenwood Long Beach City Council District 7
District 9
Ben Daugherty
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes, public participation is essential in all processes. How else are we to truly serve the needs of the people.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
My first thought would be to create a advisory board (or expand) that includes both volunteer and city representatives, designed specifically to address this issue.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
This is and should be treated as a public safety issue! There must be creative options ( grants, vet volunteers, etc) to supplement budget restrictions.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
Yes, the public needs to be aware of the challenges that the ACS may be facing.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
This to me is the most important of all issues, let the public know, just maybe they can help.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Ben Daugherty, Candidate for City Council Seat District 9
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Very Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes, public participation is essential in all processes. How else are we to truly serve the needs of the people.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
- 80%
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
My first thought would be to create a advisory board (or expand) that includes both volunteer and city representatives, designed specifically to address this issue.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
- A Compassionate, Hard-working Director 1
- Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes 2
- Public Relations and Community Involvement 3
- Comprehensive Adoption Programs 4
- Collaboration with Rescue Groups 5
- Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs 6
- Foster Programs 7
- Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter 8
- Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats 9
- Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially) 10
- Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation 11
- Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines) 12
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
This is and should be treated as a public safety issue! There must be creative options ( grants, vet volunteers, etc) to supplement budget restrictions.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
Yes, the public needs to be aware of the challenges that the ACS may be facing.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
This to me is the most important of all issues, let the public know, just maybe they can help.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Ben Daugherty, Candidate for City Council Seat District 9
Rex Richardson
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes, public participation is key creating any large organizational change.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
Yes, both of my dogs are rescues. I was able to welcome them into my family because of public friendly adoption hours and easy adoption process.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
Low cost spay/neuter services are necessary to control the stray animal population in Long Beach. I will support the City subsidizing this program as long as the City budget can accommodate it.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
Yes. The community needs to be made aware. Information and education are vital components to community based problem solving.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Yes
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Rex Richardson, Long Beach City Council District 9
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Yes, public participation is key creating any large organizational change.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
- 80%
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
Yes, both of my dogs are rescues. I was able to welcome them into my family because of public friendly adoption hours and easy adoption process.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
- Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes 12
- A Compassionate, Hard-working Director 11
- Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter 10
- Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially) 9
- Public Relations and Community Involvement 8
- Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines) 7
- Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation 6
- Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs 5
- Collaboration with Rescue Groups 4
- Comprehensive Adoption Programs 3
- Foster Programs 2
- Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats 1
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
Low cost spay/neuter services are necessary to control the stray animal population in Long Beach. I will support the City subsidizing this program as long as the City budget can accommodate it.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
Yes. The community needs to be made aware. Information and education are vital components to community based problem solving.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Yes
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Rex Richardson, Long Beach City Council District 9
City Prosecutor
Rosemary Chavez
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
I would support a review of current ACS policies, most folks value companion animals, and would support all efforts to avoid euthanizing animals
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
These policies must be reviewed and updated to reflect an attitude of protecting animals, re-connecting them with their families if possible, but try to avoid euthanizing in all instances. I believe if the community was educated about the ACS policies, there would be an uproar!
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
Providing low cost spay/neuter programs provides a real benefit to the community and should be vigorously promoted. It encourages wide participation and, if successful, should reduce the workload of ACS.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
I would support complete transparency to let the public know what is being done with government funds and this creates accountability for the ACS.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes, for the same reasons stated above.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Yes, I think is is important that Long Beach residents & leadership understand that there are other humane alternatives to euthanizing that the public supports
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Rosemary Chavez and I am running for Long Beach City Prosecutor
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Very Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
I would support a review of current ACS policies, most folks value companion animals, and would support all efforts to avoid euthanizing animals
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
- 90%
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
These policies must be reviewed and updated to reflect an attitude of protecting animals, re-connecting them with their families if possible, but try to avoid euthanizing in all instances. I believe if the community was educated about the ACS policies, there would be an uproar!
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
- Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter 1
- Comprehensive Adoption Programs 2
- Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially) 3
- Collaboration with Rescue Groups 4
- Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines) 5
- Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes 6
- Foster Programs 7
- Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs 8
- Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation 9
- Public Relations and Community Involvement 10
- A Compassionate, Hard-working Director 11
- Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats 12
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
Providing low cost spay/neuter programs provides a real benefit to the community and should be vigorously promoted. It encourages wide participation and, if successful, should reduce the workload of ACS.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
I would support complete transparency to let the public know what is being done with government funds and this creates accountability for the ACS.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Yes, for the same reasons stated above.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
Yes, I think is is important that Long Beach residents & leadership understand that there are other humane alternatives to euthanizing that the public supports
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Rosemary Chavez and I am running for Long Beach City Prosecutor
Doug Haubert
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Any changes to ACS's programs should include public participation. While I believe ACS does a good job with the resources it has, it can benefit from public input and oversight. For the first time in the history of the City Prosecutor's Office, we have engaged in public education by organizing annual Animal Care and Cruelty Prevention conferences. In 2014, we will hold our third. I think such public education are important and I am glad to have the participation of ACS. I am not sure if this is what you consider restructuring, but it is an additional program that ACS is engaged in. I would need to spend more time reviewing the programs before taking a position on whether restructuring or other changes are necessary or feasible given budget realities. For example, I would need more information before I could answer the next question.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save? Respondent skipped this question Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
As noted above, any changes to ACS's programs should include public participation because ACS can only benefit from public input and oversight. I would not know if restructuring or other changes are needed until a meaningful review was done. I do think making adoption services more easily accessed could increase the quantity and quality of adoptions.
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
As noted above, any changes to ACS's programs should include public participation because ACS can only benefit from public input and oversight. I would not know if restructuring or other changes are needed until a meaningful review was done. I do think making adoption services more easily accessed could increase the quantity and quality of adoptions.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
I would need more information on how ACS funds are spent. For example, if more money was spent on low-cost spay/neuter programs and that mean less money was available for education, shelter, etc., I am not sure I would support it. One of the challenges faced by the city is lack of financial resources. Every department has been cut (including the City Prosecutor's Office) and the reality is that while we may want to increase funding in one area, it may not be wise because that decreases money in other areas.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
Transparency and public reporting is very important for every department. It is my understanding that LB ACS has reported improvements in save rates in Long Beach, which I support.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
I see no downside and every upside to crafting goals and then reporting on progress toward those goals. Goals, of course, have to be reasonable, but goal setting and transparency is good government, regardless of the agency.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
This is a question for City Council, not City Prosecutor. The answer depends on the educational and awareness level of the next City Council. If they understand ACS issues fully, a study session may not be significant. The City Council has such a wide variety of issues they need to address, I would hesitate to set priorities for how the City Council needs to spend its time.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Doug Haubert, Long Beach City Prosecutor
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Any changes to ACS's programs should include public participation. While I believe ACS does a good job with the resources it has, it can benefit from public input and oversight. For the first time in the history of the City Prosecutor's Office, we have engaged in public education by organizing annual Animal Care and Cruelty Prevention conferences. In 2014, we will hold our third. I think such public education are important and I am glad to have the participation of ACS. I am not sure if this is what you consider restructuring, but it is an additional program that ACS is engaged in. I would need to spend more time reviewing the programs before taking a position on whether restructuring or other changes are necessary or feasible given budget realities. For example, I would need more information before I could answer the next question.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save? Respondent skipped this question Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
As noted above, any changes to ACS's programs should include public participation because ACS can only benefit from public input and oversight. I would not know if restructuring or other changes are needed until a meaningful review was done. I do think making adoption services more easily accessed could increase the quantity and quality of adoptions.
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
As noted above, any changes to ACS's programs should include public participation because ACS can only benefit from public input and oversight. I would not know if restructuring or other changes are needed until a meaningful review was done. I do think making adoption services more easily accessed could increase the quantity and quality of adoptions.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
- Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats 1
- Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs 2
- Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter 3
- Collaboration with Rescue Groups 4
- Comprehensive Adoption Programs 5
- Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation 6
- Public Relations and Community Involvement 7
- Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes 8
- Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially) 9
- A Compassionate, Hard-working Director 10
- Foster Programs 11
- Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines) 12
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
I would need more information on how ACS funds are spent. For example, if more money was spent on low-cost spay/neuter programs and that mean less money was available for education, shelter, etc., I am not sure I would support it. One of the challenges faced by the city is lack of financial resources. Every department has been cut (including the City Prosecutor's Office) and the reality is that while we may want to increase funding in one area, it may not be wise because that decreases money in other areas.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
Transparency and public reporting is very important for every department. It is my understanding that LB ACS has reported improvements in save rates in Long Beach, which I support.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
I see no downside and every upside to crafting goals and then reporting on progress toward those goals. Goals, of course, have to be reasonable, but goal setting and transparency is good government, regardless of the agency.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
This is a question for City Council, not City Prosecutor. The answer depends on the educational and awareness level of the next City Council. If they understand ACS issues fully, a study session may not be significant. The City Council has such a wide variety of issues they need to address, I would hesitate to set priorities for how the City Council needs to spend its time.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Doug Haubert, Long Beach City Prosecutor
City Attorney
James Johnson
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
I support efforts to save more animals' lives, and to involve the public in the process. As City Attorney, my role would be to support the City Council's initiatives to improve Animal Care Services.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Respondent skipped this question
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
The City Council is the policy-making body of the City of Long Beach. It is important that as City Attorney, I defer to the City Council's policy initiatives. That said, I support efforts to save more animals' lives, and to involve the public in the process. As City Attorney, my role would be to support the City Council's initiatives to improve Animal Care Services.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Respondent skipped this question
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
As City Attorney, I would advise city departments to ensure that fees charged to the public were spent appropriately. It is important that fees charged for services go toward those services. By vigilantly ensuring that fees are properly used, I believe that over time that would help ensure that the funds are there for vital programs such as low-cost spay and neuter programs.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
I personally support transparency in government, and ensuring that data regarding how our city government operates is readily available to the public.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Personally, I believe performance goals are important for good management. As City Attorney, I would defer to the City's policy-making body (the City Council).
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
As City Attorney, I would defer to the City's policy-making body (the City Council). However, I would note that all members of the public have the right to address City Council at every Council meeting, and I would work to ensure that that right is protected.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
James Johnson, Long Beach City Attorney
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
- Very Important
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
I support efforts to save more animals' lives, and to involve the public in the process. As City Attorney, my role would be to support the City Council's initiatives to improve Animal Care Services.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
Respondent skipped this question
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
The City Council is the policy-making body of the City of Long Beach. It is important that as City Attorney, I defer to the City Council's policy initiatives. That said, I support efforts to save more animals' lives, and to involve the public in the process. As City Attorney, my role would be to support the City Council's initiatives to improve Animal Care Services.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website. Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Respondent skipped this question
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
As City Attorney, I would advise city departments to ensure that fees charged to the public were spent appropriately. It is important that fees charged for services go toward those services. By vigilantly ensuring that fees are properly used, I believe that over time that would help ensure that the funds are there for vital programs such as low-cost spay and neuter programs.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
I personally support transparency in government, and ensuring that data regarding how our city government operates is readily available to the public.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
Personally, I believe performance goals are important for good management. As City Attorney, I would defer to the City's policy-making body (the City Council).
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
As City Attorney, I would defer to the City's policy-making body (the City Council). However, I would note that all members of the public have the right to address City Council at every Council meeting, and I would work to ensure that that right is protected.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
James Johnson, Long Beach City Attorney
Charles Parkin
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Important - Increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter is important to me.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response. Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Under the City Charter, the City Attorney is the sole and exclusive legal advisor to the City, City Council and all City Commissions, Committees, Officers and Employees. The City Attorney is an elected position which under the Charter acts as the legal advisor to the City. I do not see this position as a political position from which to advocate legislative priorities. As City Attorney, I am responsible to provide the policy making body with neutral legal advice not subject to my legislative priorities or opinions. The City Attorney must be able to advise the policy makers of the legal issues and possible challenges to their decisions so that they may weigh the options and make an informed decision. After the policy body has given direction, it is the responsibility of the City Attorney to implement and defend the policy as adopted. Any review or restructuring of ACS’s programs should be a public process. This would allow the community to express their views on proposed changes and allow the City Council to make an informed decision on changes and resource allocation necessary to implement the changes.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
As the City Attorney I do not know what percentage of shelter animals the City of Long Beach can reasonably expected to save. The goal should be to educate the public on pet overpopulation to reduce the number of animals taken into the shelter and to increase the number of animals saved each and every year. This will depend upon the resources allocated to ACS and the policies as approved by the City Council.
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
As stated above, the position of the City Attorney is to advise and implement the policy of the Mayor and City Council. I do support public participation in the process to consider and adopt policy changes and/or restructuring of programs at the ACS. Public participation is essential to the process so that the Mayor and council can hear from experts, advocates and citizens on the needs and desires of programs at ACS.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website.
Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Comprehensive Adoption Programs - 8
Collaboration with Rescue Groups - 10
Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats - 11
Foster Programs - 9
Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs - 6
Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation - 12
Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines) - 7
Public Relations and Community Involvement - 5
Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially) - 3
Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter - 2
A Compassionate, Hard-working Director - 4
Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes - 1
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
As stated above, the position of the City Attorney is to advise and implement the policy of the Mayor and City Council. It will be a decision of the City Council in increase funding for low-cost spay/neuter programs in Long Beach. I do believe this is an important service which is part of an effective way to reduce over pet population and helps to reduce the number of animals turned into ACS.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
As the City Attorney, I will continue to work with City staff to ensure information published by the City is accurate. As stated in response to question number 5, I believe accurate and transparent reporting of information is the most important requirement. This is because we all must have accurate information from which to begin the discussion of policy and program changes at ACS to increase the number of animals saved each year. Further, accurate reporting is necessary for the public and Council to be informed about how the City allocates and uses its resources.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
As stated above, the position of the City Attorney is to advise and implement the policy of the Mayor and City Council. Setting goals for ACS’s live release rate is a decision of the City Council. I do support this decision to be done after a public process, which should include public meetings to allow for testimony on what are reasonable goals for increasing the save rate, what is a reasonable time period to meet these goals, what are the associated costs, what are the necessary changes needed to implement and attain these goals, and what type of reporting is necessary to verify.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
As stated in response to question 8, I do support a public process and a Study Session where public participation can occur would meet that requirement.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Charles Parkin, Long Beach City Attorney
Q1: Last year, Long Beach Animal Care Services euthanized 50% of the dogs and cats that entered the city shelter. This percentage includes 15% of puppies, 29% of dogs, 72% of cats and 75% of kittens.* Over the past 7 years, ACS has euthanized over 38,000 dogs and cats. Innovative sheltering programs, such as comprehensive adoption programs, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs, have been implemented in a number of communities across the nation, resulting in save rates of upwards of 90%. Long Beach currently does not implement the majority of these innovative sheltering programs. If we are to increase the save rate for Long Beach shelter animals, ACS policies will need to undergo significant changes to be mandated by the City Council and overseen by the Mayor. How important is the issue of increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter to you? *Based on data received from Long Beach Animal Care Services through the California Public Records Act. Data covers Jan-Nov. 2013.
Important - Increasing the number of animals saved at the Long Beach animal shelter is important to me.
Q2: Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response. Would you support a review and restructuring of ACS’s lifesaving programs to include sheltering programs such as a comprehensive adoption program, proactive marketing of animals, volunteer programs and foster programs? (A complete list can be found under Question 5 in this survey. They are also described on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website). Would you support the participation of the public in this process? Please explain your response.
Under the City Charter, the City Attorney is the sole and exclusive legal advisor to the City, City Council and all City Commissions, Committees, Officers and Employees. The City Attorney is an elected position which under the Charter acts as the legal advisor to the City. I do not see this position as a political position from which to advocate legislative priorities. As City Attorney, I am responsible to provide the policy making body with neutral legal advice not subject to my legislative priorities or opinions. The City Attorney must be able to advise the policy makers of the legal issues and possible challenges to their decisions so that they may weigh the options and make an informed decision. After the policy body has given direction, it is the responsibility of the City Attorney to implement and defend the policy as adopted. Any review or restructuring of ACS’s programs should be a public process. This would allow the community to express their views on proposed changes and allow the City Council to make an informed decision on changes and resource allocation necessary to implement the changes.
Q3: What percentage of shelter animals do you think the City of Long Beach can reasonably be expected to save?
As the City Attorney I do not know what percentage of shelter animals the City of Long Beach can reasonably expected to save. The goal should be to educate the public on pet overpopulation to reduce the number of animals taken into the shelter and to increase the number of animals saved each and every year. This will depend upon the resources allocated to ACS and the policies as approved by the City Council.
Q4: ACS’s current operations manual states that ACS, itself, does not adopt animals out to the public. ACS’s current official stance is that this is the job of the neighboring spcaLA, an agency which takes in only 28% of the animals impounded by ACS every year. Long Beach Animal Care Services currently euthanizes 50% of dogs and cats in the city shelter due to its failure to run a comprehensive adoption program, including frequent and ongoing off-site adoptions, extensive marketing of at-risk animals, public-friendly adoption hours and mobile adoptions. If elected or re-elected to public office: Specifically in regard to ACS’s Adoption Program, would you support a review and restructuring of the Adoption Program at Long Beach Animal Care Services to include the elements mentioned above (offsite adoptions, public-friendly adoption hours, etc.)? Would you support the participation of the public in this restructuring process? Please explain your response.
As stated above, the position of the City Attorney is to advise and implement the policy of the Mayor and City Council. I do support public participation in the process to consider and adopt policy changes and/or restructuring of programs at the ACS. Public participation is essential to the process so that the Mayor and council can hear from experts, advocates and citizens on the needs and desires of programs at ACS.
Q5: There is a suite of fiscally-responsible, humane, 21st century animal sheltering programs that have been proven to work in more than 200 communities across the United States. These programs are given below. They are also explained on pp. 36-37 of the SALB Policy Report and on the SALB website.
Please rank the programs to indicate which programs you think are the most important for the City to implement. Place a “1” next to the MOST important program or policy, a “2” next to the second most important policy, and so on.
Comprehensive Adoption Programs - 8
Collaboration with Rescue Groups - 10
Trap-Neuter-Release Program for Community Cats - 11
Foster Programs - 9
Vigorous Volunteer Programs to help run other lifesaving programs - 6
Behavioral and Medical Rehabilitation - 12
Pet Retention Programs (e.g., Help desks, information lines) - 7
Public Relations and Community Involvement - 5
Facilitated Pet Redemptions (Making it easy for people to get their pets back from the shelter, including working with them financially) - 3
Low-Cost, High-Volume Spay/Neuter - 2
A Compassionate, Hard-working Director - 4
Transparency in reporting numbers of animals euthanized vs. placed into adoptive homes - 1
Q6: ACS reduced its funding of low-cost spay/neuter by 77% from 2010 to 2012, spending only $25,000 in 2012 on the City’s popular low-cost spay/neuter voucher program. At the same time, the City received revenues of more than $1 million from pet licensing efforts alone. In 2013, ACS’s year-end expenditures for low-cost spay/neuter are projected to be approximately $50,000 – still a massive reduction over the $110,000 the agency spent on spay/neuter voucher funding in 2010. If elected or re-elected to public office, would you support an increase in the funding for low-cost spay/neuter in Long Beach? What is your view of the City’s role in providing low-cost spay/neuter options to city residents?
As stated above, the position of the City Attorney is to advise and implement the policy of the Mayor and City Council. It will be a decision of the City Council in increase funding for low-cost spay/neuter programs in Long Beach. I do believe this is an important service which is part of an effective way to reduce over pet population and helps to reduce the number of animals turned into ACS.
Q7: Increasingly, municipal animal shelters are reporting their save and euthanasia rates to the public on their websites on a monthly basis (e.g., City of Sacramento and City of Austin, TX). Typically, these reports are easy to generate using an integrated shelter management software program called Chameleon. Long Beach ACS already uses the Chameleon software. If elected or re-elected to public office: Would you support a City Council mandate that ACS publish accurate and transparent statistics regarding the numbers and types of animals the agency euthanizes on the ACS website? If so, why do you feel this is important? If not, why not?
As the City Attorney, I will continue to work with City staff to ensure information published by the City is accurate. As stated in response to question number 5, I believe accurate and transparent reporting of information is the most important requirement. This is because we all must have accurate information from which to begin the discussion of policy and program changes at ACS to increase the number of animals saved each year. Further, accurate reporting is necessary for the public and Council to be informed about how the City allocates and uses its resources.
Q8: Would you support the City’s setting and publishing clear performance goals in terms of ACS's live release rate (save rate)?
As stated above, the position of the City Attorney is to advise and implement the policy of the Mayor and City Council. Setting goals for ACS’s live release rate is a decision of the City Council. I do support this decision to be done after a public process, which should include public meetings to allow for testimony on what are reasonable goals for increasing the save rate, what is a reasonable time period to meet these goals, what are the associated costs, what are the necessary changes needed to implement and attain these goals, and what type of reporting is necessary to verify.
Q9: In a Dec. 10, 2013 editorial, LBReport.com urged City Council to seek a Study Session that would include participation by Stayin’ Alive Long Beach (see http://www.lbreport.com/editorial/dec13/edanieu.htm). Would you be willing to ask for a Study Session on the current status of Long Beach’s shelter animals that would include a podium presentation by Stayin' Alive Long Beach?
As stated in response to question 8, I do support a public process and a Study Session where public participation can occur would meet that requirement.
Q10: What is your full name (first and last) and what office are you seeking?
Charles Parkin, Long Beach City Attorney
Copyright 2012-2017 Stayin' Alive Long Beach