Laserfiche WebLink
APPAC Meeting Summary <br />October 4, 2010 <br />1. Draft resolution was distributed, asked members to review. Discussed the timeframe and % save rate. Consensus among the <br />group was we should be able to achieve a 90% save rate in 2 years. The final resolution will be available to consider at our November <br />work session. <br />2. Over the last three months, the ER at Animal Control has been under 60 %. Lt. Taylor will be able to provide the report to us on a <br />monthly basis. <br />3. Discussed short & long term solutions for program. Short term, Ann Cannon has taken the lead and enlisted several folks to work <br />with the HS and Animal Control to take and publish pictures of all animals at the shelter, to facilitate adoptions. This will be the norm <br />until a new long term arrangement is worked out. <br />4. Long term discussion revolved around several options for a go- forward organization. This included naming advantages and <br />disadvantages of each option. <br />Option <br />P <br />Oversight <br />Responsibility <br />Advantage(s) <br />Disadvantages(s) <br />1. Animal Control hires <br />1. Simple to implement. <br />1. Political Football <br />additional uniformed <br />2. Authority <br />2. Negative perception of law <br />officer who operates <br />Sheriff <br />3. Seamless Transition <br />enforcement running adoption <br />Adoption Program. <br />program. <br />*3. Not atypical law <br />enforcement function. <br />2. County hires fulltime <br />1. Will see more adoptions <br />* 1. Will be perceived as <br />adoption coordinator, <br />Board of <br />2. Easier facilitation with <br />"County Program ". <br />transitions shelter <br />Commissioners <br />all rescue groups <br />*2. No private participation. <br />operations to county <br />through County <br />*3. Difficult to expend more <br />supervision. <br />Manager <br />funds for additional <br />employee. <br />3. Forma totally new <br />1. Fresh ideas <br />1. Housing of program would <br />Non - Profit to manage <br />require new shelter. <br />shelter operations, <br />2. Complicated and costly to <br />independent of County. <br />organize. <br />Organization Board <br />3. Fund raising would <br />of Directors <br />compete with other rescue <br />groups. <br />*4. Could easily become just <br />another rescue organization. <br />*5. Lack of oversight of <br />p rogram by the county. <br />4. Contract with one or <br />1. County would deal with <br />1. Operation of organization <br />more existing rescue <br />an established organization. <br />would necessitate a full -time <br />organizations to operate <br />Board of <br />2. Funding would force <br />director to manage the <br />shelter for county. <br />Commissioners <br />cooperation and <br />business affairs. <br />through contract. <br />accountability. <br />3. No additional county <br />funds would be required. <br />1 -3 Page 553 <br />