"We are in shock and grief after learning Thursday that the Jackson County animal shelter is killing dogs to reduce inventory. This is terrible news for all animal lovers in our community."
Laura Ahearn
Denise Krause
Laura Ahearn and Denise Krause wrote today's guest post. Both are engaged citizens who have spent countless hours at the Jackson County animal shelter.
Laura Ahearn has worked in animal welfare for over two decades in six countries. She managed a shelter in Borneo. She started volunteering at the Jackson County shelter in 2018 as a dog walker and ultimately on “Holding Crew” with dogs that need extra attention to be deemed “adoptable.” She has made numerous appearances before the Animal Control Advisory Committee, the county commissioners, and the budget committee to urge better management and expedited replacement of the outdated, overflowing shelter.
Denise Krause is a familiar name to Southern Oregon residents as a leader of the citizen-led petition drive to update the county charter. Denise serves as a “dog runner” volunteer at the Jackson County animal shelter. She said the dilapidated condition and unsatisfactory management of this facility are two of the problems that motivated her to run for county commissioner. She says she hopes her ideas for immediate action and sensible long-range planning can be heard and implemented.
Guest Post by Laura Ahern and Denise Krause
We are in shock and grief after learning Thursday that the Jackson County animal shelter is killing dogs to reduce inventory. This is terrible news for all animal lovers in our community.
Because the county has pushed things to the brink, shunning consultation and cooperation with concerned citizens and rescue groups, a community forum will be held at the Medford library on Tuesday, April 23, at 5:30 p.m. to launch a meaningful process to develop the best, most cost-effective solution to meet needs now and into the future. [Note that this event is in the library, but it is neither sponsored nor endorsed by it.]
Why are we at this crisis point? The county administrator has repeatedly acknowledged that a new animal shelter has been on his capital projects list for eighteen years. Funds to get started have never been budgeted. In this same time frame the county completed over $300 million in other capital projects. Why was the shelter pushed to the bottom of the list?
No, we aren't facing some unforeseen increase in unwanted dogs due to the pandemic; look at the long-term trend:
About two years ago the county started changing the way it manages the shelter and treats volunteers. The scheme was labeled a “feasibility study” with the evident goal of boosting costs on the county's accounts to calculate “the ask”: A ballot proposal to create a local service district – a new layer of big-government bureaucracy – with a new tax levy and debt. Volunteers were sidelined, even terminated, for what they thought was protected, private speech. Half of the cat area was converted to a conference room; now the county has stopped accepting cats due to lack of capacity. The pool of jail trustees to clean, feed the animals, and do the laundry dwindled with Measure 110, and the county staffed up with new hires. When drug possession becomes a crime in September, the pool of trustees who can provide community service will be replenished. The county is not planning to take this opportunity to reduce costs.
On February 29, the county administrator briefed commissioners on overdue capital projects. He said, “I've talked with each of you, you know, a lot over the last several years, about all of the capital projects we're working. Obviously, most of those have not been forward-facing, not out in the public.” In the case of the animal shelter, the county administrator and commissioners actively opposed efforts by citizens to receive information and provide input.
On March 26, the county administrator unveiled a last-minute proposal for a local service district, a new tax, and $14,850,000 in debt to support the animal shelter. A service district would raise taxes by further expanding county bureaucracy, while keeping control of the shelter with county administration. County management has repeatedly shown that animal welfare is not a priority. The Animal Control Advisory Committee was never consulted. There was no public input. Only one of several alternatives was put on paper. There are several other alternatives that need to be considered.
Teams of county administrators and commissioners are now visiting city councils, seeking buy-in for their proposal. Talent voted “no further action,” Jacksonville tabled the matter. We have been appearing before these councils to present our concerns about the county's scheme, and to show that there is a better way to proceed. There are inexplicable numbers and assumptions in the county's presentation:
- - -A new, modern, efficiently-designed shelter should automatically reduce costs. To support a higher tax-grab, the county is instead forecasting a shocking explosion in personnel costs: from $760,921 in FY21-22 to almost $3million in FY28-29! Why build the animal shelter in the compound for a new jail if you aren't going to reduce costs by using trustees?
- - - Construction costs are based on a design providing 108, possibly 120 kennels. When county officials presented their proposal in Jacksonville and Talent on April 2 and 3, they did not disclose that there were already 122 dogs in the shelter! Inadequate as conceived, and certainly inadequate when their long-delayed shelter would come online in 2028, much less years down the road. The size is grossly inadequate unless county leaders have made a silent commitment to implement an aggressive spay/neuter program. California's Fresno County made such a commitment last month with funding of $500,000.
- - - In 2028, the county expects to find homes for only half the number of dogs as last year. In 2023, 453 dogs were adopted. The pro forma presented to support the new tax predicts only 231 adoptions, and that number will be even lower if the county continues to increase adoption fees.
- - - Law enforcement agencies use the shelter for free to house animals seized as “evidence.” According to the county administrator, this unrecovered cost is “a few hundred thousand dollars” per year. What if they paid their fair share? The sheriff's department is probably the largest burden. It would be an easy accounting step, a fund transfer, for the county to properly offset this shelter expense with revenue to Animal Services and thereby close the gap.
We could go on to dissect the county's sparse dossier, but our energies need to be dedicated to expediting a positive way forward to find the best solution and involve and respect all stakeholders. County administration has refused even to discuss the successful models in Deschutes, Douglas and Klamath Counties where nonprofits handle shelter operations at greatly reduced costs. County heads ignore the special district option which would take power and money out of their hands and entrust governance to an elected board of citizens who serve for free because of their dedication and expertise. Even if county heads execute their threat to drastically shrink services if they don't have their way, the voters have the final say. Let's look at options to meet needs fully on a much shorter timeline.
The issues are complex, but not nearly as complicated as the county administrator and commissioners portray them. They made no attempt to educate the public, involve stakeholders or build broad support for a sensible way forward. So we are starting that process now. Please attend the community forum on April 23. If you live in an incorporated area, urge your city representatives to participate, too. We all know we need a new shelter and together we can find a better way.
As a former Executive Director of the nonprofit Friends of the Animal(s) Shelter- I can attest to the huge and impactful role FOTAS played in operating the shelter, paying for 2 volunteer coordinators, providing daily care and food for the animals, paying for the Foster home coordinator and considerable veterinary medical care costs as well. FOTAS spent over $200,000 to buy and equip a veterinary trailer onsite and subsidized spay neuter vet bills - called every veterinary and coordinate volunteers to shuttle animals all over the valley for care they needed and were not receiving from county management. Furthermore FOTAS created other animal welfare services and subsidized their costs and provided volunteers to operate and subsidized professional clinics- including monthly vaccination clinics, they bought all the chips to offer new microchip clinics- sponsored Street Dogs outreach and care to the unhoused, and Working Cats to place feral cats all over the valley at vineyards, farms and anywhere requested and appropriate. We bought housing, food and supplies and taught the new placement owners how to maintain their working cats. We partnered with other small rescue groups. Volunteers walked dogs on a schedule every day- helped with adoption counseling and cleaned the cat rooms and kennels! When FOTAS published a plea to the community to donate dog food- because their warehouse donations dwindled- Danny Jordan threw a fit and demanded they take the ad down- but did he offer budget to buy dogfood?? NO! When the fires scorched the building and burned the yard and fence down- who rebuilt it??? FOTAS DID! When the pavement was too hot to walk dogs on - who bought carpets and misting lines to cool their path to the tiny yard? FOTAS did! These are dedicated volunteers who give their time, talent and treasures and open their homes repeatedly to care for, train, and socialize animals until adopted- and helped the shelter not only survive- but reach no-kill shelter status. FOTAS coordinated TV spots and delivery of animals, adoption events at PetSmart and other retailers.
Danny and the BOC only see dollar signs - so they rudely kick out FOTAS after decades of service and support pump up the costs so they can justify a new tax bond as I predicted over 3 years ago! That shelter was built in the early 1960s when the population of JC was 80,000 people- it’s also where animal control dumps every dead carcass of dear and every thing else that would stink up the workspace. These “leaders” don’t care about the animals- they only see a new option to persuade the people to give them more taxpayer dollars- when they already have $200,000,000 in savings- Demand a proper shelter and say no to New Taxes!
Wow! This is one - albeit a huge one - example of why we need to change our county charter. The idea that the county can ignore one of their very few responsibilities and blindly follow what the county administrator sets out as his scheme is appalling. Jackson county often touts as their fine management that they have a huge savings. That huge savings isn't fine management it's failure to provide services.
This is about the animal shelter but is symptomatic of how they 'manage' their few other responsibilities as well. We obviously need change
Cross posted for LISA JAMES:
As a former Executive Director of the nonprofit Friends of the Animal(s) Shelter- I can attest to the huge and impactful role FOTAS played in operating the shelter, paying for 2 volunteer coordinators, providing daily care and food for the animals, paying for the Foster home coordinator and considerable veterinary medical care costs as well. FOTAS spent over $200,000 to buy and equip a veterinary trailer onsite and subsidized spay neuter vet bills - called every veterinary and coordinate volunteers to shuttle animals all over the valley for care they needed and were not receiving from county management. Furthermore FOTAS created other animal welfare services and subsidized their costs and provided volunteers to operate and subsidized professional clinics- including monthly vaccination clinics, they bought all the chips to offer new microchip clinics- sponsored Street Dogs outreach and care to the unhoused, and Working Cats to place feral cats all over the valley at vineyards, farms and anywhere requested and appropriate. We bought housing, food and supplies and taught the new placement owners how to maintain their working cats. We partnered with other small rescue groups. Volunteers walked dogs on a schedule every day- helped with adoption counseling and cleaned the cat rooms and kennels! When FOTAS published a plea to the community to donate dog food- because their warehouse donations dwindled- Danny Jordan threw a fit and demanded they take the ad down- but did he offer budget to buy dogfood?? NO! When the fires scorched the building and burned the yard and fence down- who rebuilt it??? FOTAS DID! When the pavement was too hot to walk dogs on - who bought carpets and misting lines to cool their path to the tiny yard? FOTAS did! These are dedicated volunteers who give their time, talent and treasures and open their homes repeatedly to care for, train, and socialize animals until adopted- and helped the shelter not only survive- but reach no-kill shelter status. FOTAS coordinated TV spots and delivery of animals, adoption events at PetSmart and other retailers.
Danny and the BOC only see dollar signs - so they rudely kick out FOTAS after decades of service and support pump up the costs so they can justify a new tax bond as I predicted over 3 years ago! That shelter was built in the early 1960s when the population of JC was 80,000 people- it’s also where animal control dumps every dead carcass of dear and every thing else that would stink up the workspace. These “leaders” don’t care about the animals- they only see a new option to persuade the people to give them more taxpayer dollars- when they already have $200,000,000 in savings- Demand a proper shelter and say no to New Taxes!
Wow! This is one - albeit a huge one - example of why we need to change our county charter. The idea that the county can ignore one of their very few responsibilities and blindly follow what the county administrator sets out as his scheme is appalling. Jackson county often touts as their fine management that they have a huge savings. That huge savings isn't fine management it's failure to provide services.
This is about the animal shelter but is symptomatic of how they 'manage' their few other responsibilities as well. We obviously need change