City Council Preview - July 21 (Animal Care)

More than half the homes in Lake Forest have pets, which means, as a group, pet owners are more numerous than seniors, families with children under 18, and every other demographic group. Tomorrow night the City Council will have an open discussion about animal care for people and their pets in Lake Forest. The discussion comes in the light of the two recent scathing Grand Jury reports about the Orange County shelter. Lake Forest contracts with Orange County to provide animal care services, and the City has been compelled to respond to one of the Grand Jury reports. FWIW – This is the first time that the Grand Jury actually went to the length of compelling the City to respond.

If you’re not already familiar with this situation, here are some links to recent articles on the subject –

• · Recent developments
• · The County shelter
• · The 2nd Grand Jury Report
• · The Lake Forest situation
• · The 1st Grand Jury Report

GRAND JURY QUESTION

The Grand Jury made four recommendations in their report of May 13, 2015 and required that our City (and others) respond within 90 days. Here is their recommendation-

“The 18 contracting cities need to review their long-term commitment to be part of Orange County Animal Care as opposed to pursuing animal-care opportunities on their own or joining with neighboring cities that have shelters. The contracting cities need to demand that the County provide them a viable plan with cost and schedule estimates for a new facility or facilities to evaluate as part of their commitment review.”

You may be a little confused when you read this recommendation. The Grand Jury may be good at investigating but not so good at using the English language, at least in this case. The Grand Jury has bifurcated the City’s response into “either or” and this is not necessarily the case. Our City (and every other City) can review our “long term commitment” at the same time that we are “…pursuing animal-care opportunities on their own or joining with neighboring cities…” Below you’ll see that the City of Laguna Hills recognized this problem in their response, last week.

LAGUNA HILLS’ RESPONSE

“The R4 recommendation will not be implemented because it is not reasonable as phrased. Instead, the City intends to join with neighboring cities that currently contract with OC Animal Care Services to pursue potential animal care opportunities. In addition, the City will ask that the County provide a viable plan with cost and schedule estimates for a new facility or facilities to evaluate as part of their review of alternative animal care opportunities.”

LAKE FOREST RESPONSE

Here is what I will propose tomorrow night -

“The only long term commitment that the City of Lake Forest makes is to the health, safety, and welfare of our residents. With regard to the Grand Jury request that we respond to R-4, this recommendation will not be implemented because it is not reasonable as phrased. Instead, the City intends to continue with the County while joining with neighboring cities to explore potential opportunities to improve animal care services, which may involve partnering with existing services or establishing new services. In addition, the City will ask that the County provide a viable plan with cost and schedule estimates for new facilities to evaluate as part of our review of alternative animal care opportunities.”

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Dr. Jim Gardner is on the City Council for Lake Forest. You can check him out on LinkedIn and/or Facebook and you can share your thoughts about the City at Lake Forest Town Square on Facebook. His comments are not meant to reflect official City Policy.

Dr. Gardner has office hours every Tuesday from 3 pm to 5 pm at the City Hall. In addition, he holds a mini town meeting every month. The next meeting will be on August 15 at 2 pm at the El Toro Public Library.

Q”},{”8Z`v