Excellent.

Good evening and welcome to the Wednesday, November 12th meeting of the Animal Wellbeing Commission.

Commissioner the meeting is now called to order.

Will the clerk please call the role to establish a quorum?

Yes, thank you, Chair.

Commissioners, please unmute your microphones.

Commissioner Treat?

Here.

Commissioner Snell.

Here.

Commissioner Middleton is absent.

Commissioner Hayes is absent.

Commissioner Barragon?

Here.

Commissioner Bell.

Here.

Commissioner Bagley?

Here.

Commissioner Christie.

Here.

Commissioner Fu.

Here.

Vice Chair Morris.

Here.

Commissioner Garcia.

And Chair Hefner.

And I am here.

Thank you.

We have a quorum.

Excellent.

Members of the public are welcome to address the commission.

We're here to provide a forum for public discussion.

If you'd like to speak on agenda item, please turn in a speaker slip no later than when the item begins.

You'll have two minutes to speak once you're called upon.

After the first speaker, we will no longer accept speaker slips.

We'll now proceed with today's agenda, starting with a land acknowledgement and pledge led by Commissioner Garcia.

To the original people of this land, the Nissan people, the Southern Maidu, Valley Plains Mi Walk, Patoon Wintoon peoples, and the people of the Wilton Rancheria, Sacramento's only federal recognized tribe.

May we acknowledge and honor the native people who came before us and still walk beside us today on these ancestral lands by choosing to gather today in the active practice of acknowledgement and appreciation for Sacramento's indigenous peoples' history contributions and lives.

Thank you.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.

One nation, under God, indivisible, liberty and justice for all.

Thank you, Commissioner Garcia.

So we'll begin tonight by welcoming our latest new member of the Commission, Ignacio Barragán.

Uh Mr.

Barragan, would you like to introduce yourself and tell us a little bit a little bit about how you ended up here with us?

Sure.

My name is Ignacio Barragán.

I um live in District 7, which is includes a pocket and land park and uh little pocket area of Sacramento.

Um I've lived in Sacramento for uh more than half of my life, so probably about 17 years, and um I have uh one really large uh dog at home, a wife and a four-year-old.

And uh I'm excited to be here and um most interested in being able to augment the voices across the community, especially those in kind of traditionally underserved.

Um I am fluent in Spanish and I'm excited to be able to reach those people and hear concerns and um you know continue to support the charge of the commission.

Excellent.

Thank you.

And welcome.

Uh so before we do the consent calendar, I just want to make a quick note that uh we did have a request from a member to uh uh make a slight adjustment, which is we will do uh comments from members of the public on items not on the agenda.

We will do that before we do final comments and questions from the commission members.

So folks will take note as we go through that.

Uh otherwise our first order of business is the consent calendar.

Um do we have any members of the public who want to comment on the consent calendar?

I have no speaker slips on this item.

Okay.

Do we have members who want to speak on the consent calendar items?

Which are the minutes and the follow-up log?

Commissioner, I've got three choices over there.

Okay.

Uh Commissioner Morris or Garcia or both or one.

Oh, sorry.

It's a dealer's choice over there.

Dealer's choice, okay.

Um, I just um uh appreciate that the idea about the ordinance change was put here in that it went to the director of government affairs in September, and then I was just wondering if anyone can give us any thought about what are next steps with that ordinance change.

And I'm looking at our city attorney representative, wondering if he can guide us at all.

Can you elaborate on which ordinance change you're referring to?

Um back, I think in June, a couple of our commissioners, Commissioner Treat and Commissioner Bagley in particular did some research about expanding the number of dogs that are available allowed to be adopted per household in Sacramento, and that we would match other communities, so long as they are spayed and neutered.

And I see that in September some language was submitted, and I'm just kind of curious what's next and how do we follow up that up?

Yeah, so my understanding was next.

So is it appropriate for a member of this commission to maybe touch base with law and legislation and kind of find out if it's on our agendas in the next future near future?

Yeah, I can determine um which agenda date or what date it would rather it was agendized for, and I can get back to that to the commission with that information.

Wonderful.

Yeah, we we put some time and thought into it, so thank you for helping.

Commissioner Morris, I've had a conversation with uh city council member Plucky Bomb, and he planned to put it on their agenda too.

So, wonderful, wonderful.

I believe there was some language that uh Commissioner Bagley developed that was forwarded on to um Councilmember Plucky Bomb.

Yes, and thank you, Commissioner Bagley, for doing the language.

And it just matches the county.

Okay, thank you both commissioners.

Other comments on the consent calendar.

Seeing none, I'd be open for a motion to approve the consent calendar.

Oh moved.

Second, uh motion and a second.

Uh all those in favor signify by saying aye.

All those opposed.

Uh any abstentions?

Hearing none, eyes have it.

And the consent calendar is approved.

Okay.

Uh also I don't know, folks all got the uh uh notification in time, but I I would let you know that we're putting off item number six because the uh staff person who is to give that presentation was not going to be available tonight.

So we are hopeful to have her um uh provide a uh uh presentation to us at our next meeting, which will be all the way in January.

All right, moving on then to item number three.

Let's talk about cats.

Don't I think so?

For this, we're gonna need the.

What's that?

It'll be up shortly.

It'll be up shortly.

There it is.

And I'm gonna need a clicker of some kind.

Oh, thank you.

Excellent.

Thank you.

Okay.

Yes, let's talk cats.

Um, so I put this presentation together in response to requests from other members of the commission.

Uh, folks who were interested to hear about this but didn't actually want to give the presentation themselves, so you got me.

Uh I I am by no means a cat expert, and I want to say up front that uh nor am I an attorney, uh, but I I did make an effort to sort of gather the um eleventh uh information I thought was relevant.

Um, and I I don't obviously speak for the shelter or for the commission.

These are just my own um, this is my own work product.

Uh so my hope here was to give folks some context about cats and shelters, uh, touch on sort of the legal and uh regulatory framework that they work under, uh, talk a little bit about front streets approach and the outcomes that they are seeing, and then talk a little bit about some of the work that volunteers and other partners are doing.

Uh so as I think a lot of the folks around this table know, I'm much more of a dog person than a cat person.

So I'm gonna start with uh something that we say among dog people, which is if you have two two dog people, the only thing that they agree about is that the third person doesn't know what they're talking about.

And uh I would say that uh in the course of gathering information to to put this together.

I certainly think it that that uh that story can be extended to to uh uh cat people, because uh there certainly are a lot of different points of view, and I think in particular um there tends to be for folks who are in who are situated differently, whether they're on staff at the shelter, volunteering at the shelter, perhaps working with um cats in the community, or perhaps just uh, you know, sort of an average person working and living in Sacramento.

Um, there I think there is a great deal of disconnect among these different constituencies and different groups, and they're likely to see take the same set of circumstances and come up with very different ideas about how to proceed.

So let's start with the national statistics.

I thought those would be helpful.

Let's see if I can operate this.

There we go.

So um, and again, probably because I'm a dog person, I and to be fair, for the most part, animal shelters take in dogs and cats.

We do take in, they do take in other animals on occasion, but for the most part, they take in dogs and cats.

And so I think there's some relevant comparisons to be made and some differences to be talked about.

So uh with regard to intake, you'll see some relatively similar numbers, right?

Three 3.2 million cats taken in by shelters nationally, and um almost a similar number, 3.1 million dogs.

Adoptions, again, you know, pretty close, rough justice, right?

One uh 2.1 million cats uh intake into shelters.

These are all um statistics from 2024, I believe.

Um, and uh about two million dogs that were adopted, so roughly equivalent.

But then, as you start to look at some of the other information, you see quite a difference in some of the outcome information.

With respect to return to owners, for example, only about 90,000 cats were returned to their owners that had been uh brought into shelters, and um compared to 620,000 dogs.

Uh so uh uh that return to owner rate is really, really low.

Only about less than 3% nationally of cats that are brought into shelters are ultimately returned to their owners.

Uh with dogs, the numbers are, I mean, they're still not everything that we would like them to be, certainly, but they are are much, much, much higher.

Um, with regard to euthanasia, again, a pretty um uh significant difference between those outcome levels, right?

Uh 530,000 cats euthanized versus 390,000 dogs.

So you've got cats that are nearly twice as likely to be euthanized in shelters, and only one seventh as likely to be returned to their owners.

Um I think to some degree this is where some of the disconnect starts to occur because folks who are working in shelters they know this.

Um other folks may not may not have that same, have that same background and that same information.

And I would say with regard to the euthanasia numbers, it's particularly concerning with regard to cats because as you've seen in our own shelter data, by and large, the euthanasia that are occurring among cats are really almost exclusively medical.

It's very rare that there's a behavioral euthanasia for a cat in a shelter, whereas um it's it's much more common in dogs.

So that would certainly tell you that you might expect those euthanasia numbers to be somewhat somewhat similar, but they're really quite a bit, quite a bit different.

Okay.

So from the national level, let's take it down into our our own personal state here.

Again, I'm not an attorney, I'm not giving anybody legal advice, but I wanted to take a look at sort of the legal lay of the land as I understand it.

And um again, here's where you start to see uh some differences between uh cats and dogs.

Uh the food and ag code talks about the um the requirement to intake uh uh stray dogs, also all stray dogs are to be are to be uh brought into shelters.

There is not a similar requirement for all cats.

Uh, there is a requirement in the Food and ag code that um uh uh shelters are required to take in sick, injured, or what they call unweaned felines.

These would be very young cats who um are not really ready to uh survive on their own without their without their mother.

Those are specifically called out in the food and ag code as um as uh animals that should be admitted to shelters.

Um in addition, you know, there there is no, at least I could not find any instance where either the city or the county had imposed an additional requirement over and above what is uh what is there in the food and ag code, food and ag code.

Now, as folks who are more versed in these things would likely tell you, there's there's more to the story, right?

And so uh, because separate from the food and ag code, and of course, those of us who've worked in the building and had been involved in legislative discussions, it's not at all unusual to have a piece of code over here that says one thing and a piece of code someplace else that says maybe something a little different and trying to resolve those differences.

So there is over in the penal code, when it comes to animals that are uh abandoned or neglected by their owners, there is a provision of the penal code that says that animal control authorities are to take in uh cats that have been uh or animals that have been subject to uh abuse and and neglect and that sort of thing, right?

So you can see that you've got sort of uh think about it in terms of two pathways into a shelter when it comes to cats.

The uh uh cats that are that are injured, that are uh uh sick, that are um too young to care for them to look after themselves, and um uh cats that would have been uh uh subject to uh abandonment, cats that have been abandoned.

So, um as so often happens when you've got uh different pieces of code, you will often get uh uh disputes about things.

And let me say at the outset that I think that uh there is there is good reason for folks to have different points of view on these things because uh their experiences are different.

You know, where I might say as a somebody who's worked in the legislature, okay, well uh I get it, I see what the code says about about uh intake of of uh uh uh injured or or sick animals, and it's it's not there with respect to the uh uh cats the same way it is with dogs, uh I get that, I understand that.

But if you're an average person, member of the public, right, and you've got a cat that shows up in your yard and it's got no uh uh collar on it, it's got no ID, anything like that, you know, you maybe talk to your neighbors and say, Well, is this your cat?

You know, where does the cat belong?

And if you can't find an answer, who you're gonna call, you're gonna pick up 311, you're gonna call and say, I've got this cat in my yard.

Somebody please come get it.

That's not an un, that's not an unreasonable request necessarily.

However, from the perspective of somebody working inside a shelter who says, well, the law doesn't treat a stray cat necessarily the same way it does a stray dog.

I don't have that same responsibility.

So you can see where uh attitudes and uh opinions would start to diverge.

So, and uh uh most specifically, those kinds of things are very often the kinds of things that lead to lawsuits.

And so uh as was mentioned in the uh audit and in several other places recently there was um recent litigation uh that was brought down in San Diego County against the San Diego County Humane Society, and it it specifically started to look at and wanted to look at this question of of so what constitutes an abandoned cat uh as opposed to uh uh that that would that would not otherwise fall into the uh injured or or uh sick uh category, right?

Because, you know, where does that where does that duty you know begin and end, right?

And of course, there will be some specific uh instances where it's it's quite evident that a cat or any other animal has been abandoned, right?

If animal is inside a rental property and left behind by somebody who departs, and everybody in the neighborhood knows who lived there, and the animal was left behind without food or water, and as the person left somebody said, Well, Joe, what about your cat?

Oh, I don't care about it.

Well, okay, that's pretty pretty clear that's an abandoned animal.

But remember here that uh responsible pet ownership with regard to cats is really quite different than responsible pet ownership when it comes to dogs, right?

We don't have the same expectations.

I have my German shepherd at home.

She doesn't leave my house without being under a straint that I control, right?

But if if I I don't own a cat, but if I owned a cat, wouldn't be unreasonable for me to open my front door and let fluffy or whatever I choose to name it, wander about the my yard or and you know, cats have an ability to get over fences and things like that.

So very often you can see where there is a uh an obvious instance of an animal being abandoned, but very often that might not be entirely clear whether an animal has been abandoned or not.

So what the litigation in San Diego look tried to look at was um, you know, where do you draw that line?

And at the time, the folks at San Diego Humane, they had a protocol where they looked at um a variety of factors to try to figure out is this a cat where there is what they called evidence of ownership or verifiable signs of ownership.

Um things like did the cat have a collar on?

Was there indications that the cat had gotten medical care, things like that?

Because, and the court in its reasoning said, Well, to be abandoned, you had to you had to have been owned, right?

You can't be abandoned if you were never owned.

Okay, haven't thought about that, but certainly a reasonable um reasonable thing to think about.

And um the folks who brought the suit, uh, their contention was, as I understand it, that the that the the criteria that San Diego Humane was using was too narrow and they wanted it to be enlarged.

And specifically one of the things they asked for was they wanted the shelter to start uh to start uh uh doing intake of healthy adult cats that were what they called friendly and adoptable.

That was one of the many aims of the suit, and it's a very long um piece of reading if you want to read the decision.

But that was one of their specific requests, and that request was denied by the court.

Court didn't think that that was appropriate.

Now the court did say that they thought that the San Diego uh parameters that they were using were too narrow.

San Diego did enlarge those parameters and included things like uh not only was the cat wearing a collar, but was there evidence that the cat had maybe at some point earlier had a collar and uh was the cat wearing clothes?

Because obviously the cat wasn't wasn't born without clothes, somebody must have put it on it.

Things like that.

So with those minor changes, uh the the court ruled specifically that that in that instance that uh that humane society is in compliance with California law.

Now, that's just one case.

It's just one court.

It was not in, it was not uh didn't come out of Sacramento, obviously it was a San Diego case.

And of course, uh folks could uh bring another uh set of litigation tomorrow in a different court, have a different fact pattern and get a completely different ruling.

But that's sort of the that's the the basic sort of rules of the road as we as we currently find them, right?

That uh that shelters are required to take in sick, injured, and unweaned felines, and also to take take in uh what we would call uh abandoned animals.

That's that's what they're required to do.

Now again, you could see where if those are the two paths in which we're gonna take cats into shelters, there's a big gap there, right?

Because there's gonna be cats that don't fall into we've got evidence of verifiable ownership, and they're not gonna necessarily fall into they're sick or injured or or um, you know, uh an unweaned neonate.

So you're gonna get folks who think, hey, that that you know, we need to do something about that.

We need to enlarge that uh that uh process so that we don't leave cats out on the street.

Because, and there are some real strong compelling reasons why we don't want lots of cats on the street.

They are certainly vulnerable to predation, right?

Uh dogs and other animals are likely to kill them.

They are um in jeopardy, obviously of being hit by cars and all those sorts of things.

And I think we all kind of understand that.

That's that's pretty easy to understand.

What I think a lot of folks may not know is that beyond just the legal requirements, there's some real reasons why for folks in shelters, um, they don't view uh the shelter as an ideal place for cats.

Now, as I tell everybody who comes in to adopt a dog, I say that being in the shelter is a stressful experience for an animal under any circumstances, and that goes for dogs as well as cats.

Um, but in particular, there are some reasons why uh cats have um face some difficulties that that uh other animals do not in terms of uh the uh uh the how their cages are are um constructed, do they have good vertical space to move about, do they have good places to hide, uh those kinds of things, uh and those have a real impact on cats and their health in terms of the noise that they're exposed to, those kinds of things.

And so um uh we know that that is uh a driving factor in why in a lot of shelters in a lot of contexts, folks have looked for other alternatives for cats other than having them come into shelters.

Now, let's start to talk about Front Street, because beyond those sort of um endemic to shelter issues, there are some specific issues at Front Street that make um the uh intake of cats somewhat problematic.

Folks will recall from our needs assessment back in 2024 that across all animals there's a there's a real deficit of housing.

We have 109 spaces available for cats.

Uh the the folks who completed the needs assessment, their recommendation that we was that we needed 140 at the time that was done, and that was of course based on current intake, that if we were not taking in any more cats than we already were, we needed to have 140 spaces as opposed to the current 109.

On top of that, beyond just the number of spaces, there's the kinds of spaces.

And one of the uh faults that the folks at the uh who did the needs assessment found was that we needed to have like 20 spaces for isolation of cats that are sick.

We only have nine spaces.

Um obviously we have um some very um uh challenging uh uh limitations at the shelter with regard to the veterinary staff and the and the capacity of the facility uh overall.

Uh I found it interesting, and again, it's one of those things I I didn't know until I looked at it, but uh you will see if you look at the the shelter's numbers, this sort of inverse uh uh situation where we have most of the dogs that are under the care of the shelter are gonna be at the shelter.

So, for example, today we have as of 1 30 this afternoon, we had 177 dogs in the shelter, and we had uh 59 of them in foster, right?

So, roughly three times as many dogs in the shelter as in foster care.

And with cats, it's just reversed.

89 cats in the shelter, 227 cats in foster care.

Kind of an interesting um uh difference.

And I it speaks to the preference among veterinarians and others to have cats not in shelters when there are other alternatives available.

So, all that as background.

Let's talk a little bit about Front Street and the their own practices and um sort of how all that works.

So, intake of uh cats are the immediate intake is for uh sick, injured, and unweaneding kittens.

Uh healthy strays are only admitted if there's uh capacity and if there's that proof of abandonment.

Uh owner surrenders are referred to uh Sacramento SPCA, and there's a there very often is a lengthy waiting list for that.

So that kind of encapsulates the as best as I understand it, the way things are uh are being done at the moment.

Let's take a look at some of the numbers, and you'll see the cat intake, and these are for 2024, which was the last complete year, obviously, uh, close to 3900 or 3947 cats were taken in by Front Street.

I used the California shelters numbers uh just because they were attainable for the level of detail that I was able and wanted to get.

Um and so if you look at that return to owner percentage, really low, 1.6%, right?

And but even for California shelters generally, it's kind of in the same ballpark, 2.8%, not great.

Um cats that are brought into shelters are not being found by their original owners.

Let's look at non-live outcomes.

Now, I did combine deaths in shelters and fosters with euthanasia, and here was my thinking behind that, which was it's it was apparent from the conversations I had with folks and from looking at the data, um, that different facilities have different approaches when it comes to euthanasia.

Again, remember for cats, almost all of these euthanasia are done for medical reasons, right?

So you could see, and and quite frankly, as I understand it, and other cat people who are more cat knowledgeable than I am can correct me if I'm wrong.

Um, you know, some of the some of the animals that come in are essentially very near to death, right?

And so different shelters make different decisions about uh when to actually euthanize versus allowing that death to occur naturally.

So I combine them together for purposes of sort of understanding what's happening to these animals, right?

And so you look at the non-live outcome rate, this is again for 2024, and it's it's nearly 25%.

So one cat in four that's coming into the shelter in one fashion or another is not leaving alive, right?

Um, which obviously not ideal, right?

And so uh I did a little bit of looking around to try to find some other um situation in which uh there's a uh a 25% mortality rate.

The only thing I could come up with was um soldiers soldiers in uh trench warfare in World War One.

So not you know, not the greatest um thing to compare with.

So that's a little bit about what what we're seeing in the in the shelter currently.

The next thing I did was look at the national standards of care.

As folks familiar with our ordinance will recall, one of the things that this panel is asked to do is to examine what's happening at the shelter in the context of what the national standards of care as set by the association of shelter veterinarians.

And if you look at their standards of care, you will find that by and large the things that are being done by the shelter in terms of immediate intake for the injured and ill and the neomates and that sort of thing, to postpone or schedule non-urgent surrenders to explore alternatives, and you know, the idea of scan for a microchip, help folks do lost pet listings, those kinds of things, are all things that fall under and are um standards of practice that are uh accepted by the association of sheltered veterinarians.

Now that is not to say by any stretch of the imagination, that everything is great and there's no problems, it's just that that's that's the benchmark that we have, and you can see, again, that there are real gaps in the system, right?

Um, and so uh to try to address some of those gaps, there are some volunteer and community efforts underway.

And the the one that leaps out is um uh uh kitten connection, right?

And so that is a volunteer foster care initiative.

It's been going on now for four or five years, I believe.

There are uh volunteers who, and I gotta tell you, as a dog person, I thought we were kind of, you know, we're quite special and do a lot of hard work.

Then I took a look at the things that the cat people are doing, and as dog people have got a lot of work ahead of us just to keep up with these folks.

So these are volunteers who are literally responding to 311 calls about um uh kittens that have been orphaned that have appeared to have been abandoned by their mothers, these folks go out to places where there have been calls, they will uh scatter uh flower around and uh try to maybe give it a little bit of time and see if the mom is coming back because they know that uh really young cats will do the best if mom is still around.

Uh but then if if if mom isn't, then they're um folks who who um uh uh coordinate the rescues and and provide uh home-based care.

They'll do some triage uh I have a note here that Commissioner Bell, who's been uh part of that program, I think from day one, and um perhaps could speak to uh more knowledgeably about it than certainly than I can.

Uh but these folks are um they are doing uh uh amazing things in terms of of uh uh going out there and and taking those calls and um uh arranging for foster care for uh for these uh really really young cats who uh you know face some real real challenges, right?

Uh in addition to that is um uh our folks at Friends of Front Street, um many of us are supportive of uh one of the needs that they work to address is the the need for for spay and neuter of what we would call community cats, cats that don't fall into that uh uh necessarily we know that the cat was abandoned and don't fall necessarily into the sick or injured um um slots.

So uh what Friends does is they um they provide the funds for uh the first 50 cats to be altered over at community spay and neuter, the facility right next to Bradshaw, um every Monday.

Now, I understand that uh they've had some personnel problems at community spay and neuter in terms of uh staff shortages, and so uh in November, I'm not sure whether those are happening, but those are um that's an that's been an ongoing effort, and they uh uh do, they've done 8,000, more than 8,000 um spay and neuters of of uh of cats.

Uh so my own takeaways, and again, these are just these are my thoughts, right, is that um uh front street's approach to managing cat intake and care uh from what I can see uh uh complies with state law and and aligns with the national standards of care.

I will say that beyond the legal minimums, that the system as we have it is dependent upon volunteer efforts and non-shelter partnerships, right?

So when you're relying on volunteers or third parties to do some of this work, then if you run out of volunteers, the work doesn't get done.

If you've got a partnership with an organization that loses a veterinarian one month and they can't quickly replace that person, you're not gonna get the same level of service that you might have hoped from the from that um partnership.

Um and then the other point I would make is that this entire system is vulnerable to excessive demand.

I will I will keep the source of this nameless, but what I was told was there's a point because, you know, as we as as folks I think are aware, I mean obviously there are there's seasons and we we talk about kitten seasons uh which you know typically come in the spring, and and there are times when that system itself is just they just hit a wall, right?

They're just overwhelmed with the demand, and there aren't volunteers enough to to handle it, right?

And so that that is a real and ongoing concern.

Uh and I will say, I think quite, you know, it's it's just self-evident that um there are some real gaps between the services that are available and what might be if we were to ask the general public about well, you know, what's your expectation if you find a cat in your yard, et cetera.

There's some real gaps between what's being provided and and and and what folks might like to have.

Um, but I would also say, as we've encountered in so many other instances, that the undersized nature of our facility and the limitations that are placed on the budget at the shelter make it expanding services greatly without um some sort of new investment.

I mean, if if someone's got a magic wand, great, I'm all for it, but absent some additional um uh investment.

I I think that it's probably uh unrealistic to expect some sort of uh um huge uh uh expansion of services without some sort of uh investment.

And I know this commission has talked about uh some of the interim improvements and things like that that we had a pretty we had a pretty narrow wish list last year, and it we we got one thing off of the wish list, not all of it.

Um but that's stuff to keep in mind.

So that's my presentation, um, and I look forward to comments from the commission, but we should first hear from the public.

Thank you, Chair.

I have four speaker slips.

First one is Mark C.

Bear with me this is the first time I've addressed it some kind of a council or group, so thanks for your uh attention.

Um a lot of facts that you brought out about um abandoned uh pets, cats, dogs, and that um on October 30th, I was traveling I live in the city of Sacramento, and I was traveling down Prue Ridge early in the morning, and luckily I was going real fast with the flow of traffic, you know, to get to work, drop off the kids, whatever.

And as I was approaching uh the intersection on Stockton and Fruit Ridge, uh maybe about 10 feet in front of me, it was just a baby kitten right there on the far right lane.

I put on my flashers and uh waved the cars over and everything like that.

There happened to be a volunteer at uh McDonald's right there in that, and she saw what was going on and came out and everything.

I'm not gonna reveal her name, but I ought to be you know, and an enemy.

But anyway, um that was just one incident, and by the powers invested somewhere else, I was able to find fostered that turned into uh adopting the kitty and early uh Halloween gift, and that you know, October 30.

Now, just alone last week, there's like about four people, individuals that were calling me or texting me that about dogs.

One particular girl, she lives in an apartment in the city too, and that and she heard some whimpering and you know, little uh barks and out, it turns out to be these four pickings that were left.

So I related to what you were saying, you know.

The thing is sometimes I find from my experience, your time is up, thank you for your comments.

You get two minutes for public comment.

If you'd like to make another comment, you can do during matters not on the agenda at the end of the meeting.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker is Jamie McDoll.

Hi, good evening.

Frankly, I'm not sure where to begin, but let's start with.

I'm pretty sure that this commission is supposed to be an independent body, and this report certainly does not seem independent at all, but very much uh kissing ass of Front Street.

So just want to say.

But I know that you did say that you don't speak for the shelter or commission.

And yeah, I still don't see the purpose of this at all.

Your legal interpretations, by the way, are a little suspect.

And you do have a commissioner on this who actually knows the law.

It might have been good to consult.

You reference the food and ag code, but I do believe that the California Civil Code is more applicable to our animals and to our city.

And you also did mention that it is problematic to be relying on volunteers and partners, which completely agree with that.

And that you mentioned that the shelter is vulnerable to excessive demands.

Also, very true.

The bottom line is though, why is this a problem?

Why are the cats a problem?

Why do we need so many volunteers?

And it's simple.

Population, lack of population control that has been ongoing for so long because Front Street turns away animals against the California civil code, unaltered, to go out and breed and made more and more cats and more cats, so that people like Commissioner Bell gets called because there are kittens out there abandoned, feral, because there's no population control.

And it would be great if this presentation was more about what Front Street's policies were on animals and on cats, but this completely inappropriate for this commission.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Next speaker is Susan Falcon.

Good evening.

Dear commissioners, I urge you to all please pay close attention to the clearly biased agendas being put forth by the chair and the vice chair of this commission on your behalf.

As you sit on this day, you should be deeply concerned that these agendas are often false, misleading, and defending illegal practices and failed leadership rather than doing anything truly to change the status quo of a shelter that continues to fail animals and betrayed the public's trust.

Well, both the public and other commissioners have repeatedly asked for truth and transparency about Front Street's cat and kitten policies.

This latest agenda not only falsely claims Front Street has no legal obligation to accept lost and abandoned stray cats and kittens, it actually suggests it's a good idea to do so.

In what world is it moral, logical or legal to turn away unsterilized animals and allow them to breed out of control for six years, as Front Street has done?

And why didn't shelter staff get up here and explain their programs?

I'll tell you why, because doing so would mean admitting they are violating state law.

This commission was created to facilitate public and community dialogue.

So recommendations on how to help animals can be made to the mayor and city council.

For the past four years, they have done nothing to advance this goal.

Instead, even with the earnest concerns of new members, the old guard continues to defend and protect failed leadership.

If we if we want real life-saving change, then this commission must make way for leaders who stand for truth, accountability, and compassion.

I pray that 2026 ushers in a new era for this commission and for Front Street Animal Shelter.

Thank you for your comments.

Next is Julie Verga, and I will pass out the handout that you provided.

Thank you, by the way.

Thank you very much for handing those out.

Appreciate it.

Okay, go ahead.

Good evening.

In 2013, a small group calling itself the California Shelter Policy Stakeholders Group, co-authored by Dr.

Kate Hurley and then Humane Society lobbyist Jennifer Fearing released a document titled Charting a Path Forward.

This was the first blueprint for what we now know as reduced intake, which encourages shelters to turn away cats and kittens in violation of law under the false pretense that such practice would reduce euthanasia in shelters.

The reaction from public and private animal welfare agencies was swift and overwhelmingly critical.

Their formal response, which you have in front of you today, remains accurate and urgent more than ever today.

They warned that these proposals were illegal, illegal, illogical, and would endanger lost, abandoned and sick animals.

They correctly noted that eliminating stray holding periods and abandoning cats back into the community clearly violates state law, including multiple bodies of California law.

Despite these warnings, Dr.

Hurley and her allies stayed the course, ultimately securing 50 million in taxpayer funds to advance these failed policies statewide.

Many of those who objected have oaths of betrayed animals in violation of law subsequently.

And really, what this has done is cause the worst crisis of overpopulation that we have seen in our lifetime.

It does not even take into account the thousands of animals, hundreds of thousands, statewide and thousands of them turned away and left to breed, suffer, and starve in our communities.

Yet this commission agenda, which speaks on your behalf, continues to advance and defend these illegal and harmful programs.

Commissioners, please do not believe the lies advanced in tonight's agenda.

Front Street's current cat policies are illegal and unlawful.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

That's all the speakers that I have for this item.

All right.

Members of the commission, Commissioner Bagley.

Yes, thank you.

Well, I think I'm going to start off with legal information and probably end in with some advocacy.

Let me start with the page that discusses cats in California law.

I have a question as to where you obtained these conclusions, Chair.

Whether you you summarized it this way, or whether you gleaned this from another organization or another publication.

No, that's it's it's it's my work.

I read the codes and okay.

Thank you.

All right.

Um, and I can see you put some time into this because there's a lot about this presentation that I agree with.

But if this page, cats and California law, is the legal premise from which everything else stems, then there's a problem.

Because the first thing you say is that shelters are not required to intake healthy stray cats, and I don't think that is accurate.

My legal opinion is that that is inaccurate, and I would be happy to meet with the city attorney and go over the research and the statutes and everything else I'm about to elaborate on.

Shelters have a duty under 597.1 and civil code, and that's the penal code, and the civil code 1816, as well as 1815, which define the depository nature of shelters, and then 1816, particularly subsection C, is very very important.

It's clear to me that if a person wants a community cat program, they are going to lean into the San Diego decision.

But if you use the San Diego decision to guide you, you will see that that judge validated 1816 C.

When she said the restrict restrictive criteria was in violation of California law, and that it was not in violation when it was broadened.

What she is saying and relying on is 1816 C, which refers to 597.1.

Understand that those together are both the obligation statutes and the duty statutes for shelters to take in stray and abandoned animals.

Now you said food and ag 31108 mandates admission for dogs, and there's no parallel statute for cats.

That's inaccurate.

Not the section that has to do with kittens.

If you look at 31752, it is almost verbatim.

The only difference is the numbering.

So there is a parallel.

Understand that in all these codes, and I'm talking about penal civil food and act, they never expressly say shelters must take in stray abandoned dogs.

Shelters must take in stray and abandoned cats.

They use the term animals.

And if you go to 599B, you will see their definition for animal.

But I didn't stop there because I know the case law that defines that and elaborates on that definition of dumb creature, which is what you see in 599B.

Understand that shelters, the broad term is animals.

If you look in all the codes for companion animal, domesticated animal, pet animal, vertebrate animal, you will all see from all of them that they include cats.

There's just no question, just like there's a ton of dog statutes, which makes you be you're able to fall back and say shelters are required to take in dogs, there are a number of cat statutes.

I have a list of cat protections throughout California law.

Just because I wasn't sure even where you got that, because to me, it's very clear if you look at the definitions for animal that it includes cats, okay?

And I do agree they're supposed to take in unweaned sick kittens, of course.

But the big difference with kittens is that you are able as a shelter to immediately adopt and foster them out without any holding period at all because they clearly have not been owned when their uh neonates and their unweaned kittens.

When you say that the Sacramento City County codes add no additional requirements, I wouldn't expect them to.

They are supplementary, supplement, they supplement state law so that in fact the city code is a bit narrower than state law, but it's superseded in Trump by state law.

The state law that we should be concerned with is 5971 as well as 1816 and 1815.

The other problem that I have with this, and it kind of lines up with, and this is where it's advocate centric, is when you say that Front Street is in compliance with the law.

If the law requires Front Street and every other shelter to take in stray and abandon, because that's the key term, stray and abandon, then when a finder brings a healthy stray cat that they have found to the public counter, and that cat is not taken in, and the finder is told to put it back where they find it, that is a violation of the laws that I just gave you, a clear violation.

And if you read the San Diego case and you understand she is validating 1816 when she finds San Diego in violation and then not in violation, you understand that 1816C has value in this, and that that is the law along with 5971.

Now I'm not denying if you want to have an honest conversation, that Front Street's too small, you don't have the resources, you don't have the crew, you don't have the vet staff, that's an honest conversation.

But I would never jump to saying Front Street isn't compliance because they're not following the stray and abandoned animal admission, and I want you to think about that.

And if you want to sit down, I'll show you the codes.

Just one second.

Let me talk just for a second about community cat programs.

Because there are aspects of this that are have not been discussed.

And it was uh I have things that I would have said to Kate Hurley had she shown up last month.

The problem with community cat programs is that when they were created, they were system-centric, not welfare centric.

And that's the problem advocates have.

I understand that.

But the bottom line is from an advocacy viewpoint, from a moral animal welfare viewpoint, we understand that what is being ignored is the physiology of cats.

It is far different than dogs.

I don't want to say they breed like rabbits, but they breed almost like rabbits, okay?

To reject unaltered cats and not take them in because you don't have enough space.

It's thousands of cats.

The problem is it exponentially increases the crisis, which advocates and volunteers understand.

But without lifespan studies, okay, what that's what Hurley doesn't have, and community uh cat program advocates don't have.

They don't have lifespan survival studies that and they can't.

They can't do it.

If you do a deep dive into why they don't, there I don't want to get into it, but there's a whole lot of research out there as to why they don't.

The few observational studies that they have showed that these non-ferals don't last long, and you are left with the decision that when you put certain cats out in the street like that, their fate is far worse than humane euthanasia.

Most of you weren't here.

People, advocates throughout this state fought like hell to get the shelter system to adopt a humane euthanasia, and here we are, 2025, causing this exponential crisis by rejecting animals under community sheltering that are unaltered, okay, procreating, and we haven't gotten to the point to ask ourselves isn't there a fate that we are subjecting these animals to that is far worse than a humane euthanasia, and that's really what it boils down to it's it's obscene.

The cat death is obscene, but you have to ask yourselves for those non-ferals, and you know, I read the San Diego decision, I'm thinking, wow, in a perfect world, yeah, we're gonna use the judge's criteria and do all these things.

The reality is it's very subjective, it's very difficult to have staff do it consistently.

She expects staff to do it in good faith.

You and you and I both know I've worked in shelters, you volunteer in shelters.

The idea that it would be consistently applied, is just it's not even fathomable, really.

Those are the things I disagree with, Paul very strongly.

I appreciate that.

I appreciate your comments, and I I and I think that much of what you say is is well taken in the sense that that there is no doubt, I don't think any I think it's unquestionable that there are um uh uh that there are there are inevitably going to be cats that however it is in practice, decided that a cat is abandoned versus not abandoned.

I mean, it is it inevitably a g a gray area um and and difficult to to discern I mean you know you can't interrogate the cat right and and that the outcomes for cats that are uh that are that are not in someone's home environment you know that I mean the one thing we know about lifespan is that cats live longer you know in a home with a person that that cares for them right and and you know it gets worse from there but it gets I I and I and I I think much of what I would agree with much of what you say I I certainly did not mean to imply that um that outside of sick injured and non-weaned that shelters have no responsibility well I mean I think that's what you printed I mean and I just I and I think if you it was the California law page.

Well I think if you and then you cite sections that are holding period sections and not sections at all that would pertain to that.

This was this was my attempt to put what I had found in a in a PowerPoint right and and so um it certainly what we what we what I did not find and you may disagree and as I said some court may show up you know two minutes from now and and and and take another view the legislature might act in and whatever they want to do but that um uh at this point as I understand it shelters do not have the same obligation to take in all strays that that they do for of cats that they do for dogs and if I'm if I'm wrong about that I'm simply I yeah I want you to show me what statute tells you that that's all um moving on uh member Christie.

Oh that's how I feel after this um chair hefner thank you so much for giving this presentation um I know people have been asking for it for a while um I do wish that it was delivered by Front Street staff though um and uh or staff that are more familiar familiar with the policies and the decisions just because the comments and questions that I have are not best directed at you but I do appreciate all the work you put into this.

The cat euthanasia statistics I'll just start with that because that's where we began um I just think we all need to acknowledge how skewed those are because if we're only in taking sick injured unweaned well those guys have much worse odds right and so if we were to like put our um going back to your analogy of the um world war one trench soldiers if we only put our sick injured and unweaned children in the trench we'd expect similar uh mortality there so unfortunately I don't I don't think you know that that would necessarily carry over if we did intake healthier weaned kittens.

But that's at acknowledging that there are massive resource limitations to taking in more cats and that I imagine we'd be having a big conversation about the number of euthanasias if we were receiving all the cats as well.

One of my questions is what what really does unweaned mean um because is a like a three week old kitten might take a couple bites of food and I don't know if that means that they're weaned or um like a seven week old kitten maybe has just taken its first bite of food but that's just a really subjective thing and so we're you know I think we've all acknowledged that everything is a gray area.

But that's one of the big questions that I always have in that if 311 are the folks that are triaging a lot of these calls that come in what training do they have to be able to make these assessments so that animals are getting directed into the best places.

I'd love to know from Front Street staff, what they think we could do to raise the capacity for receiving kittens every kitten season.

Because I think we all know that the kittens that don't get intake in will likely stay on the street or go on to make more kittens in a few months.

And so we're dealing with that exponential growth and um also, sorry, circling back to the euthanasia stats um we'd had a previous conversation about um maybe an accidental shortcoming in the euthanasia stat reporting where we didn't have a clean uh separate category for unweaned kittens as that being a euthanasia reason.

And so just circling back at some point, I'd love to hear that there's been an update on that and that we have a little bit better of a way to categorize so that we do understand the the statistics a little bit more there.

Um the vet staffing as you mentioned is a huge problem and um community spay neuter uh having to put their feral Mondays on hold is such a disappointing blow to the community, and and also knowing that Front Street is currently down a vet, if that hasn't changed.

Um so uh I also know because I signed up as a kitten foster um in the springtime, that they were unfortunately at the like most critical stage of kitten season, they were down their cat foster coordinator.

Um, and then uh we made it through my little foster and I, and then I signed up as a dog foster and now uh have experienced Front Street losing their dog foster coordinator.

So it's been a little rough on the staffing front, and I appreciate all the work that people have done to step up.

But I do know that any staff positions that are unfilled ultimately are affecting the capacity of animals that are being able to be treated.

Um and then just to acknowledge that like uh I I try and stay up to date on what's going on with the San Diego case and their community cat program because it is kind of a groundbreaking case and we can learn a lot from their model.

Um, but also just to again emphasize that we really don't have a community cat program here, and turning animals away is not the same as spaying and neutering and returning to the field.

So I think you said it very succinctly by saying beyond the legal minimums, the system's really dependent on the volunteers and what these small groups are able to accomplish.

Um, so in a in some ways, I think that as a commission, uh one of the things I mean, we're all advocating for more and better for these animals, but um hoping that some of these efforts can be structured in a way that makes them a little bit more resilient to flux would be one of my big asks.

Thanks.

Excellent.

Commissioner Betagan.

I wanted to say first of all, uh thank you for all the hard work you must have put into that, um, and acknowledging as you said that you're not a uh you're not like a legal mind, and so I I think the effort that you put into trying to compile all that information is worthy of applause.

So um thank you for doing that.

I know it sounds like it was an answer to um the community uh requesting more information.

Um I also though um acknowledge Commissioner uh Bagley's input there and really appreciate her legal eye and and review uh the law, which not just the just the new case law, but also just the codes that I'm going to take home as homework to get more familiar with.

So um I did have um a couple of questions, maybe one thing to um to for clarification if you may.

You you started at the beginning of the presentation with a note about um that the code applied to not just abandonment, but you said the word neglect.

So I'm not sure, again, I have not familiar, but um neglect is a very charged word.

And you know, so for my seat, if the code does mention that, I think that that might put additional um burden on a shelter like Front Front Street to also consider what is the definition of neglect and should they be accepting greater number of cats into the shelter or taking more substantial steps towards adopting some kind of cat community cat program in order to be deferential or respect that kind of definition of ignorant and not just abandonment.

To um Commissioner Bagley's point.

You know, when you I am also concerned about the fact that cats might be surrendered, or you know, a neighbor might find it and go go um drop it off at the shelter and that it's turned away without um proper um either euthanasia, which I would argue is could be the better alternative in some instances, but but at least some kind of spade or neuter if we can, and I understand financial resources are constraining.

So that's just you know, saying that for what it is.

But um, you know, I also wanted to kind of say something else that should be a part of the conversation, which um, you know, we you did a great job of articulating the number of spaces available for cats and the projected increase that we all acknowledge is needed.

I would argue that if we're just trying to catch up with the short-term projection of 30 additional spaces, we're already failing.

I mean, I mean, California, Sacramento specifically, it's one of the most thriving real estate markets in the nation, and I anticipate we're gonna continue to see growth on that front in terms of more people moving in, more people that are maybe um taking advantage of mixed residential and and just more heavily populated, what's gonna happen then?

And so instead of um getting ahead, instead of getting behind the ball, we should be, you know, really working with our our leaders at the city council to really have a projection that's gonna adjust for the growth in population as well, not just what we think solves a problem today.

That's um one point I think we need to consider.

Um, the other thing is I really appreciated what Commissioner uh Christie said, which is this idea of like how can we uh address um moments where cat season and I am not a scientist or a vet, and but I I do know a little bit from a companion animal course I took at Davis like 20 years ago, and that is um I think there's multiple estrus periods, and so you know it's not just the one time, but it would be multiple times that we need to be anticipating um, you know, getting ahead of that.

I really appreciated public comment on the note that we can't put all of the the burden on um volunteers and partners, and I think you said that yourself, uh Commissioner Hefner.

Um, but I would say it might make sense to continue to work with shelter staff to identify some kind of um even like a halfway house or interim period where they may not have the necessary um spaces to have a long-term um uh shelter arrangement for these cats, but they could be a one or two-week period where it at least would support some of the volunteers and partners, give them an opportunity to maybe rescue the animals or to foster the animal or to work with some of these other nonprofits to get them um spayed and neutered, right?

And so I think that's just something that we also should be factoring into the equation.

Um two last things.

Um, I think this was Commissioner Bagley who made this uh made this point in passing when talking about the law, and I would also kind of argue that for a really long time, and in case law it's pretty well established that you know the word companion animal goes way further than just dogs.

Um, and I would argue that as uh as a commissioner and as a commission on animal well-being, we really should be looking at the holistic definition, and um we really are charged with protecting all animals, especially companion animals, because I think that is like a logical outgrowth of the word animal and the type of um, you know, animal community we're supposed to be protecting, and it goes much further than dogs, in my opinion.

Um, and the last thing is because there's this, you know, I really appreciated the legal review and I that we have from Commissioner Bagley, and also, you know, you know, we're lay people, right?

And so um I don't know if we have access to this, but it'd be great to maybe use city staff or city attorney or someone to do a review and really provide some clear guidance to this commission about here's how we actually think all of the codes um, you know, balance out and what we actually think should be something that we could discuss and maybe come back at a future date and make a recommendation to the city council to maybe adopt or or pass some kind of action um advising the the uh the shelter staff to take action in a certain way.

So thank you.

Excellent.

Thank you very much.

Commissioner Snell.

Going back to question I had many times that I already know the answer to, and I so won't really ask it.

Is is there a written policy about this?

And we know that there isn't.

And so I appreciate very much that you stepped up and did a presentation that I think that the staff should have been doing.

We've I've brought it up multiple times that I uh I would like to see the policies publicly reviewed here, our written policies first, and then those publicly reviewed here instead of policy by decree that I think that the shelter has seen for a number of years.

Folks want to review.

There's a lot of subject matter experts that I think in previous meetings were dismissed.

We heard um or heard Phil once before say that he was a subject matter, he and his staff were the subject matter expert and didn't really need anybody else.

And that's that's part of the problem is that there are people who disagree, good meaning people, knowledgeable people who disagree with what's happening there, and those voices have been shut out.

So I would very much again like to see written policies that have been publicly publicly reviewed that staff are presenting.

Um I appreciate that you're able to do a presentation to get the policy discussed to get that started, where we've had a very difficult time getting those sorts of things on the agenda before.

So it's a very it was a very smart way to get this discussion started.

I don't know if it was a smart way, but it was the it was uh it was effective.

There's a there's a there's a saying about um uh don't don't pass up the last resort because you might be checking in.

Right.

Um and uh it will come as no surprise to you that that I too share the concern that uh as a as a commission that uh is charged with making recommendations about policy that that is um uh something that's very difficult to do in the absence of policies.

And I believe I'm hopeful that although this was in very small print, I think we have a discussion about the follow-up to the audit that perhaps that might come up in.

Yeah, I've got a comment or two there too.

I will note just so that everybody has you know is operating from the same sort of set of facts, is uh, you know, I I did go out of my way when I came across a somebody I thought to be a subject matter expert that um uh had some uh some knowledge about this topic uh and and uh extended an invitation to that person to um address this this commission last month and um you know she was met with a degree of uh hostility uh online that um really made her uncomfortable about uh um making a presentation and I can't seem uh blame her, and um I would say that the the number of volunteers to make a presentation on this topic uh diminished substantially.

It was not great to start with, but it diminished substantially after all those things occurred, and I there are people here on this dais who I invited to uh uh be part of this and and make presentations and you know um I there's an old saying about um you know if you beat the horse to death then you have to walk.

I'm what have I'm what you get after you beat the horse to death.

So what I appreciate is is the willingness, I'm not saying any of it was right or wrong.

I'm not gonna be the expert there.

I'm gonna leave it to our city attorney or or our other legal experts on the commission.

Um what I would like to see from staff is for staff to do the presentation, and for staff to say to ask the commission and the public for their input on what the policy should be, and then we make a recommendation, we a recommendation, but so far that I've seen Front Street has not asked us for a recommendation of what the policy should be, and that's where I think the problem is that they're not even asking the question.

Um, and where you're able to get the presentation together, I appreciate that.

Right or wrong, I'm not gonna make a judgments about that.

I just say that I appreciate that you're able to get the conversation started where staff has failed to do so.

So, but thank you.

Commissioner Badigan.

Sorry.

I'm speaking way more than I anticipated doing on my first day, but um uh just I appreciate what you said there.

I would echo that sentiment.

My only caveat that I would uh or a little note I would say there is I don't think that shelter staff is going to act out of their own volition to come and present and make here's our recommendation because it it seems as though their position is that they're following the law, right?

And I think that that question is unsettled.

I don't think we know that to your point.

We need um legal advisors to speak to that.

Um so I would argue, and it doesn't need to be denied, but maybe it's worth some kind of a motion at some point to say, um, you know, hey, we would like the shelter staff to present on to prepare and present some kind of um policy on this matter, um, then and and addressing this these concerns so that we can react to it because absent some kind of action from us, I don't think it's gonna get us anywhere.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, moving on to item number four, the animal care services performance audit update.

Oh, we lost Ryan, and I think Ryan is presenting, he's returning.

Sorry, we wrapped up sooner than you might have expected.

Okay, about time for a coughing attack.

Thank you though.

All right.

Which uh item are we on?

We are on number four, the um update on the audit, do you have oh you've got the spreadsheet there.

My only audit is um or uh update to the audit is um that that's downloaded from uh the portal um that we have got access to a couple weeks ago.

Um so it's uh it's updated, uh it's been updated as we is updated as we can have it at the moment, but some things are not uh filled out yet, so uh that'll continue to get uh expanded upon.

Um and then um a specific um uh action item from our audits.

Uh we have uh request for proposals for policies uh for uh organization to develop policies and procedures um uh for us and uh we should hear back within a couple weeks.

That's all I have related to the audit.

Oh okay, um right.

Do we have uh members of the public who would like to speak on this item?

The clerk is occupied at the moment.

We have members of the audience.

Yes, thank you.

Um I have first Julie Verga.

Okay, I'll change the order.

Do you agree?

Uh good evening.

I'm gonna skip around on some of the items that are listed on the recommendations for the audit.

Um item I believe three.

Um November 1st public records request showed the shelter had 10 staff vacancies.

That's including the that who quit a couple of weeks ago, one vet tech, um various ace uh kennel techs.

Um I think attrition is a good marker of poor workplace culture and should be included in the scope of the discussion about what you're gonna do regarding the vacancies.

High vacancies, as it's been mentioned, crippled the shelter and needs more investigation and consideration than what's listed in the in the response to the audit.

Item 26 relates to creating an MOU with the Friends nonprofit.

I don't know if you're aware that the shelter manager has worked with another volunteer to create another nonprofit called the Front Street Fundraising Foundation.

And they have to be included in this process too.

And there needs to be some distinction.

I have no idea, and I'll discuss that later, what they were created for, what they're gonna do, how they will work with the existing friends group that's been operating for 24 years, and six directors.

And um the commission looked at the issue of vet salaries in April last year, and at that time the city was doing a class and compensation study.

Leah Morris worked on that.

It's been working on them for a long time, and it would be appropriate for this commission to further discuss the matter in January to eventually recommend that the vet salary be moved up to consideration of the increase in the vet salary be moved up to the front of the line for evaluation.

Thank you.

Thank you for comments.

Next speaker is Elise.

So on the very small print form that you guys got, I have a couple of comments.

Um I have a magnifying literature.

I had to move it to a different Excel spreadsheet so I could read it.

But the first item talks about the Spay neuter clinic that they're looking into.

And in lieu of the new Spay neuter clinic, um, they're gonna ask for an additional $500,000 for animal balance clinics.

But if we have no money in the city, why is this even on here?

Because what are the odds of us getting an additional $500,000 for spay and neuter?

Um, that seems out of the realm of the possibility.

Um, in addition to that, there's several references in regards to an RFP to have the policies and procedures done by an outside source.

That makes zero logical sense to me.

Um, do the people within the shelter not know what their policies and procedures are, and can they not write them?

Because again, we're spending money from the city that we don't have, and those people are still gonna have to work with shelter staff, I'm assuming, to get what the policies and procedures are.

So wouldn't it just make more sense for the people doing the job daily to give us the policies and procedures?

Hopefully, they know them, even though they're not written.

Um, to I spoke with somebody on the East Coast, a director of a shelter on the East Coast last week, and he recently started at a new shelter.

They did not have any written policies and procedures.

He used AI to do it.

He said he set up the AI and had the policies and procedures written in about 10 hours.

Why aren't we utilizing AI?

It just seems not smart to spend money when the resources within the city of Sacramento.

That's all I got.

Thank you for your comments.

Uh next is Julie Burga.

Sorry, I was late.

I ran into the mayor up there, so I had to say hello.

Um, okay.

So um regarding the audit update, um, the comment that I'd like to make is that Front Street Management is facing a crisis entirely of their own making.

This audit is only really the tip of the iceberg.

As council member Dickinson stated, it reveals colossal failures across the board.

Failures so deep they cannot be easily fixed.

And yet, in this audit update, we continue to hear the same spin and double talk we've been hearing for six years.

Now we are suddenly expected to believe that Front Street cares about Spain neuter, and the city that faces a 66 million dollar deficit is going to give Front Street a half a million dollars to do animal valence clinics.

We would love nothing more, don't get me wrong.

But as we've been told, we need to do more with less.

Okay, that's what we've been told by the mayor on the council.

So what has happened at Front Street is they let grants expire for spay neuter, they turn down free spay neuter.

They have never really until recently prioritize spay neuter at all.

We've been talking to them about spay neuter, spay neuter, spay need or spay neuter all this time, and there's been no concern, which is the basis of the court program.

They do not prioritize spay neuter.

It's about turning animals away, like they will just suddenly disappear and the crisis will go away.

It's illogical and it's illegal.

Commissioners, please ask Front Street Director why he raised no objections when the interim city manager took back two hundred and fifty-three thousand dollars in federal funds earmarked for animals of the unhouse that we were told by Tom Pace could easily be used for spay neuter.

Think of all the animals that could have been helped.

Bottom line is this it's the same old spin, just another day.

Please ask for accountability.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

That's all the speaker slips I have for this item.

Comments from members of the commission.

Member Snell.

Back to the policies again.

Um again, we've asked multiple times if there was written policies, there isn't.

We offered help to write the policies.

Um we've had members of the public offer help to write the policies.

We've asked when the policies would be written, and they've we've told us well we don't have the staff that in an organization that's 90 years old.

I don't know how long that position was vacant, but and yet now the plan is to farm it out to some unnamed organization to send it out when you've got people here volunteering asking to get involved.

The idea that you're just gonna send it out for proposals and and I I cringe, I I just have this hunch, just a hunch, that there's probably an organization lined up.

But anyway, that's it.

I just want to tell you, I can't read this.

Okay, and I want to get back to this thing.

If if can we do this again in January?

Discuss this again, and can you print it bigger?

I'm sorry, I have like macular edema and uveitis chronically, honest to God, and there is just no way that I can read it.

Um can it be printed next time?

Ryan, what do you think?

Is there a way?

I mean, even if it's 10 pages, um I'm not sure where the source where the source of the file came from, if it was downloaded directly from the portal.

I didn't, I didn't print it myself, you know, printed it.

Yeah, well, I I will say when I printed it, I mean I literally had to go find one of these to you know try to it's not readable this way.

So um I I do think it um I just want to get back to Member Bagley's point is very well taken that this is really it's really tough to read in this format and and hard to have a real discussion about it, so um you know I I'm I'm certainly uncomfortable with the idea of having this come back in January.

Um you're uncomfortable with it?

I am comfortable.

Oh, thank you.

Thank you.

Appreciate that.

But you know, I guess it would um you know I'll probably go blind reading it, but I mean it's gonna it's gonna just take longer if you can't print it bigger.

You don't think you can print it bigger?

Anyone?

I couldn't read it either.

Yeah, uh I would assume there's a way.

I'm not familiar with the software, so we'd have to look into it and uh see if there's a way to change the formatting.

Well, maybe Santa will leave us uh if someone sends it to me and it's done that way, I will forward it on to everyone in a larger, even if it's more voluminous, okay?

Just putting that out there anywhere.

Um I'll forward it to you when I go to work tomorrow.

Excellent.

Somebody's figured it out.

That's great.

Um Commissioner Pugh.

Is that right here?

Um, I'm actually looking over Commissioner Fuse's shoulder, and she's got it up on her screen, and she was able to withstand it, so she has the skills.

Commissioner Few has figured it out.

Read it on a screen.

So apparently there is that skill out there because I was appreciative that she made it bigger.

I feel like this maybe should be like a standing item on our agenda.

I'm seeing a little bit of consternation on the chair's face, but if we're bringing it back in January Well, the good thing is in January we get to get a new chair.

So the consternation would be on somebody else's face.

But if we bring it back at least in January, we can continue to be updated on the items that are on there that are concerning.

Um I was surprised myself at the idea of a vendor being um an RFP going to a vendor to do policies and procedures.

It is what it is.

It's what was in the document, so that was sort of interesting to me.

Um I myself found some template policies and procedures and forwarded them to a few folks at the shelter.

They were dated 2019, so they were not current.

Uh but there was at least a sample of some policy and procedure templates that are out there.

So I would imagine that this can be accomplished uh with some attention and and concentration.

I'm not sure about 10 hours.

Kathy and I both visited um Stanislaw Shelter, whose executive director had just been there about two weeks, and she said that shelter had no policies and procedures, and she and her staff were in the midst of drafting them.

We could certainly follow up with them to see how they're doing.

Um a conversation.

We went to the Stanish Law Shelter at the at the invitation of the Bradshaw executive director who also said her policies and procedures were in process of being revised.

So it seems like this is kind of a thing in the shelter world that people are starting to look at and revise.

So I don't know if there are vendors out there who's who are doing this, but um I was interested to hear that Bradshaw also was in the midst of doing some revision.

We haven't followed up with them if they would be willing to share anything, but um, I'm glad to see that some that it's that something's happening, whether it's a a consultant vendor who's gonna come in and help out, or whether it's uh um in t internal folks.

So I I'm glad to see something happening.

Um I was curious about the comment about the vet salary and how like whether this commission could take a motion to move that up in terms of a priority.

I don't know if that I guess I'm looking once again at the city attorney.

Is there a way that this commission could ask for an item on this audit to be moved up to a higher priority if I don't even know that these items are prioritized, but can we is that something we could do?

You wanted to request that an item that was contained within the audit, one of the findings in the audit be prioritized over other findings in the audit.

I think we would like to or I'm I'm not making any decision on behalf of the commission.

I'm just responding to a comment that was a public comment that I know I have personally put a fair amount of time into in terms of trying to encourage that the veterinary salary be revisited.

Um and I had approached the director of the Department of Human Resources over a year ago and was told that it's it's just in the queue.

Um and I don't know if there's a way for this commission to request that it come out of the queue and be moved up, or something that could be seen as a recommendation for this commission.

I mean, certainly uh it would be appropriate, I think, given the jurisdiction of the commission to make a recommendation to city council if you would like to see some sort of policy prioritization um that sort of distinguishes some concerns in the audit from others for um you know decision making on a truncated timescale.

You know, that would be something you would have to recommend uh to them.

Um, I think that would be fully within your abilities, you know, as a commission to make such a recommendation.

So I don't know that folks here today have enough ability to read through these audit findings and suggest any kind of prioritization.

Again, I was just heard the comment from the public, and knowing that I myself have tried to bring light to this topic.

Um, so I don't know if in at this point we want to try to create a priority for that or for any other items.

It's just a question or a thought that maybe we could do.

Since we're bringing this back in January, perhaps that we can.

That's what I was just thinking out loud.

Might be an opportune time to people say that there's a priority.

Particular things that folks would like to have considered as priority items that we want to think about an agenda item that looks like that.

Um when we get to member comments.

If folks want to sort of pile on or bring up specific things we can sort of sort that out as we go forward.

Yeah, um member Christine.

I have a question, and hopefully, Ryan, you can help me with it.

But um, for number one, where we're talking about the proposal um for next fiscal year to fund 10 public animal balance bay neuter clinics at an approximate cost of 500,000.

It does say public, but is that just to mean non-shelter animals?

That's a community resource.

Do you know?

I haven't been um very involved in like the planning or the discussion of those.

So I don't feel like I I should have the ability to speak on it.

Okay, thank you.

I'm gonna assume that the public word being in there means that that's what we're talking about as a community resource.

Um, which I I love to see that.

Like, I don't know if this is prioritized, but I like seeing it up at the top.

Um I also just also want to draw attention to the issue of getting all of the shelter animals surgeries done.

Um, and I would love to hear sometime soon, like what steps we're planning for to help stay on top of that.

Because as we know, if we rely on these big batch clinics coming in, we have to store up animals to get to that point.

So, um, again, another point for increasing the vet salary so that we retain a uh a staff that can stay on top of those things.

Thanks.

Member Garcia.

Hi.

Um, back to policy again.

Um, I know we've talked about this for a very long time.

It's always been kind of one of the things that kind of I was really interested in quite a while ago.

Has the um company been uh procured?

Do we have that company or vendor chosen?

No, we know the RFP is out though, so we expect to hear back within a couple of weeks.

Okay.

You know, as they're chosen, I'm kind of trying to think about a timeline here, you know, how long will that take?

Do they have to come in and do some sort of assessment and say, this is what you need, this is how long it's gonna take.

How are you gonna prioritize which policies need to be done first?

Is that how that's gonna kind of work?

And as policies are kind of in a draft form, will we be able to see those?

Bring them here for a public and commission to review those as well.

Those are good questions.

I don't know the answers to all of them.

Um I did want to comment that um the funding for an external agency to assist with uh the policies and procedures was offered to us um by the city manager's office, so it's not coming out of shelter budget.

Um, and the idea being that you know the cities, you know, what what you may think of policies and procedures.

I have internal policies for my team, for example.

Um, but they're they're more so procedures.

Um to have an official city policy is is a very arduous uh process, has to be very specifically formatted, it has to go through multiple approvals and the unions and all that stuff.

So I think the idea behind it is yes, obviously shelter staff will be highly involved in in drafting these policies as far as what's contained within them, but as far as the formatting and and uh getting it through the process, I think the idea is that an external agency that really specializes in this can help get it right the first time, can get it through the process uh ultimately faster while taking um some of the the workload burden off shelter stuff.

So I think that that's just a little bit of background on on why we're interested in doing that, especially since it's not coming out of our budget directly.

Is there a time frame on that, or you just have to wait for the RFP to come?

As far as like how long it will take to get them all written and all submitted.

Uh no, I think we would have to work with the vendor.

And I'm wondering, will they prioritize kind of the policies that really kind of at the top of the list can kind of go down the list to the ones that aren't quite as necessary?

And then at that point, can as a few of them are completed, can we bring them in as a standard part of our meeting to um review them public commission and take and just take a look at them, see where they are with with some of those, even in a draft form.

Yeah, I I would very much assume we would start with the I mean you even internally we've discussed like okay, these are really like our our big issues, for example, intake policies standardizing that.

Um so yes, I would assume there would be um prioritization.

I'm not sure about draft policies coming in.

That'd be a good question for Philip.

Great, thank you.

Commissioner Bagley.

Oh, I just uh that there should be a sense of urgency on the salary of the vets.

And um I would like to move it along quickly.

I mean, we don't meet for two months, so anything that we can do today, I think we should do, but I'm not sure that you're ready, but I I do mirror her sense of urgency that's in line with the public speaker on that.

I it's my understanding we've lost a vet that's the specialist in span neuter, which is crucial.

I could be inaccurate about that.

It's something I heard that that was the vet that was suspended neuter vet.

So um increasing salaries for those folks, it seems are in line because we are losing um crew the crew, and we need more.

So that's just my two cents, Chair.

Commissioner Barragon.

Super quick, I I think you mentioned templates, and I just wouldn't say I think we I would encourage all of us if uh absent RFP, we don't know the timing, like maybe we come to the next meeting and here are some templates.

Here's some recommended policies that we could submit, and then that way when they do select this consultant, we as a commission have already presented here some things we think you need to reconcile as part of their assessment and as part of their evaluation, so that when we see a final draft, we're not reacting to it, but we made a preemptive strike.

So that's just my recommendation to us.

I'm gonna maybe do that.

Thank you.

So that's me.

Um thank you for that suggestion.

The one thing I I don't know about, but would encourage folks to turn to is the um veterinary association guidelines, which this commission is charged with ensuring that we meet and see what they say, which I have not detailed read recently about this topic.

Um I did reach out to a very a variety of uh humane society uh shelter medicine program at UC Davis, uh uh SPCA, and didn't get a whole lot of substance other than these templates that were um published in 2019, and they were templates, so um so that you know that's out there, but definitely want to revisit what the um association of veterinary guidelines say about this topic because that's what we're supposed to be ensuring we're in compliance with.

I would just sort of um piggyback on what a lot of folks have said, uh, particularly with regard to the policy development questions, it's been something that's been rattling around really since the audit was first um made available to the public, and you know, I don't I don't have a I mean I think in the best of all possible worlds policies would be developed internally.

Um, you know, we don't always live in the best of all possible worlds, as we all know.

Um, but I would and I and so if the RFP is on the street, then it is what it is, I would say that one of the things that perhaps the commission might want to think about discussing if we talk about some of this prioritization work in terms of specifics um uh related to the audit, I would like to see with regard to the to the large scale policies that are uh uh pointed out in the audit.

I would like to see that there be an opportunity for for public engagement and public review uh and discussion about some of the major policy questions, not the least of which is the feline ones that some of which came up earlier in our discussion.

So you know, I uh I would have liked to have had an opportunity to have the commission weigh in on uh if we're gonna send this out for an RFP as opposed to doing this work internally.

Um it would have been an opportune time for us to to say um, okay, how are we gonna get the public involved in this and and uh let them have uh you know a fair say in the shaping of not the not the not the moment to moment procedures but in the big pictures how how is it we're gonna define um uh the intake of fienlines relative to uh you know all the possibilities out there because there is as we've seen tonight a great deal of difference of opinion of folks, and it would be nice if we had uh some discussions of folks of those of those big picture issues uh before you know things are set in stone in one for one fashion or another.

So just adding my own little voice to to that uh clerk, you have to oh I'm sorry, Commissioner Treat.

Sorry, and I've lost my voice, so those who know who Bender Vicaro are, that's why I'm channeling today.

Brenda Valcon.

I have I have said this before.

Um, I want to see us have an all-day forum where we're not breaking any laws by meeting together and have different experts in different areas come in and brief us, and I would like one of those subject matters to be policy.

We all know people who have different uh opinions on how things should go, and I welcome those, but uh I'm tired of just having two minutes for anyone to come in and talk about certain areas where it takes a lot more time to do that.

I've mentioned this to the city attorney before, I've mentioned it to council members.

I'm prepared to go to the council and just say grant us uh the legal status to have this meeting without breaking any laws, where for a day we can go through these major issues and not just shove them over to the follow-up catalog.

It's not a reflection on Ryan.

I want to learn some answers from some different people that aren't handpicked by anybody to come in and actually talk about the issues that we have to make the shelter better.

We don't meet again until until what February or January.

Okay.

January.

All right, that's a lot of time.

And uh I basically would like to have a workshop.

I'm asking the city attorneys to please make that happen, or I will go to the mayor and the city council and have them make it happen.

But I'm tired of two-minute presentations when I want to learn more about a lot of these subjects.

I have the clerk on next.

Yes, I'd like to suggest that we vote you all vote to extend the meeting past two hours.

Um, we have two more discussion, one more discussion, excuse me.

Two more discussion items, commissioner comments, matters not on the agenda, and I have seven speaker slips at this time.

So so move to continue.

Second, we have a motion and a second.

It's my least favorite motion on the planet.

I have a motion and the second.

Uh, all in favor of extending our meeting past the two-hour time limit, please say aye.

Aye, all those opposed uh abstentions, the ayes appear to have it in the opinion of the ship.

Can I I could rule the other way.

No.

Thank you.

The motion passes.

You continue.

Thank you.

All right.

Moving on then to interim improvements, Mr.

Hinderman.

That again is your bailiwick, I believe.

Uh, regarding the shade structure, um, we did get a quote back for that, came in uh way over budget.

So we're uh working with public works.

Um to kind of see next steps there if we can hopefully find get a bid uh that that falls under our budget.

Um by the sounds of things, we have to get bids for everything before we we get started on anything.

Um so uh for example, uh the kennel um the kennel um improvements, the curbs, things like that were also uh we didn't forbids there.

So until we identify a contractor, uh we won't really have an estimate on um the timeline, but it's likely that we're we're months away from from starting those improvements.

Um I know it did come up uh last uh last meeting, and um Commissioner Morris had also asked about um kind of the plan for for animals.

Um so uh we don't suspect there's gonna be any intake disruptions for dogs, but we will be doing one building at a time, so we'll need to find solutions for those dogs.

So um we have reached out to the SPCA.

Um they're also going through uh some major uh renovations.

So uh they said it's unlikely um they would be able to assist, although they were gonna try to pull pull more animals during that time.

Um and depending on how long it takes, maybe they uh maybe they get their innovations done and can help more than they than they suspect.

But uh most our our primary um strategy is gonna be a big uh push to foster care.

Um we've done several uh kind of emergency um foster pleas in the past, and we've been able to um get as many as uh 70 dogs out of the shelter in a single day.

So uh that'll be our plan.

Um, but we'll need to to learn more from the contractor about how long each building's gonna take and things like that.

Um so that is pretty much all I have for the interim improvements.

We have uh members of the public who want to speak on this item.

Yes.

First, Mark C.

Pass, okay.

Dia Good.

Yeah.

Welcome back to you.

Thank you, Ryan, for um discussing the plan.

Everyone should know that each one of those kennel buildings houses between uh 16 and 32 plus dogs.

Most of those dogs are large dogs.

Um I don't know how successful you're going to be in getting all of those dogs out to foster because we can't, you know, the shelter has a difficult time getting them out to foster even when they're on the einthanasia list.

But as long as there is some consideration of a real plan, which I'm sorry to say should have been presented when when you when they made the proposal for the improvements.

That's normally how you would do it.

You say we're gonna make these improvements, and this is what we're gonna do with the dogs.

Um but anyway, if if the if someone can come back, if staff can come back and and keep everyone updated on what the plan is to move those dogs, that would be great.

Because if you don't have anybody taking them, I don't know what you do with them.

So thank you.

Other speakers on this item, that's all speakers.

Okay, that's all the speakers I have.

Comments from members, Mr.

Morris.

Thank you.

And thank you, Ryan, for filling in a little bit of the background on that.

I I still am kind of challenged.

How did we come up with a dollar figure that we asked the city council for when we don't when now we need to go out and get bids from and I'm not saying that you personally know the answer to this or whatever, but it's confusing to me that we went forward and asked for 400,000, and yet we and I was present when the city architect came through and and we talked about these are the problems with curves, these are the problems with the kennel.

Not just the latches, but the the kennel enclosure is dangerous because it's a chain link fence essentially where people and animals lose their toes uh versus like railings, as I've seen at other shelters or some other enclosure front.

Uh it's not just the latches, it's that whole enclosure.

So I'm a little c confounded about that we s now are kind of going backwards to get bids from contractors when we put forward a number of what it would cost, and so that's some confusion and concern that you're hearing.

Um, and so the idea of oh now now there's gonna be bids coming in and how long will that take, and I just know that several of us put in a lot of time and and effort into the needs assessment, and if this is the one thing that comes out of it, this is an area that is uh an area for me for focus.

And um, and so I'm just expressing like why do we need to go get bids when we gave a price tag already?

Um, but I don't know how the city process works per se.

Um once the bids are back.

I mean, I know when we did the RFP for the needs assessment, we had a deadline of when uh applicants would submit their bid, then we had a deadline for reviewing those bids, then we had a deadline for reviewing references of those bids.

So, not today obviously, but if in January we could hear a little more structure about the bids when the bids were requested, they responded by December 31st, they're under review, they'll be you know revised by January 15th, something to give us a sense of forward motion here because I'm I'm feeling s sad uh about the ongoing loss of time in terms of moving to something that feels like better enclosures for the animals and the people that work there.

Um I was hoping we would get like okay, we know that we're gonna start on March 1st or whatever, and and how we would deal with moving animals and I appreciate the numbers because I was like, I don't know how many animals per kennel.

Um, and so approaching our partners sooner than later.

I'm I'm glad you approached or someone approach SBCA.

Um so continuing to keep those doors open in terms of moving animals will be important because I'm just curious, you know, gonna do a free vec of free dog adoption and move dogs out of kennels and then shut that kennel down, and therefore we don't take in 16 animals or 32 animals.

I'm just not quite sure how we and like even does anybody have any idea how long the work will be once it's initiated?

Is it a one-week timeline turnaround?

Is it a whole month to to jackhammer those curbs and tear out the enclosures?

Does do you have any info on any of those ideas, Ryan?

We won't until we have a contractor that can put those estimates out there, you know.

Uh my assumption, I I've never no expert in this topic, but my assumption is even with funding approved um that you know the city's gonna look to get the lowest bid possible is because there is the money allocated for it doesn't mean that they want to spend all of it, right?

So um getting the lowest bid possible is is probably the goal.

Um, and uh I do know there are you know there's city policies around once something's over a certain threshold, it has to go through a bidding process, you know.

So um I just share that the shade was not a high priority.

It was sort of an add-on.

Uh and so uh there's a lot of talk about the shade, which was kind of an add-on.

It was not it's not it was not a big priority, at least my memory of the discussions, so don't want to get the latches and the kennels and everything somehow we get a new shade and then we say, Oh, yay, we're done kind of thing.

Um so thank you.

All right.

Moving on to let's see, item number six was the hope presentation.

That's gonna be held off until January.

Number item number seven is the annual report.

Uh let's see.

So you folks may recall that we had a draft of this in September.

There have been a few minor additions made.

Um mostly the addition was the was one chart that uh Commissioner uh Morris had requested.

I added that.

And then with um Commissioner Garcia's uh kind assistance, we added the section on community engagement, and uh with the information there uh regarding various events and things that folks had um attended and been part of.

Uh do we have members of the public who wanted to speak on this item?

I do not have any speaker slips on this item.

Oh speakers.

Do we have members of the commission who want to speak on this item?

Oh.

I just had a question.

Commissioner Hugh.

Oh darn it, it's not you.

What a surprise.

Did you want to say something else?

Okay.

Um I just wonder if uh Commissioner Abishel's name should stay on or come off, given that she's not a commissioner any longer.

Um I don't know if there's any protocol around that, but uh Commissioner Ava Abushell, who was here for a brief time.

Um so that was just a question.

Um I appreciate you putting in the chart about the neighborhood, so I wanted to thank you for that.

And I also wanted to thank you for putting in some comments about the tours and the time that folks have spent looking at other shelters and trying to learn about other shelters and how they're structured.

So I just wanted to call that out and say that was I appreciated that from my perspective.

So thank you.

Commissioner Baragan.

Could we make a motion?

I see your motion here, a motion to amend to change the names of non-existing commissioners to vacant and then pass.

That sounds like a motion.

Do we have a second?

I hear a second motion and a second.

Uh, Ms.

Ms.

Bagley, did you want to be heard on?

Oh, I wanted to tell you that this is a beautiful report, and I know that they're gonna go straight to your gorgeous graphics.

That's I mean, it really is a very nice presentation of the work.

Well, thank you for that, although I I would say it assumes facts not in evidence that folks will go to any part of it.

Oh yeah, they will.

Okay.

Excellent.

So we have a motion and a second.

May I have a clarification on who gave the second?

I didn't quite hear.

Oh, sorry.

Thank you.

So I have a motion and a second.

As amended to uh remove the names of vacant members and add the new folks.

Okay, got it.

All those in favor?

Commissioner Barrigan and taking off Commissioner Albak.

Correct.

All those in favor?

We'll signify by saying aye.

Any abstentions?

Seeing hearing none of them.

Ayes have it.

Excellent.

Uh okay.

So now we'll move on to number eight, the manager's monthly report.

Do you have a report for us, Mr.

Uh, the only uh update I have, which is an exciting one, is that uh our uh offer for our new veterinarian uh was accepted.

So they will be um starting within the month.

So we'll be back to three vets again.

What was the start date again?

Within the next month.

Commissioner Morris, did you have a comment on that?

No.

Yay!

Hey, um, I just wanted to mention my name is misspelled, which is no, I was wondering if that's possible to get that fixed.

We will work on fixing that.

Her name was Miss Bell.

I'm sure it was me.

Spelling was not my best topic.

Uh do we have speakers on this item?

We have speakers on this item.

Yes, this is a discussion item.

Okay, let's let's I have two speaker slips.

Yeah, for speakers.

Dia Good.

Dea.

Come on down.

Last time when we asked this week afterwards, I didn't think.

I guess my biggest question is why isn't the shelter manager attending these meetings anymore?

Ryan?

Oh, something that I offered to do um out of interest and also to give Philip a chance to work on other competing work priorities.

It's a problem because no one's here that has the expertise that he has, clearly.

I mean, you can tell.

I mean, how many questions have been raised?

Anyway, I I would urge the commission to request that he attend these meetings so we can answer the questions so we can have a so you can have an intelligent discussion.

And if no, I'm not being critical of you, Ryan.

I'm not.

That makes no sense.

Um several things that were absent from the manager's report, was the vacancies, and I'm glad that you've hired a vet.

That leaves it down, that drops it down to nine vacancies.

I wrote Tom Pace about this and actually got a great letter back from the mayor's office, who said that they would provide updates on actions taken to strengthen staffing leadership and operational effectiveness at the shelter.

That was great.

I'm requesting that the shelter manager again resume the vacancy updates at these meetings and share with the commission the written plan on strategy that the department will be using to meet their objectives.

The community development stated in um in this year's budget that one of their objectives was to recruit and improve retention of staff for sections of the shelter for all sections of the shelter.

And then I just wanted to talk about this friends thing because I'm really appalled.

As you all know, I co-created Friends 24 years ago as a nonprofit.

It's gone through six different directors, and now all of a sudden we have the director or the manager moving around and creating a new nonprofit, and nobody knows what the jurisdiction is, nobody knows what they're gonna do.

It's just a mess, and nobody has mentioned it.

I'd like that on the agenda for clarification.

Thank you.

Commissioner Treat.

Oh, I do have one more speaker if you'd like to finish by the comment.

Let's do public comment first, sorry.

Elise.

I'm just gonna ditto what Dia said, so okay.

Okay.

That's the last speaker slip on this.

Excellent.

Commissioner Treat, with what voice you have.

Can't get it off.

Oh, there it is.

Okay.

Um I don't know where to begin.

Um, I will talk about the fact that um, and Ryan, I almost wish you weren't here because this really is not directed at you.

But last meeting when we didn't have a shelter's report, I was not happy.

Um, just reporting on a new staff member is not my idea of a director's report.

Um I've gone on and on about euthanasia numbers.

I see when I asked in March of last year, it's going to be delivered quarterly starting in January.

Um, I think a lot of people, including for uh transparency and the public even want to know more about what's going on at the shelter on a variety of different levels, and and just Philip not showing up is not good enough for me.

Um, you know, at least we used to have something that went up on the board that talked about different stats.

Well, I don't even see that anymore.

So that's very disturbing to me.

Um, it falls in line with how disturbed I am about how the agenda is chosen and what's on the agenda.

Um, I would like to see more participation with the commissioners deciding on what's going to be on the agenda, not just the chair and the vice chair and the city clerk.

Um there are things that I'd like to see on the agenda that I mention at different meetings and then they never come up again, um, including having the follow-up on the consent calendar.

I don't think that's appropriate.

I think the follow-up needs to be talked about at every meeting, especially when I see things on the follow-up calendar that have had no action for months.

Um, and then lastly, when it gets to the agenda, and we have commissioner comments and ideas and questions before the public speaks, that does not give us the ability like last meeting when I had something to say at the end of the meeting after hearing comment and was told our comment period was already over.

If we can't comment on what's going to be said at the end of the meeting, it makes no sense to have public comment.

So I want to see those changes made.

Um, or I may leave the commission because I'm tired of them being brought up and nothing taking place.

I also would love to see Mr.

Zimmerman come back.

Um I didn't bring something up uh until now because I I guess I wrongly assumed that we just had two coincidental consecutive months of absence, but now hearing that it's a decision, an intentional path.

Um again, Ryan, nothing against you.

I think you're you're doing as as well as you can.

But um, Mr.

Zimmerman contributes a lot of knowledge um of policy and procedures, and our our meetings are significantly hindered by not having him to answer questions.

And I and I think back to the spring when I joined and there were vacancy reports on the manager updates that I did find really helpful, and they seemed to come to a resolution of we were uh very few positions were open, and then those reports went away, and now we have a lot of vacancies, so I would love to see Mr.

Zimmerman back to help support us and hear those vacancy updates again.

Commissioner Garcia.

Hi, um this is in response to um to Paula's question on the um end of the meeting comments.

I too kind of was taken back with that last um month.

So I did reach out to the city clerk and ask if it was the chair's prerogative to have uh members of the public speak first and then commissioners speak last on the comments not on the agenda for a couple reasons.

Um number one, you can circle back and maybe answer some of the questions in a roundabout way or answer a question that came up during the meeting um with the public so that maybe there's an answer or also a comment that we may come up with during their comments.

So yes, we can we can do that, and and Paul's aware of that as well.

Well, and just just to clarify, I we did uh talk about at the top of the meeting that we're doing it that way this time.

So thanks for making that inquiry because the the uh as I understand that the clerks uh when they create the order that that's done um, you know, sort of uh uh by the council procedures, and we start there, but we've got the flexibility to flip that order, and we're doing that tonight.

So minor victories, other questions, uh I've put on.

Um so I guess maybe this is a good time to ask what would be interest areas that folks would want on the January agenda.

Okay.

We're we're we're technically still dealing with the manager's report.

Oh, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, but we thought we were further on down.

Sorry about that.

The place to request agenda items for folks who are new or or or not familiar, is in the member comment and question portion of the agenda.

So that's coming up.

Stay tuned, right?

Sorry, I got ahead of myself.

Commissioner Bagley.

Well, I don't know that this has to do with the manager's report, but I am very concerned with the remark from Miss Good about a second non-profit, and I'm just wondering if the city attorney um has reviewed that possibility, if that is a power that's legal for a manager uh to acquire, and I would like to hear uh in the future the city attorney to um brief us on that.

I this the first time hearing of it, and it bothers me too.

I'm sorry, you're your first time hearing about um the nonprofit situation.

Yeah, that there's a potential second non-profit that is in the works, and I don't know that that's been reviewed by the city if that's within the realm of his duties or legally, or if he's allowed to do that.

It just it's odd to me, it sounds odd to me.

I don't know the law on it, so I was hoping that you might be able to do a little research on that, or if you haven't already for him.

I don't think advice.

Pardon me?

Oh, thank you so much.

Other comments or questions.

So we can now move, I believe, to the public comment on matters not on the agenda, after which we will have member comments and questions.

Thank you.

First, I have Elise.

Um I realize that Zimmerman should be up on the dais, but whenever I, as a member of the public, reach out to the shelter for assistance.

Ryan is quite literally the only person that ever responds to my request.

So I think his knowledge base is most definitely there.

He just may not be as prepared as he was in general.

Secondly, I wanted to mention Kate Hurley, and yes, there was quite the online controversy over Dr.

Kate Hurley speaking here because the advocates in general believe she is the reason why.

She is the person, the architect of restricted intake that has caused all of this.

So all these problems coming bestowed on Front Street is directly tied to Kate Hurley.

So yes, the advocates do not like her policies, quite frankly.

And again, believe they're illegal.

Additionally, I think that one thing that is definitely missing is, and I've spoken to Ryan and other members of the shelter staff, that the advocates don't want the animosity.

We're not out here going, oh, let's let's pick on Front Street today.

We'd like to be included.

We'd like to be involved.

We've given suggestions, we've offered help, fix our shelters, offered $15,000 in free services that because somebody doesn't like us, they didn't accept.

We need to move away from that.

We need to build a better shelter, a better policy, a better everything, and stop with the animosity.

And I realize that the advocates have a part in that, but when you're met with no, we can't, we're not gonna, for almost six years now, frustration levels are high.

The new commission members have done a great job of lowering that temperature, and I appreciate that.

Thank you for your comments.

Next is Julie Verga.

So first I'd like to say thank you, Commissioners.

Um, as we end the year, thank you so much for being here.

I I believe that you are all here for the same reason that that the advocates are here because we love animals, and we really do want to make a difference, and I recognize your your commitment, and I know it's you're in a tough spot sometimes because um you know what one of the things our new commissioner brought up tonight, I think would be a really good thing to address as soon as possible.

He brought up a good point.

Uh let's talk to the city attorney.

Who does set the agenda?

Who you know there's a lot of controversy about this.

Is Philip Zimmerman setting it?

Are the chairs setting it?

I mean, this is a commission.

This is an independent body, so all your voices should be heard, and you should be listened to so that what you have to say comes into play on the agendas.

Um, I was concerned tonight, you know, with with uh Paul Hefner, and again, I know you love animals, but what you said on that agenda to me was just not true.

You know, that that uh stray cats are not um legally required to be um accepted to the shelter.

That's false, uh in my opinion.

And so I think if we do have a city attorney that we can we can talk to about those kinds of things and get clarity on the role of this commission, the role of the chair, the vice chair, and the uh city agency, Front street, it would be really important.

But uh I want to end by saying again, thank you, commissioners.

I believe that solutions can always be found to help animals.

Um most of us here can prove that in our own lives.

Um, that I even have a nonprofit now to help animals that I've spent really hundreds of thousands of dollars to help them, and we can always find more help.

It it's there if you're looking.

Thank you for your comments.

Next is Kim Pacini.

Okay, well, hi.

Um I agree with Julie that this is a wonderful team of people here, and it's very much appreciated.

But I just have to say, you know, from John Q public animal lover, I'm just appalled.

I'm appalled that it's even up for discussion that an animal shelter doesn't take animals in, they don't take cats.

They don't have to take, you know, a lizard or a rabbit or a dog, whatever.

You just arbitrarily can just say, well, it's not specific.

I'm I mean, the bureaucracy is just it's appalling, and I'm I'm sickened by it.

I'm sickened by the whole Friend Street disaster that's been going on for the last six years.

And Ryan, you know me, everybody who loves animals knows me and knows that my heart is in the right place, and I want Front Street to be successful and reclaim, you know, the glory of where it was before, and not to be picking on you know the new director constantly.

But the fact of the matter is, if he's not here, does he care?

Is he just a coward that he doesn't show up for these types of you know meetings that are essential for us to get answers and clarity, and if he was really doing his job, why is he undermining a 24-year-old um uh friends of Front Street that has done nothing but good for the community and he is intimidated and um you know, harassed them, and the the board members have completely disassociated from him.

I mean, there's just a lot of awful things going on, and how does that get resolved with someone who won't show up for a meeting?

We just have to have accountability for that.

So I'm very grateful that you guys are all here, and um, you know, you know, some of the things that you know for him to have uh given back 253,000 dollars for I mean, it just it doesn't it's nonsensical.

I mean, we're it's like going to a restaurant and having them say we're not serving food today, we're an animal shelter.

We take cats and we take dogs, and our people who are working at that.

Thank you for your comments.

Your time is up.

Next speaker is Dia Good.

Sorry to uh to have so many comments, but there's so many things going on here, and there's so many important issues, and they just need to be addressed in some cohesive manner.

Um I just wanted to go back to the the mention of the um policies and procedures in the manager's April 11th response to the audit, which was published at the the back end of the audit.

He wrote that the shelter started drafting the needed policies and procedures and would have them submitted to HR by July.

When the commission, as was mentioned, when the commission offered to help in the project, they were told that there was no need to, because the shelter had their own experts to prepare the documents.

This whole thing about the RFP, it would have been nice if somebody had mentioned it before the RFP went out.

There should have been some discussion.

Now you have an RFP, which could probably be canceled, but I mean it's just it's just a screwed-up process.

Um the thing about friends, friends has spent 24 years with, as I said, six different directors that they've worked with.

This one is the seventh.

They've worked closely with them.

They have contributed millions of dollars to this shelter to pay for community spay and neuter to pay for the grants for the for rescues to take the animals, to pay for uh large medical expenses.

They do a lot, and it's been it's been a terrible situation.

It was it was wrong, it's still an ugly situation, and there needs to be some clarity and some discussion about about it.

And to Amsterdam, when HSUS did an audit years ago, the policies and procedures, the shelter created them, and they were brought before this commission for discussion.

That happened.

That's the precedent.

So thank you.

And I think you guys are really thank you for your comments.

That's all the speaker slips I have for this item.

Okay.

Now we can turn to commissioner comments, ideas, and questions.

So folks want to be heard on that.

If you've got items that you want to see added to the follow-up log, this would be the place to make sure that that gets noted.

Let's start with number Christie.

I was just looking through my notes because I was curious when was the last or if there has been a presentation by the Friends of Friend Street nonprofit to our commission, just about what they do and what the relationship is.

Can anyone recall?

There has not been one since at least since I joined the commission a year and a half ago.

Okay.

I mean, it sounds like perhaps there's change in the wind.

Uh I'd like to learn more about that relationship.

Um, and it seems topical with the audit calling for the MOU.

So I'd like to see that um on an upcoming agenda.

Can I make a motion to that effect?

I don't think we need a motion for that.

Okay.

I think all we need to do is add that to the follow-up log.

Um the only thing I would mention to folks is we meet ten times a year.

We're supposed to meet for two hours, and the number of items that we can get through in two hours is limited.

In addition to that, um, as I have said previously, we are a commission with no budget, no staff, and very limited authority.

I do not have as the chair, and nor I do, I think as a commission, we do not have the power to subpoena anybody to appear at our meeting who chooses not to attend.

So we can we can do what we can do.

Sometimes, you know, all you get is one of us, and so uh while we can make requests, there is no uh no one's job hinges on whether or not they do what we want them to do or not.

That is the nature of our body.

So with that, moving on, Commissioner Barrigan.

I have a comment, a uh agenda request item request and another comment.

So the first comment is um in my perspective.

I I did two years at a um as assistant executive director of a large nonprofit, and nonprofits are under-resourced, understaffed, um, and recognizing that sensitivity.

I actually think we're in a really unique position that the city manager's office uh uh apportioned funds to do a um to do an independent kind of review for policies and procedures.

I actually think that's an opportunity for us, but I also recognize the public's sentiment or some of the comments about what we wish we would have had an opportunity.

I I think we will, and um so to that point, um I'd like to see an agenda uh in January's um agenda, an agenda item in January's agenda that um has a discussion about templates or items that we want to prioritize to um uh Leah's point earlier, or or recommendations about the policies and procedures that we would like for this the eventual bid winner to consider as part of their process.

Um, so that that's essentially what I'd like to see on the agenda, and then um finally um last comment.

It's just uh um it's great to be here, and um I have met a few of you, and some of you I have, and I look forward to working with all of you.

I heard from a lot of the same folks, myself included tonight, and I hope to hear everybody's perspective as I think everybody brings a unique point of view, and that's why we're all here, uh, and in particular, no, I mean I mean, just awesome that you're obviously probably younger than the rest of us, and it's awesome.

And I hope to hear your voice because I'm sure you'll have a unique perspective as well.

So thanks.

Thank you, Commissioner Snell.

Um I lean back again on the policies.

Um, I do still have a lot of concerns.

I like the idea of bringing that into maybe uh uh agenda item where we make some recommendations to whoever wins this RFP.

Um I'm really concerned that that RFP was done, that it just sort of ignored the commission.

It I feel like it ignored the commission.

One of the things that I had it's come up in the public comments about the uh uh nonprofits, um, the audit had recommended an MOU with Friends of Front Street.

I'm not gonna say a good uh value statement of of any of the organizations, but what I have recommended and I would like to be able to recommend in um, you know, such a prioritization is that we have a policy about um a written publicly vetted policy on public partnerships and MOUs, uh framework for how those organizations, all of the organizations can be involved with Front Street without it being a decision by decree.

So a policy in place, and so those types of policies where we get some sort of input on how those happen.

Um that's where I was concerned about, you know, where we just I really felt blindsided by the idea of an RFP when we've been offering when countless offers for help on developing those policies.

Um and the idea that it's just gonna be sent out.

Okay, you know, it's um, and then there's no there's no statement there about um what the commission's role would be on the adoption of those policies or recommendations to the council anything.

So I I like the idea of putting something on the agenda where we can start making some recommendations to the RFP or whoever it is and to the commission or to the council about what these policies at Front Street should be and to get the public voice involved in the policies.

So that's all I've got.

Thank you.

Commissioner Treat, I'm guessing a lot of people wish that my voice was completely gone, but it's not.

I would like to echo what what Commissioner Snell said about the policies and the procedures.

Um I was at the Friends of Friendship Treat for five years, and they do great works.

Um, thank you, Dea, for starting that back in the day.

Um those are two things that I would like to have discussed in the work day that I am going to propose in January, whether it's on the agenda or not.

I'd like to have us do a full work day twice a year.

Uh that is uh the agenda for that set by this commission and have the attorneys say that it's okay for us to meet and confer about the workday session uh without breaking any Brown Act.

Um I'm sure it can be done.

Um I'd hate to have to carry a piece of legislation that says it can be done.

Um, but that's also an option.

Uh I think having more time to talk about policies, having more time to talk about partners of Front Street, and some of these other issues that take more than a two-hour period with two-minute comments is really important for us to make it the best shelter we can.

So on the agenda in January, I would like uh to have the discussion for uh two work days for this commission during the year, uh, one starting as early in the year as possible, maybe January, and um for us to consider a variety of things that have been brought up, included the including the policies and the procedures of input from this group and the public, uh, versus just doing an RFP.

We work for free.

So hopefully the city will see that's a good thing.

I'm told that all I have to do is ask for it to be on the agenda and it will miraculously have my mind, Commissioner Garcia.

Okay, I guess I'm on a couple things.

I know I know it seems like a lot coming up for like agendas.

A lot of it isn't gonna take a lot of time, but it it needs to kind of be on the agenda so we can kind of rehash things and go over things because we've talked about things and then it kind of goes away somewhere where we don't know where it went to.

Um, so definitely the um a little more information on the uh establishment of a nonprofit, new nonprofit, just something about that.

Another thing, and I just heard someone say policies and procedures.

Those are two different things, and I I kind of wonder will this company work on policy?

That's one thing.

Procedures is a whole other issue.

And I don't know if just any old company could write procedures for an animal shelter, let alone and what goes on there medical-wise, like in a hospital, procedures are a totally different um issue.

So I kind of like a little clarification on that.

If it are they just doing policy and then staff and whoever will do how that procedure goes under that policy.

Um, so that would be interesting to find out as well.

Um, and going back to this was a while ago, and I know working on the committee for adoptions.

I know we did quite a bit of work on that.

Um, one thing we discussed, and I would like to revisit that, and I don't know if it'll take a lot of everybody's want to talk about putting something out there about the long-term residents at the shelter, whatever you want to call it to make it kind of look pretty or or whatever, the long-term residents as well as the seniors.

I mean, it can kind of go together under a name like that, but to get those front and center on um on a website or however they want to do it.

They have a screen in the lobby now.

It'd be nice to kind of flip through some of those, you know, visit some of our long-term residents, our senior residents, something like that.

I'd like to revisit that again because I'm not sure where that actually went.

And that should do it for now.

I would like that too.

Basically, the at risk that we form some some type of website or some I I don't know what it should be.

I just know that we're I just feel like we're not doing enough, and I think we should discuss that.

And I also think that um Commissioner Hayes was very involved in that, and um, I'm sure that we could maybe get some information from other shelters on how they do it, where it doesn't offend the public or have a negative connotation.

But what I um press the button for, I wanted to talk about something that Elise Myes said, and I want to really be clear on this.

It all started with community sheltering, okay?

It all started there.

The animosity started there, and I will never forget, and I'm going back into time when this when the advisory a lot of folks weren't on it that are here.

Some of you were the you were the advisory committee, and I think it was the first meeting, and I remember calling in as an advocate as a member of the public, you know, and I said, why are you telling the public to put stray found dogs back in the street?

They're unaltered.

Why are you doing that?

Why don't you find that objectionable?

There was a particular member, no names in involved here, who was heavily involved as an employee from Correct.

And I know that there are people on this commission that are very impressed with Corret and Kate Herbert.

Kate Hurley is an expert in sheltering medicine, okay.

The member that was on the advisory committee answered in this way, and I will never forget it because it was a great turning point for me.

I had a kid going to Davis at the time in vet pre-vet.

This was a turning point.

A veterinarian on the committee, her answer was, I know it sounds scary, meaning to put an unaltered stray dog back in the intersection.

I know it sounds scary, but we have a study showing that these dogs are within a certain distance from finding their way home.

And I was aghast.

And I think that when we heard when advocates heard that, it was a turning point just like it was for me.

My biggest fear here is we're talking about an RFP for policy, and Corrett is a consultant to shelters.

And we have a manager who is a disciple, has been a disciple of Coret, reduced intake, community sheltering, whatever you want to call it this month, that they become the consultants to advise you on how to set policy and what those policies are.

And that that is such a fear coming into this.

Because I'm gonna tell you that is a bomb.

Okay.

You think you feel animosity now, which has died down somewhat, I think.

There's some branches being offered back and forth.

You bring them in as the vendor to set policy after they have caused facilitated the breeding we have seen, the pain and suffering from traumatic death and vehicular death, it will ignite a fire storm.

I'm just putting it out there because that's what my fear is.

So I and I I know that's a point directly addressing what Miss Myes mentioned on animosity.

Can I just ask a question as to how you would have the commission address that I want the commission to understand what that would do and what that would mean, and to stop being impressed with a non-profit who who puts himself out as an expert, puts himself out as having best practices when they're really just opinions.

There is so much more to that particular nonprofit that this shelter has f has failed by following.

The funding, the the people that are controlling that, there's so much to it.

And I'm just saying, you're putting it out for a vendor to set policy.

I don't know about who the U is that you're talking to, but well, I mean, you I um management is putting putting a solicitation out for a vendor to come in and assist in setting shelter policy, and they are consultants in shelter medicine as well as shelter the shelter industry, and bringing them in or choosing them to be the partner in this would not be very good because it's caused so much animosity to begin with.

I'm just looking for uh, and I don't I don't mean to belabor this, but what I'm trying to get my head around is what would an agenda item look like that addresses that I don't I I think it's premature right now because it doesn't sound like I mean I want to know who's choosing the vendors and what vendors come forward.

So if we had an agenda item that examined the RFP, and what and what it and and what it asked for, what the timeline is.

I mean, I I'm just trying to figure out yes that.

Yes, that okay.

I have a yes that do I hear uh yet yes to sure, right?

I mean, I I'm just trying to figure out that's what I think the public is gonna have so much to say about how you choose that vendor.

Okay, in order to I mean to worry to discuss that, or uh you know you're pretty close to the top of the list right now.

I want you to go ahead.

So I I was wondering if I director questions is the attorney, which is um what option do we have to to um get some clarity on I mean, we're talking about timing, but I'm more curious like who is it discretionary for staff to decide what vendor wins the bid, or is it gonna go before city council and then the public has an opportunity to comment on the bids proposed?

I that's what I want to understand.

I think it would depend on the nature of the professional services being sought.

I can get back to you and advise on that.

Yeah, thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Commissioner Pugh.

But that's me again.

I never guess right.

Commissioner Morris.

So I'm guessing the agenda item is city attorney to advise on P and P RFP process.

Well, to be clear, I wouldn't be providing public legal advice regarding this stuff.

I would, if if anything, I would circulate a confidential legal memorandum to the commission, which could then be utilized as the information going forward.

I would not be presenting an agenda either.

So you would be circulating a memo, so to speak, possibly, to the members of this commission, which we would digest, but we couldn't talk about with more than a few people, because that would violate the Brown Act.

So we would have to wait until we had our January meeting on, I believe, the 12th of January to have further discussion on what that memo may have um generated, by which time the process may have already been done and a vendor selected.

Would that problem not still exist if I was giving a presentation at the January?

Yeah, I wasn't debating whether a presentation or a memo.

I was just trying to figure out how any of the concerns might be handled by having something on the January agenda.

Yeah, I I think that the faster option would probably be the first thing that I said, which was circulating a memorandum so that you could act on the advice as soon as possible.

You know, yeah, just providing more information about city policies regarding um requests for bids on these kinds of service contracts.

So is that something we can ask for today from you or from your office, your city attorney office?

Uh noted, I will look into it and I will circulate a legal memorandum on that topic.

Okay, so we don't have to wait till January 10th.

No, uh January 14th to have some follow-up on that.

No, okay.

Thank you.

I guess I think I'm not sure.

Um so just as sort of structure, uh the items that are on an agenda must be completely compiled.

All the all the documentation attachments, etc.

At least in the experience I have had so far, must be fully compiled and submitted to the clerk's office by a deadline that is 10, 11, 12, 13 business days prior to the actual meeting.

So that means these materials are due to the clerk's office in a final format by December 29th.

So for example, member treat uh the work that would be done ahead of that to put an item on the agenda with all of the s supporting research and information goes into the clerk in this case I believe by December 29th for the January 10th uh agenda, and that's been part of some of the I know for me a struggle is the timing and getting everything, getting materials, whatever it may be that I am trying to get together.

Um and so just sharing that if if the timeline is consistent with the 2025 timeline, then December 29th.

Well, and Commissioner Morris, since that was addressed kind of to me, um, yeah, the PAN, the public agenda notice has to be done.

Um to make the request actually have it on there, though, is what I'm questioning.

Um can we truly just ask that something be put on the agenda and have it go all the way through?

Because that hasn't always happened under any of the I'm just gonna jump back in and say oh we can put something on the agenda, but if we don't have materials in terms of some research, for example, on can a workshop be done, where could it be held how how is it organized that sort of thing I mean it can be on the agenda and maybe that's what we talk about is but if there was well I think my request would be to our sitting council that they ask how it can be done and that we vote on it in January.

So we're asking him to come prepared to the January 10th meeting.

Yes.

If I wasn't clear his research on whether a workshop could be conducted.

Yeah if I wasn't clear that's exactly what I'm asking for.

I'd like to bring it to a vote at the January meeting period I don't know what other research has to be done other than them saying we can do it or not.

Did you have something else you wanted to add?

Of course I did no I love your recommendation but my concern is if it if we're seeing it for the first time on next time we meet that's not enough time to digest the information and then I think vote on it.

So I would say that we get it well in advance to have time to review or that's just not to slow things down but it's um I I I just don't think we should get in the habit of like um seeing something for the first time in like and then voting on it but that's just my my thoughts.

Okay, okay.

Commissioner Garcia just feeding into that um am I on because she just goes on um commissioner treat um it can be on the discussion calendar we don't you don't have to have dates and details up to that point just on the discussion calendar and at least get that on the agenda and then come up with suggestions as to how when what where and and why on that um but definitely get it on the agenda for discussion right.

So I'm anxious that we have a lot of discussion and no action and so that's why I've like we need stuff by December 29th that says okay we want to have a workshop we've learned this will not be a conflict with the Brown Act.

We can do this on a as a from my understanding I've been in these boards and commissions we can all be at a conference where we're learning stuff as long as we don't talk to each other is kind of the best in I see the city attorney yeah so if we had some of that stuff done ahead of time we certainly in January aren't going to be able to say yes we want this meeting on this day and with these topics covered or whatever but the pre-research is kind of where I'm I guess we're looking at the city attorney for that.

I feel compelled to speak I don't know that I have really all that much to add although I can as my time as chair grows blissfully thank the Lord short.

Here has been my experience others who will be in this chair soon the sooner the better as far as I'm concerned and I believe a motion to vacate the chair is always in order.

And I will I'm prepared to second that motion when anybody wants to make it.

Here's been my experience my experience is we finish up this meeting and as quickly as the very next day there's a meeting that involves the shelter manager myself as chair and the vice chair and we gather with our notes based on the things people have said based on what's in the follow-up log that we have all just approved right and we try to figure out what items do most people want most urgently, and and those are the items that we request be placed on the agenda.

Now, sometimes they're just items that they don't need a huge amount of background and research, et cetera.

They're there, for example, I would say, as an example, your notion about having a full day or two uh discussion, right?

That could be something that we take up as an item where we discuss and consider a motion to request to recommend to the city council that it grant to us the ability to do one or more day-long sessions, right?

Now, if somebody wanted to, in support of that motion, prepare some background material that says, Well, there are 12 other commissions like this, you know, Lord help them, but that um have availed themselves of similar opportunities and had good things happen as a result of that.

All those things would be that would be helpful to have, right?

And so if there's background information that's required, as to the vice chair's uh point, that all has to be gathered and prepared by someone, and again, we're a commission with no budget, very little authority, and no staff, right?

So, a la the cat presentation, let's use that as an example.

There were several folks who at different times had different interests about cats.

I am probably the person sitting here with the least amount of knowledge about cats.

I tried to recruit people to come talk about cats.

I tried to encourage members of this commission who know more about cats than I do.

I tried to encourage members of the shelter staff to the degree they were available and willing to come and speak about cats.

Guess what?

Nobody wanted to do it.

So, you know, you got me, right?

So uh, and while all of us are here as volunteers, uh, you know, there's a kind of a limit to our own time and then that sort of thing.

So uh that's all that's and I will also say, and it's been a source of not a small amount of uh disquiet on my part, that um uh we will our typical custom and practice, just for purpose of transparency, has been we have an initial discussion with the shelter management about XYZ um uh uh uh proposed agenda items.

We have a discussion about who, if anyone is going to work to prepare the ancillary materials upon which there is often a very close deadline.

Uh and that all goes into what I'm gonna call a black box because I never know what's going to come out of it until the agenda is fully realized and made publicly available.

And there, and and if I can just carry out this analogy, and there have been times where things that I have requested that have been on to be on the agenda have not appeared, and I've not necessarily gotten been fully satisfied with the answers I've gotten about why those items have not appeared, and I have made my uh uh feelings about that well known to anybody who's prepared to listen, which is a very small universe of people, you might be including my dog.

Uh so all that is is a way of saying I and the vice chair are I think fully prepared to, as we have every single time, perhaps not as successfully as we might have hoped, uh, done that meeting sometimes immediately after this.

The commission leaves and uh done our level best to try to congeal the various items that people have and and make those suggestions and then to the degree we're able to prepare uh anclayer materials that might be helpful to those discussions, and there's and sometimes it works, and sometimes it don't, and we don't have access to things, there's an entire system that the city uses to uh input these items.

Uh I've had items get crossed in the loop.

I've had items disappear entirely, and I don't often know the reason why.

Uh and sometimes when I have discussions about people about that, they don't can't quite give me the reasons why either.

So that's a long way of saying we're doing our best, but I have learned by hard experience not to promise anybody that any item is going to be on the agenda because I do not have that power.

And if you will examine the committee members' handbook, you will see that the agenda is to be paired by city staff.

It is their work product.

They may be happy with it, they may be unhappy with it.

There are certainly times when uh members and myself included have proposed items that uh somewhere along the food chain, somebody decides doesn't belong there.

And so while I am in my waning moments as chair, more than happy to carry forward all of these suggestions.

Uh I'm just everybody to understand that uh vice chair Morris and I could uh faithfully represent these as best we can, but I can't guarantee you that what's going to come out on the other side is what comes in the front.

So, with that, are there other other comments that people would like to make?

Thank you.

I don't know that thanks are deserved, but um Commissioner Bagley.

There's part of this, and maybe I just missed it.

You said you go and you meet with the management, you meet with Mr.

Zimmerman, okay, and you three of you decide what should be on the agenda, and I believe that in good faith you try to come up with the things that are of interest.

Isn't it city staff that prepares it?

Aren't they referring to the city clerk's office?

I'm wondering why management is involved with setting the agenda for the commission when commissioners can set that agenda and send it over to the city clerk's office, and they can be the ones that put it out.

I don't understand why management is involved in what we do as an independent body.

Well, that's not been my experience.

No, I have that was a question.

So it was a question if you knew.

I I don't have an answer for you.

Why, you know, why is the system is what it was it was certainly made without my input.

I um, so that is the system I have.

And uh they there's a role, there's another position.

I cannot think of that person's exact title.

I want to say some level of administration who actually we send materials to that position.

Um Jennifer Chikasawa, and then Jennifer helps facilitate getting it forward to the city clerk, and so there's there is another layer in this process, and um the best I understood is that the there was a staff assigned to assist us, being at least what I first started here being Philip and Jennifer Chikasawa, who were the assigned staff to assist us.

That's kind of how I've worked and Jennifer has been a guidance through through the time of my chairmanship.

I'm sure the next chair will do such a great job doing it.

I can't wait to turn and and let me remind folks a motion to vacate the chair is always in order.

Is there a motion?

Um Commissioner Garcia.

On the lighter note, maybe off of the agenda a little bit, just a couple updates and um we missed him last meeting only because he got adjourned and I kind of missed missed the the ball on that, but a couple things that are maybe like in the weeds, but kind of going on.

Um, the final um five translations of the brochure is done and they are now out for printing.

Um also the community development part did another tour of the facility with me, and they have established a 24-7 uh translation service for the shelter.

And that's also available for the ACOs out in the field to um at any point in time during the day, they're at a home or they're at the facility, someone wants to adopt the dog, can't understand what they're saying.

Twenty four seven, they have um availability to those translation services as well as the ACOs out in the field when they run into someone with with the same um circumstances.

So a pretty cool little service that they offered for that.

Um couple of us will be touring the YOLO County um shelter here before long to visit the clinic in a can thing.

I think we could realize it's a little bit on a small scale for any mass fan neutering, but um, nevertheless, we'll go and um tour that shelter, maybe see how they handle policies and procedures as well.

Um, another thing we have our final council member touring the shelter.

So, council member Vang will be touring the shelter sometime this month.

Yes, yes.

So just a few little updates.

Thank you for those updates.

And we've got an extra minute, but we're going to adjourn instead.

Thank you all very much, and everybody have a good holiday season.

We are adjourned.