SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY ANIMAL SERVICES STUDY

Transcription

1 SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY ANIMAL SERVICES STUDY July 13, 2011 Presented by Tammie Murrell & Sue Marks-Gibbs, Consultants

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES 3 INTRODUCTION 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 ADOPTION AND FOSTERING 14 HUMANE EDUCATION 21 VETERINARY & SHELTER MEDICINE/SPAY & NEUTER SERVICES 26 JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY 34 REGIONAL SHELTER 38 ANIMAL FIELD SERVICES 47 ANIMAL LICENSING 64 POLICY AND PROCEDURES MANUAL 69 APPENDICES 127 SCOPE OF WORK 128 COMPARISON AGENCIES 131 COORDINATING COMMITTEE 133 BASE LINE SURVEY 143 CHARTS 160 HUMANE EDUCATION DATA 171 VETERINARY & SHELTER MEDICINE/SPAY & NEUTER DATA 173 SAMPLE ANIMAL SHELTER FLOOR PLAN 175 SAMPLE JOB DESCRIPTIONS 176 COSTS, BUDGET, FEES AND REVENUES 198 CODE SECTIONS 211 REFERENCES 279 Page 2

3 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1 Recommended Program Costs and Revenues 12 TABLE 2 Agency Cost Percentage 12 TABLE 3 Estimated Cost Per Agency 13 TABLE 4 SCASA Euthanasia Rate 13 TABLE 5 Adoption Fees by Agency 16 TABLE 6 Sample Adoption Services Unit 19 TABLE 7 Cat Adoptions by San Joaquin County Agencies 20 TABLE 8 Dog Adoptions by San Joaquin County Agencies 20 TABLE 9 Phased Humane Education in the Classroom 24 TABLE 10 Sample Veterinary Services Unit 32 TABLE 11 Agency Cost Percentage 35 TABLE 12 Sample Summary Operating Budget and Revenue 36 TABLE 13 Potential Agency Costs 37 MAP Driving Distances 42 TABLE 14 Comparisons to Other JPA s 43 TABLE 15 Per Capita Comparisons 43 TABLE 16 Shelter Size Formula 44 TABLE 17 San Joaquin Agency Share of Potential Capital Costs 45 TABLE 18 Shelter Services Unit 46 TABLE 19 Current Officers Assigned 52 TABLE 20 Proposed Field Services Staff Assignments 59 TABLE 21 Sample Beat Configuration 60 MAP Sample Beat Configuration 61 TABLE 22 Sample Field Services Unit 62 TABLE 23 Stanislaus County Licensing 7/1/10 to 12/31/10 65 TABLE 24 Stanislaus County Licensing 12/31/10 to 2/15/11 65 TABLE 25 San Joaquin Agency Licensing Fees 66 TABLE 26 San Joaquin Agency Licenses Maintained 66 TABLE 27 Estimated San Joaquin County Dog Population 67 TABLE 28 Potential San Joaquin County Licenses Sold 67 TABLE 29 Potential San Joaquin County Dog Licensing Revenue 68 APPENDICES TABLE 30 San Joaquin County Agency Cat Statistics 160 TABLE 31 San Joaquin County Agency Cat Data 9-Year Comparison 160 TABLE 32 San Joaquin County Agency Dog Statistics 161 TABLE 33 San Joaquin County Agency Dog Data 9-Year Comparison 161 TABLE 34 San Joaquin County Population Data 162 TABLE 35 San Joaquin County Agency Per Capita Finances 162 TABLE 36 San Joaquin County Per Animal Costs 163 TABLE 37 San Joaquin Agency Officer Per Capita Data 163 TABLE 38 Current San Joaquin Agency Calls for Service by Quarter by Hour & Day 164 Page 3

4 LIST OF TABLES continued TABLE 39 San Joaquin Agency Calls by Quarter by Beat (Chameleon Data only) 164 TABLE 40 San Joaquin Agency Calls by Day of Week by Quarter (Chameleon Data) 165 TABLE 41 Dead Animal Calls 166 TABLE 42 Officer Activity by Type (Chameleon Data) 166 TABLE 43 Sample Twelve-Hour Shift Deployment Schedule 167 TABLE 44 Sample Ten-Hour Shift Deployment Schedule 168 TABLE 45 Current San Joaquin Agency Hours of Operations & Staffing 169 TABLE Actual San Joaquin Officer Salaries & Benefits 170 PLAN Stanislaus County Animal Services Shelter Final Floor Plan 175 CHART Sample Organization Chart 200 TABLE 47 Current San Joaquin County Agency Fees 203 TABLE 48 Fee Schedule Comparison & Recommended Fees 205 TABLE 49 Agency Revenue Comparisons 208 TABLE 50 Potential San Joaquin County JPA Revenues 209 Page 4

5 INTRODUCTION The Animal Protection League (APL) has been contracted to conduct a countywide animal control and shelter study to determine the feasibility of a regional approach to animal control services within San Joaquin County. San Joaquin County and the cities of Lathrop, Lodi, Manteca, Stockton and Tracy are participating in the Study. The Countywide study has been divided into three phases: Phase I Adoption/Education/ Veterinary & Shelter Medicine/Spay and Neuter Services Base Line Study; Phase II Regional Shelter; Phase III Animal Control and Field Services Plan. The Phase I Report will 1) outline current practices in animal services within San Joaquin County; 2) speak to successful models utilized in other jurisdictions; and 3) make recommendations for the development of a comprehensive and cost-effective program for San Joaquin County. Extensive research was conducted and included a comprehensive survey of animal services within the County and in the cities of Lathrop, Lodi, Manteca, Tracy, and Stockton, interviews with animal control staff, site visits, and meetings with the Animal Control Study Coordination Committee. Page 5

6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The initial evaluation of the six participating municipalities shows animal care agencies are working with limited staff and large numbers of animals. Resources are devoted to answering calls for service and catching, housing, and euthanizing these animals. It appears, in the past, that these agencies have not emphasized education, adoption, and veterinary care programs, nor taken advantage of potential revenue streams. There is both an awareness of the importance of these functions by current staff and acknowledgment that adequate resources are not available for these services. Because these programs are currently minimally conducted, if at all, in San Joaquin County, the question must be asked as to how services can be funded in a time of recession. Shelter intake numbers and animal-related calls for service continue to increase, forcing euthanasia rates and costs up. Communities with low euthanasia rates, such as Santa Cruz Animal Services Authority who in 2008 euthanized only 29.43% of dogs and cats impounded, reversed this negative trend, and eventually reduced sheltering costs by lowering intake of animals at their shelters through aggressive education, adoption and spay/neuter programs. The comparison agencies used in this report have controlled costs by combining resources of several municipalities into an animal services agency which takes advantage of economies of scale, reduced administration costs, licensing and vaccine program revenues, and streamlined operations. In the past, two studies were commissioned by San Joaquin County to evaluate Animal Sheltering and Animal Control. The first was conducted by George Miers & Associates in The second was conducted in 2008 by Citygate Associates, LLC. The Miers study recommended consolidating current animal control programs into a county-wide animal control agency. Both studies recommended implementing efficient and aggressive spay/neuter programs and formalized adoption and education programs. We concur with the results of these two studies and find their results and recommendations valid and consistent with the recommendations in this study. The Hayden Bill (SB 785, 1998) prescribes that all shelters have a duty to provide animals held with necessary and prompt veterinary care, nutrition and shelter, and to treat them humanely. These requirements are codified in the California Civil Code, the Food and Agriculture Code, and the Penal Code. (See Hayden (SB785 & Vincent (AB1856) Law beginning on page 246 in Appendices.) Modern animal care and control entities utilize humane education/public outreach, adoption/ fostering, and veterinary medicine programs to reduce the number of animals in the system and lowering costs as a result. These savings could be realized in San Joaquin County through combining resources by the participating animal services agencies in the form of a joint powers authority (JPA). None of the jurisdictions can afford to improve or start new programs individually, but a combined effort could be successful here as it has been in Stanislaus County, Santa Cruz, Southern California and Marin County (see Comparison Agencies on page 131 in Appendices). And because these humane aspects of animal services are popular and well received by the public, volunteers under staff coordination can assist in many of the functions. Page 6

7 There is concern by the participating agencies that centralization of services will not adequately serve all the citizens within the county. Discussion of satellite options versus delivery of animals to clinics and adoption centers is in the Regional Shelter section of this report. Adoption and Foster Programs Adoption and Foster programs are just one component in an effort to reduce pet overpopulation and euthanasia: the other tools are aggressive spay/neuter, humane education, and veterinary medicine programs within shelters. Adoption programs are being conducted by each of the participating agencies in varying formats. Two jurisdictions have partnered with non-profit humane groups to conduct or assist with adoptions of shelter animals. One works with a retail pet store to assist in marketing animals outside of the shelter. Most rely on citizen knowledge that animals are available at the municipal shelter and, due to lack of resources, must limit their adoption efforts to walk-in customers. The participating jurisdictions have minimal foster programs. The purpose of such programs is to remove potentially adoptable young and infirm animals from the shelter environment and prepare them to be adopted. This work is predominately performed by volunteers in most model agencies, overseen by professional staff under clear guidelines. A comprehensive plan including an effective adoption and fostering program would serve to more efficiently handle the animals currently in the system. Focusing on lowering the population of dogs and cats in the county through spay and neuter programs would ultimately reduce the intake of animals and concurrently reduce costs because less animals handled equates to less money expended on animal control. An efficient adoption program can provide net income to fund other important animal services. Humane Education San Joaquin County animal service agencies conduct occasional classroom presentations, event participation and professional training seminars. According to the animal service professionals in the participating jurisdictions, resources are not available for a larger effort in these few areas, much less a standardized humane education program. Humane education is a vital piece of solving the pet overpopulation puzzle by teaching both children and adults responsible pet ownership principals and the importance of spaying and neutering. Veterinary & Shelter Medicine/Spay & Neuter Services Aggressive spay/neuter programs are the key to lowering pet overpopulation and euthanasia rates which in turn saves money because less animals are handled by animal control and shelters. San Joaquin County has no history of any type of spay/neuter program until 2000 when a local nonprofit, Animal Friends Connection, implemented a spay/neuter voucher program with grant money from Maddie s Fund. Their efforts were successful in decreasing Lodi s euthanasia rate but have tapered off as the grant ended. Other voucher programs have been attempted but with Page 7

8 small amounts of money devoted to them. The first municipal spay/neuter clinic in the county was opened in the City/County Animal Shelter in Stockton in December 2008 in partnership with another non-profit, the Animal Protection League. Over 2,400 shelter animals and feral cats have been altered through this effort that operates at least twice a month. Joint Powers Authority A Joint Powers Authority (JPA) is an entity permitted under California Government Code Section The comparison JPA s studied are full service animal care and control agencies. Each is comprised of field services, shelter services, adoption, education and fostering components, and comprehensive veterinary components including shelter medicine and spay and neuter services. The creation of an Animal Services JPA in San Joaquin County would allow agencies to combine their animal care and control efforts and save money through reduction of administrative activities, shared resources and equipment, purchasing ability, combined bond capacity of the agencies, and the ensuing cost savings from more efficient operations. An Animal Services JPA would also create a department of specialists in the Animal Services field who would keep abreast of best practices in the industry and adjust operations accordingly. Regional Shelter The animal shelters in San Joaquin County were all built between 1950 and They are old, inefficient and, for the most part, unpleasant to visit. Modern shelters attract the public to come adopt pets, purchase licenses or attend a humane education class. More importantly, modern shelters are designed for positive interaction between people and animals whether the people are animal professionals or the public. Veterinary standards for shelters have advanced dramatically since local shelters were constructed. Drainage, HVAC, mechanized cleaning systems, nonporous surfaces, high-walled kennels are among the systems that have been developed to control disease and reduce the effort needed to clean and disinfect animal areas. There are economies of scale to be gained through operation of one central shelter as opposed to one in almost every city in the county. There is concern that the public will not come to a centralized location to adopt pets and conduct animal business. Three of the comparison JPA s have found that centralization has worked for them, while Santa Cruz Animal Services Authority has maintained satellite facilities in partner cities. Animal Field Services Of the six agencies studied, only two, San Joaquin County Animal Control and Stockton Animal Services, dedicate their Animal Control Officers only to field duties. Lodi, Lathrop, Manteca and Tracy officers and/or supervisors have duties other than handling calls for service or field related duties. By comparison, all the JPA s studied have personnel dedicated to handling calls for service and field work. Only Stockton Animal Services has a dedicated dispatcher, while all the comparison agencies have dedicated dispatchers. Page 8

9 San Joaquin County agency animal Field Services units do not have consistent coverage on weekend and only Tracy Animal Services has Field Services officers on duty seven days per week. San Joaquin Animal Field Services agencies do not have consistent databases designed exclusively to track the activities and functions of a contemporary Animal Services Agency. All agencies except Lathrop Animal Services rely, at least some of the time, on local law enforcement dispatch centers. None of these dispatch units utilized the Animal Services databases, causing difficulty in accurately tracking the activities and functions of the Animal Services agencies. The lack of consistent data reports to track activities makes it difficult to impossible to determine effectiveness of officer deployment and customer satisfaction. Animal Licensing None of the agencies studied has a comprehensive, proactive, aggressive licensing program. Two of the comparison JPA s studied (SEAACA and SASA) utilize dog and cat licensing as a way to promote responsible pet ownership by providing a means of identification for pets, making certain pets are vaccinated against rabies, and encouraging spaying and neutering. Enforcing licensing ordinances is also a way to generate revenue. SEAACA s Licensing Unit consisting of one supervisor, four clerks and twelve part-time canvassers expect to collect $2,119,905 in revenue in fiscal year SASA, which was created as a JPA in December 2010, employs four canvassers. In December 2010, SASA was maintaining just 10,485 licenses. From December 2010 to February 2011, the four canvassers increased the total number of licenses maintained to 28,300. There is great revenue potential for San Joaquin County through development of an effective licensing program. Policy & Procedures Manual A Policy and Procedures Manual is an internal document designed to assist employees with effective and efficient service delivery. Defining the manual itself, what a policy is, a procedure is, the proper use of memoranda, what rules of conduct, etc. are critical to the reader understanding the context and responsibilities of accountability to the content of the manual. It is important for each employee and agency volunteer to have a working knowledge of protocol s in one s work area, as well as to keep abreast of changes and updates to the manual. It is important to establish that all staff members and volunteers are accountable for upholding the policies, procedures and protocols in their work area(s). Supervisors and managers should be responsible to make certain employee and volunteer s manuals are kept up to date and they are held to the standards within the manuals. An outline for a policy and procedure manual for a potential JPA is provided as part of this report. Consultants Recommendations A regional approach be taken with: Page 9

10 1) Creation of a Joint Powers Authority for a full service Animal Services Agency that includes a full service animal shelter, a field services/animal control component, a licensing division, adoption and fostering specialists, a humane education specialist and a veterinary/shelter medicine/spay & neuter services component. The consultants recommend that management oversight specific to Animal Care and Control be provided by the agency s Executive Director and Director of Operations who would provide management oversight for Shelter and Field Services Operations (see proposed organization chart on Page 200 in the Appendices). 2) Creation of a licensing unit that aggressively and proactively pursues licensing compliance. Licensing compliance not only promotes responsible pet ownership, it generates significant revenue. 3) The joint hiring of a regional Adoption and Foster Coordinator and four part-time adoption workers by participating agencies. This coordinator would work with existing partnerships, volunteer groups, and off-site adoption venues, and develop a comprehensive program to market adoptable animals throughout the County (sample job description included is on page 178 of the Appendices). 4) Creation of a centralized adoption center to be operated by the Adoption and Foster Coordinator. Physical or remote location(s) to be established consistent with regionalization of animal control services. 5) The joint hiring of a Humane Educator to develop a formal humane education program consisting of regular classroom visits, volunteer and teacher training, adult education opportunities, and a spay/neuter awareness campaign (sample job description included on page 197 in the Appendices). 6) Establish an aggressive spay/neuter program including a high-volume spay/neuter clinic to be operated by the Joint Powers Authority. 7) Hire or contract with a Veterinarian to oversee the clinic(s), and develop standard clinic procedures as well as a shelter medicine program for all participating agency shelters. 8) Build a regional animal shelter to house unwanted animals for San Joaquin County and cities within the county. All of the existing shelters within the county are old and inefficient for adoption, disease control, proper ventilation, and veterinary care. Modern shelters are easier to clean, have efficient drainage, HVAC systems and non-porous surfaces for better disinfection, and are inviting for the public to come for licenses, adoption or education. Additionally, the animal shelter campus would house the animal care and control components. Page 10

11 9) Creation of an aggressive regional volunteer program for the Adoption and Foster, Humane Education, and Veterinary & Shelter Medicine/Spay & Neuter Services programs. 10) Creation of a Field Services Unit consisting of one Field Supervisor, two Lead Officers, twenty Animal Control Officers, four Animal Services Technicians (field personnel that handle calls for service not requiring the expertise and abilities of an animal control officer), and the equivalent of three dispatchers. Creating such a Field Services Unit would provide Animal Field Services Countywide, seven days per week, twelve hours per day. 11) Procure and utilize a comprehensive Animal Care and Control database and train all employees in its use. Provide personnel with equipment necessary to efficiently do their jobs. This would include computers in their vehicles that are linked to the database, so that personnel can not only receive calls and communicate with dispatchers and each other, but also so that personnel can perform data entry and report writing in the field, saving frequent trips to the shelter to perform data entry. 12) Creation of a comprehensive Policy and Procedures Manual that gives each employee and volunteer a working knowledge of protocols in one s work area, allows supervisors and managers to hold personnel accountable, as well as to keep abreast of organizational changes. A suggested Policy and Procedure Manual outline is included in this report (starting on page 69). In summary, the long-term goal of the recommendations is to develop a structure for implementing services more efficiently consistent with today s humane standards. Research concludes the recommendations above have proven effective in every community researched. Reducing the animal population through the recommendations above has the fiscal benefit of handling and housing less animals which in time manifests itself in less resources needed for animal control and sheltering. A comprehensive animal control and sheltering program addresses the core problem of overpopulation of dogs and cats, rather than only handling the symptoms of the problem. Centralized processes for fees, fines, and both field services and shelter procedures can streamline the animal services organizations in San Joaquin County. Differential licensing fees, consistent revenue streams, and aggressive compliance of spay/neuter, litter permits and licensing could increase revenues countywide to partially fund the recommended programs. Partnering with non-profits who have donation-raising capacity the municipalities lack is how other agencies have filled the funding gap. A phased approach to implementing these programs should be examined, as funding allows, beginning with the spay/neuter component. Page 11

12 Table 1 Recommended Program Costs & Revenues Division Staff No. Expenditures Revenue Net Cost (Profit) Administration 4 $874,500 $20,000 $854,500 Field Services 30 FTE $1,740,300 $50,000 $1,690,300 Shelter Operations 16 $796,300 $5,000 $791,300 Adoption Center 3 FTE $131,080 $800,000 ($668,920) Veterinary Center 6 $576,700 $387,000 $189,700 Licensing Center 6 FTE $275,320 $1,000,000 ($724,680) TOTAL 65 FTE $4,394,200 $2,262,000 $2,132,200 For the purposes of animal services, it makes sense to use population served and animals handled as a fair method of distributing costs. If the ratio were to be equally split between those two criteria, the cost breakdown is as follows: Table 2 Agency Cost Percentage Jurisdiction Population Population % Animal Intake Animal Intake % Combined % Lathrop 17, % % 2.66% Lodi 61, % 2, % 9.67% Manteca 67, % 2, % 10.97% San Joaquin County 156, % 3, % 19.99% Stockton 291, % 9, % 45.07% Tracy 81, % 2, % 11.64% TOTAL 675,963 21,152 Page 12

13 Table 3 Estimated Cost Per Agency Jurisdiction Cost Ratio Net Cost Breakdown Lathrop 2.66% $56,716 Lodi 9.67% $206,184 Manteca 10.97% $233,902 San Joaquin County 19.99% $426,227 Stockton 45.07% $960,983 Tracy 11.64% $248,188 TOTAL $2,132,200 Finally, Table 4 shows the improved euthanasia rate for the Santa Cruz Animal Services Agency from when they formed a JPA and adopted animal care best practices. Table 4 - SCASA Euthanasia Rate *SCASA was given responsibility for Watsonville city shelter in 2004, the added animals spiked euthanasia rates in 2005, however as best practices were applied they began to decline in **Does not include wildfire evacuations or protective custody of approximately 900 animals (domestic & wild) *** Includes all animal intakes including wildfire evacuations and protective custody Page 13

14 ADOPTION AND FOSTERING In 1976, Richard Avanzino became Director of the San Francisco SPCA where he implemented aggressive adoption outreach and spay/neuter programs. Under his leadership, the San Francisco SPCA also began taking custody of most of the dogs and cats impounded by the City of San Francisco s animal shelter. After one year, the number of healthy animals euthanized in San Francisco shelters dropped to zero and the number of sick and injured animals euthanized dropped by nearly 50 percent. This was at a time when most major urban cities were killing nearly 80 percent of cats and over half of the dogs in their municipal shelters. Avanzino s success in San Francisco demonstrated aggressive adoption programs can drastically reduce euthanasia rates. Unfortunately, this practice has not experienced widespread acceptance among municipal agencies. Many government-operated shelters operate under the belief that these programs cannot work in their communities or they lack the impetus to revamp existing policies where animals are brought to shelters, held for a mandated period of time, and the surplus euthanized when space is needed for additional animals. While the laws governing animal shelters do not require education or adoption programs, California Penal Code Section 597f(b), requires that all officers of pounds or humane societies, and regulation departments of public agencies to convey, and for police and sheriff departments, to cause to be conveyed all injured cats and dogs found without their owners in a public place directly to a veterinarian for a determination of whether the animal shall be humanely euthanized or shall be hospitalized under proper care and given emergency treatment. The Hayden Bill, the California Penal Code (599d), and the California Food and Agriculture Code (17005) state it is policy of the State of California that no adoptable animal should be euthanized if it can be adopted into a suitable home. Specifically, the Hayden Bill increased the amount of time animals must be held in municipal shelters, but also set a new standard for animal care in shelters by requiring proper care, veterinary attention, adequate nutrition and water, and exercise. The bill sets the elimination of companion animal euthanasia by 2010 as a State goal and encourages non-profits and public agencies to work together toward this end. Humane programs are measures that advance this goal and are implemented by most humane societies and some municipal shelters because they 1) improve the health and welfare of the animals impounded 2) assist in reducing animal population 3) lead to reduced animal services costs due to fewer animals handled, and 4) better serve the wants and needs of the public. San Joaquin County Animal Services staff members expressed a desire to implement progressive programs designed to reduce pet population and euthanasia rates at local shelters, but acknowledged a lack of coordinated efforts and adequate staffing and resources for program implementation. Current State of Adoption and Fostering Programs The results from Coordinating Committee discussions coupled with survey data regarding municipal adoption and fostering efforts are as follows: Page 14

15 SJ County Animal Control San Joaquin County contracts for shelter services with the City of Stockton, therefore has no adoption or fostering programs. Through the adoption program at the City/County Animal Shelter, approximately 30 percent of the County dogs and 4 percent of the County cats taken in during FY were adopted. City of Lathrop Animal Services The City of Lathrop contracts with the City of Manteca s Animal Services to provide sheltering services. While they do not have a standardized adoption program for dogs or cats, they do participate in the PetSmart adoption program. This program is operated within PetSmart retail stores. Adoptable cats from various shelters and non-profits are housed at stores for public viewing on a rotational basis. If an adopter is identified, PetSmart staff complete necessary adoption paperwork and conduct the adoption transaction. Approximately 37 percent of the dogs coming into the Manteca Shelter from Lathrop were adopted in FY while 29 percent of cats were adopted. While the City of Lathrop has no standardized foster care program, animal services staff members sometimes provide foster care for animals taken in by the City of Lathrop. City of Lodi Animal Services The City of Lodi is unique in San Joaquin County in that it contracts with a non-profit agency, Lodi Shelter People Assisting Lodi Shelter (PALS) to perform all adoption, fostering and placement of animals. PALS is a non-profit corporation acting as an independent contractor. They employ an Office Manager to oversee operations and who supervises and trains volunteers in data entry, adoption paperwork and telephone answering protocol. Lodi Shelter PALS also issues animal licenses and renewal reminders. The City of Lodi pays PALS... the entire gross proceeds from its collection of animal licenses, adoption fees and unaltered animal fees for its services. Because the City of Lodi contracts with Lodi PALS for all adoptions, licensing, revenue collection, and coordination with rescue groups, animal services officers are able to focus on animal control work without the burden of sheltering issues. The adoption rate for dogs in FY was 59.3 percent and 43.6 percent for cats, the highest percentages in the County. The City of Lodi no longer receives revenue for adoptions or licensing, so the City bears the entire cost of Animal Control. The operating philosophy is that in the past officers were tied up with adoptions and other services and now they can do animal control. City of Manteca Animal Services The City of Manteca has an informal foster program that allows employees, volunteers and citizens to foster animals that are adoptable but have not yet found a home. The program requires an Animal Control Officer to visit the residence and determine that the yard is secure and the conditions humane. They also secure a liability waiver. Adoptions occur at the Animal Shelter with 38.8 percent of dogs and 23.1 percent of cats adopted during FY Page 15

16 City of Stockton Animal Services The City of Stockton relies on shelter staff and the part-time volunteer work of the Animal Protection League (APL) for adoption and fostering. The City of Stockton partners with APL, a non-profit corporation to assist with adoptions. The City pays APL $2,000 per month toward rent on an off-site cattery and adoption center. APL pulls cats from the stressful shelter environment, quarantines and observes them for two weeks, spays/neuters them, then handles adoption paperwork. APL also assists the shelter with dog adoptions by utilizing volunteers on weekends to bring shelter dogs to offsite adoption events at local pet stores and other community venues. Approximately 35 percent of Stockton dogs and 6.5 percent of cats were adopted in FY Stockton has a limited foster program utilizing volunteers to care for cats and dogs too young to live in the shelter environment or that have medical conditions requiring attention. Shelter staff members also foster animals on their own time. City of Tracy Animal Services The City of Tracy promotes adoptions and uses the newspaper, internet and a partnership with rescue groups to assist in adoption efforts. They do not maintain a standardized foster program. Tracy also has a low-income spay/neuter voucher program. Vouchers are distributed as funding becomes available. In Tracy, 39.7 percent of dogs and 30.3 percent of cats were adopted in FY Table 5 - Adoption Fees by Agency Jurisdiction Dog-Male Dog-Female Cat-Male Cat-Female Lathrop *$ *$ *$83.00 *$ Lodi *$ *$ *$ *$ Manteca $95.00 $95.00 $95.00 $95.00 San Joaquin County $ $ Stockton** $ $ $ $ Tracy *$82.00 *$ *$47.00 *$67.00 MHS*** $ $ $ ($150/pair) $ ($150/pair) SCASA $ $ $ $ SEAACA $ $ $60.00 $60.00 *Includes adoption fee from respective agencies and average spay/neuter costs provided in surveys. **Stockton has an adjustable fee schedule. Rates are reduced for dogs ($100.00) and cats ($75.00) already altered, or if altered at in-house surgery clinic. $75.00 for old, very young and special needs dogs, $50.00 for cats. Rates go down as the number of days the animal is at the shelter accrue. Cat housed days, $56.00; Dog housed days, $75.00; Cat housed 50+ days, $38.00; Dog housed 50+ days, $ ***Marin Humane Society has an adjustable fee schedule. Dogs: Up to six months of age, $250.00; Over ten years of age, $ Cats: Up to six months of age, $ ($150.00/pair); Over ten years of age, $65.00 Page 16

17 What California Joint Power Authority s (JPA s) are Doing Santa Cruz Animal Services Authority (SCASA) Santa Cruz Animal Services Authority employs one full-time Animal Services Coordinator responsible for oversight of Client Services. There are also four full-time Animal Services Assistants whose duties include coordinating adoptions, volunteers, and fostering. In addition to get acquainted areas at the shelter, Santa Cruz has a number of programs designed to make animals more adoptable and increase visibility of adoptable animals. One such program is SPOTT which stands for Shelter Pups on the Town. Trained volunteers wearing Santa Cruz AS Authority vests bring shelter dogs to public areas such as malls and beaches and walk them. The dogs also wear vests with the AS Authority Logo and verbiage such as Adopt Me or I need a mommy. This program serves not only to socialize the dogs and get them out of the shelter environment, it greatly increases the visibility and displays the quality of the dogs available for adoption. SCASA adopted 41% of the dogs at their shelter in 2009 and 52% of the cats. SEAACA SEAACA employs a full-time Adoption Manager and adopts both at the shelter and at off-site locations. They partner with The ModPawd, a non-profit that removes cats from the shelter into modular units on shelter property specifically to market shelter cats. SEAACA s adoption rate for 2010 was 37% for dogs and 12% of cats. Marin Humane Society The Marin Humane Society (MHS) adoption and foster programs are managed by their Director of Animal Care and Adoptions. Staff members include an Adoption Supervisor, two Adoption Assistants and a Foster Care Coordinator. MHS also has a robust volunteer program managed by its Director of Volunteer Services. The MHS Foster Program relies on volunteers to open their homes to animals in need. Examples of animals that might need foster care are litters of kittens or puppies and abused, fearful or injured animals. Foster care volunteers provide temporary homes with all necessary supplies provided by MHS. MHS also provides training and support for the foster volunteers. MHS s adoption department finds forever homes for the animal when it is ready for adoption. The MHS Adoption Center is open Tuesdays through Sundays 10 am to 5 pm and Wednesdays until 6:30 pm to facilitate the adoptions of dogs, cats, rabbits, birds, gerbils, and livestock. The Adoption Center has get acquainted areas with trained volunteer and staff adoption counselors assigned to work with customers seeking a pet. MHS encourages potential adopters to bring the entire family, and any existing pet dogs to meet the potential pet prior to adoption. In addition to the shelter adoption center, MHS holds several community adoption events per month in which animals are transported to community venues to meet potential adopters. The MHS Behavior & Training Department focuses on keeping people and pets together by offering a multitude of dog training classes, behavior consultations and educational workshops. Page 17

18 San Joaquin County Coordinating Committee Discussion Members of the Coordinating Committee agreed that countywide animal care and control has focused on mandated control services rather than the soft services of adoptions and rescue from the municipal shelters. Committee members would like to see centralized processes and adoption centers where community members could go to see a variety of animals. Some committee members thought a few large, strategically placed centers would be more effective and fiscally prudent than a number of small operations. The idea of Storefront Adoptions was discussed for adoption accessibility. Tracy had a group adopting shelter animals at West Valley Mall which was effective, but staffing and liability became issues and eventually the program was discontinued. The Committee agreed that the numbers of adoptions could be increased if a more aesthetically pleasing venue than the current shelters were available to conduct adoptions. The consensus was that current shelters were not designed to be conducive for public adoptions. None of the participating jurisdictions have foster programs outside of the work done by shelter employees and non-profit groups. Some members thought the absence of a coordinated countywide adoption and foster effort such as those in Sacramento and the East Bay is needed in San Joaquin County. Consultant s Conclusions and Recommendation for Adoption/Fostering Program Each of the participating agencies adopt animals from their shelter. Many citizens know that animals are available at the shelters and go there. Many other citizens either do not know or do not like to go to municipal shelters where animals are also being killed. The older municipal shelter structures in San Joaquin County were not designed with customer service in mind, and are not pleasant places to take the family, and do not display the animals well for adoption. Lodi and Stockton work with non-profits that market their animals for adoptions and take them off-site to more aesthetically pleasing locations. They vary in their structure but operate under the same concept; facilitating the adoption of as many shelter animals as possible. A professional adoption program includes a marketing plan, separate areas for dogs and cats so that the cats are not in distress, room for prospective adopters to interact with adoptable animals and staff dedicated to the adoption process. Some of these features are available in San Joaquin County facilities, but not in all the facilities. Most of the shelter staff would like to spend time working on adoptions, but are kept busy with administrative, kennel or animal control tasks. Volunteer adoption/fostering programs have been in existence in the County for at least the past 15 years. These programs have been successful in increasing the number of adoptions, and have had an impact on euthanasia rates as reflected in the statistics for those years where a large effort has been put forth (see Tables 7 and 8 on page 20 and Tables 30, 31, 32 and 33 starting on page 160 in Appendices). Adoption and fostering services for participating jurisdictions can be accomplished relatively inexpensively. These are areas in which a small paid staff with a complement of trained Page 18

19 volunteers can make significant strides in improving adoption numbers. The recommendation is that one full-time adoption and foster program coordinator be hired and assisted by and four parttime staff members operating an adoption center. The salary range for such a coordinator is approximately $40,000 to $60,000 with $12 to $15 per hour for part-time staffers. Benefits are approximately 30% of salaries for full-time employees. A centralized location might not be convenient for some customers but adoptions could still be conducted at individual community venues and shelters in the partner cities. As awareness of an adoption center grows, shelter staff would be freed up from some of that workload. Adoption/foster employees would evaluate dogs and cats from participating jurisdictions and ascertain that the animals are spayed/neutered, current on vaccines, and generally healthy. Staff members would oversee operations at an adoption center similar in concept to the adoption centers of the two non-profit partners, Animal Protection League (APL) and Lodi Shelter PALS. Part-time employees could be utilized to clean kennel areas at the adoption center(s) and transport animals, monitor animals and set up and tear down kennels at adoption events on weekends. Volunteers and part-time staff could be utilized to update web-based databases that advertise adoptions, such as Petfinder ( A small advertising budget could be utilized to promote local events and services. Table 6 - Sample Adoption Services Unit Adoptions Services Unit Amount Description Adoption/Volunteer Manager $60,000 Adoption Technicians (part-time) $46,080 4 positions at $11,520 each Benefits Supplies Advertising/Marketing Staff Development $1,000 Expense Total $131,080 $18,000 estimated at 30% of Mgr salary costs $4,000 $2,000 Potential Revenue ($800,000) 5,472 adoptions (2009 actual) NET COST(INCOME) ($668,920) Details for these figures are outlined on pages in the Appendices Due to the current real estate market in San Joaquin County, space for an adoption center could be leased for under $1 a foot. Retrofitting an existing building or government-owned space would be even more cost effective. Ultimately, the ideal situation would be to build a centralized shelter(s) with an adoption center as part of the facility. In Summary Consultants believe that continuing to operate local animal services without implementing an aggressive adoption and fostering program is counterproductive. The current operating model of taking in unwanted animals, medically treating and housing them, then euthanizing them, is not an effective use of scarce resources. Utilizing volunteers to assist a small staff focused on increasing the adoptions of shelter animals is a cost-effective way to assist in lowering euthanasia rates at our local shelters. Page 19

20 Volunteer adoption/fostering programs have been in existence in San Joaquin County for approximately 15 years and have been successful in increasing the number of adoptions and reducing euthanasia rates for dogs. For cats, while the number of adoptions has risen, the adoption rate has not kept up with the population increase causing the adoption rates to decrease and the euthanasia rate to increase. Because cats are prolific breeders if left unchecked, additional programs such as aggressive spay/neuter and Trap/Neuter/Release programs must be implemented to supplement the adoption efforts of the volunteers. Table 7 Cat Adoptions by San Joaquin County Agencies County-wide Cat Data % % Adoptions 1, , Redeemed by Owner Euthanized 4, , Table 8 Dog Adoptions by San Joaquin County Agencies County-wide Dog Data % % Adoptions 1, , Redeemed by Owner 1, , Euthanized 8, , Page 20

21 Current State of Local Humane Education HUMANE EDUCATION/PUBLIC OUTREACH The city and county participants in the first Coordinating Committee meeting agreed that humane education programs are beneficial in educating the community about the principles of responsible pet ownership. Humane education can assist to improve the quality of life for both animals and people in the community, and lower euthanasia rates. While the participating agencies recognized the importance of education programs, all indicated that they do not have resources to provide standardized education programs. The agencies responding to the survey attend some community events such as National Night Out and community meetings. Some occasionally go to schools in an effort to emphasize the importance of spaying and neutering of companion animals, teach children about dog behavior and how to avoid situations that may result in a dog bite, and discuss responsible animal care. It was noted during discussion with animal service officers that education takes place each time the officers interact with citizens. There are several humane societies in San Joaquin County and one offers humane-type education classes. Animal Friends Connection conducts pet behavior classes and offers therapy dog certification. No other humane education outlets in the community could be found. The results from Coordinating Committee discussions coupled with survey data regarding municipal humane education efforts are as follows: SJ County Animal Control At one time San Joaquin County Animal Control had a ¾-time employee who was responsible for humane education. This person was responsible for going to school and community events and delivering humane education curriculum. Although difficult to quantify, it was opined that this was an effective program that served to improve the care and quality of life for pets in the community, as well as teach the principles of responsible pet ownership. The survey results indicate that San Joaquin County Animal Control currently has no educational outreach programs and no established humane programs. Animal Control officers conduct site visits at schools, the Environmental Health Department, PG&E, post offices, and the water department to provide presentations about bite prevention and proper animal care. City of Lathrop Animal Services Animal Services officers educate the community through occasional school presentations, police academy, Junior Police Academy programs, attending Neighborhood Watch meetings, holding rabies clinics, distributing spay/neuter vouchers, and coordinating with Lathrop Police Services to participate in other city events such as National Night Out, crime fairs and community events. City of Lodi Animal Services Animal Services officers go to schools, health and safety fairs, National Night Out, provide shelter tours to interested groups, and attend fundraisers as time permits. Their partner nonprofit piloted an in-class 3 rd grade humane education program in May of Page 21

22 City of Manteca Animal Services There are currently no standardized humane education programs in Manteca, animal service officers provide education when interacting with citizens. City of Stockton Animal Services Animals Services employees attend Neighborhood Watch Programs upon request, provide training to postal carriers, and make occasional presentations at schools. Staff members also attend community events to microchip, vaccinate and license animals, as well as distribute educational materials on the importance of spaying and neutering, programs available for affordable spaying/neutering, and low-cost vaccinations. City of Tracy Animal Services Animals Services officers provide some school presentations. Tracy Animal Services sends an officer every 6-8 weeks or so to educate on spay/neuter benefits and dog bite prevention (2 nd and 3 rd grades) at local schools. They also go to philanthropic groups such as Lion s and Rotary clubs, attend career days, and staff tables at community events providing literature on the spaying/neutering What California Joint Power Authority s (JPA s) are Doing Santa Cruz Animal Services Authority (SCASA) Santa Cruz Animal Services Authority assigns an Animal Services Officer the duties of coordinating Humane Education efforts. SCASA makes an effort to establish a humane ethic in workplaces, schools, clubs and associations. The Santa Cruz SPCA, a nonprofit agency in the Santa Cruz community, also offers formal humane education programs. With a full-time educator on the SPCA staff, programs and presentations center on animal safety, making compassionate choices, and building empathetic skills for a more humane world. All SPCA classes fit into the California Curriculum Standards and can be tailored to individual classroom s needs. The SPCA also coordinates shelter visits, Girl Scout and Brownie badges/patches, and community service options for kids. The SPCA does not require a fee, but always solicits donations and even suggests service projects such as collecting money, toys or blankets for kids. SEAACA SEAACA does not operate a humane education program per se, but instead, employs a Campaign Development Manager for public outreach and awareness of animal issues such as responsible pet ownership and the importance of spaying and neutering. SEAACA s philosophy is that the public s attitude toward animals must be changed and that it is the mission of all of their employees to assist in this effort. Marin Humane Society The Marin Humane Society (MHS) is unique in that it is both a non-profit and a contracting agency for a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) Animal Care and Control agreement. The County of Marin, and its cities and townships contract with MHS for sheltering and field services. Page 22

23 Approximately half of MHS s budget is funded by the JPA, with the entire county and its cities reaping the benefit of the JPA and the Humane Society programs. MHS contends that research proves that children who are taught to be kind towards animals tend to mature into compassionate adults. One of their guiding principles is an ethic of compassion that they strive to share with their community, especially children. MHS employs a full-time humane educator and provides education through shelter tours, classroom visits, humane birthday parties, summer camp (week-long programs and specialty camps for children of all ages), after-school student service clubs, student internships, and adult education. Specific programs offered by MHS may be found on page 171 in the Appendices of this report. Consultant s Conclusions and Recommendation for Humane Education/Public Outreach Program The Humane Society of the United States has acknowledged that animal abuse is an early warning sign in children who may develop antisocial tendencies that can lead to more serious problems. Humane educators have found that students involved in humane education classes learn respect and kindness toward animals that is translated to people, the environment, and themselves. The National Parent Teachers Association has stated that Children trained to extend justice, kindness and mercy to animals become more just, kind and considerate in their relationships with one another. The State of California Education Code Section 233.5(a) states, Each teacher shall endeavor to impress upon the minds of the pupils the principles of morality, truth, justice, patriotism, and a true comprehension of the rights, duties, and dignity of American citizenship, and the meaning of equality and human dignity, including the promotion of harmonious relations, kindness toward domestic pets and the humane treatment of living creatures, to teach them to avoid idleness, profanity, and falsehood, and to instruct them in manners and morals and the principles of a free government. San Joaquin County and its cities are a melting pot of ethnic and socio-economic diversity that manifests itself both in wonderful cultural opportunities but high dropout, crime and illiteracy rates. Many of its citizens have no historical basis for humane treatment of animals or no cognizance of problems stemming from unrestrained breeding and lack of veterinary care. Others have simply never had these issues brought to their attention. This is a county where a little effort in this area could have big returns. While many San Joaquin citizens may not be able to afford spay/neuter fees at a private veterinarian hospital, the county ranks 28 th of 58 counties in median income. Lack of awareness of pet overpopulation and its consequences is a bigger problem. It is recommended that the agencies jointly hire a humane education/public outreach coordinator to research the myriad of humane education curriculum and outreach tools available and choose programs that best suit the needs of our county. The potential salary range for this position is $40,000 to $60,000. Our recommended salary is $60,000 with benefits (social security, unemployment insurance, workers compensation, medical insurance and retirement) calculated at approximately 30% of the salary for a total of $78,000 (see Sample Personnel Cost Data on Page 23

24 page 198 in Appendices). A sample job description can be found on page 197 in the Appendices. This coordinator s responsibilities would include: Research and selection of curriculum Development of short and long-range program goals Recruiting/hiring volunteer educators Training educators Introducing the program to county school systems Coordinating classroom visits Personally conducting humane education classes Development of an assessment program to measure program impact Development of community and adult humane education programs Because there is little money currently being spent on humane education in San Joaquin County, the hiring of a program coordinator is going to be dependent on the commitment of elected officials, managers and animal care professional staff to the concept of changing how animal services are conducted in the community. Cooperation and coordination between the County and cities is the most cost-effective way to begin this process. There are many possibilities for finding educators including developing relationships with local colleges for student teachers, use of qualified volunteers, developing a program that utilizes existing teachers or outreach to senior and retired citizens. Communities with successful humane education programs report that schools are very receptive to the programs and become valuable partners in the effort to reach out beyond their students to parents and the rest of the community with the message. It is recommended that the program start with 3 rd grade in as many schools as possible with the limited resources available. Seven-year olds are young enough to still be completely enamored with animals, yet old enough to comprehend the concepts of pet overpopulation and veterinary care. Expansion to 4 th and 5 th grades would be the next step with the ultimate goal of reaching all students in the future. Table 9 - Phased Humane Education in the Classroom Education Group Phase Concepts Third Grade 1 Home care for pets, veterinary care, pet overpopulation Fourth & Fifth Grade 2 Responsible pet ownership, guardianship of nature First & Second Grade 3 Animal interaction, kindness to animals Sixth, Seventh & Eighth Grade 4 Add Volunteer projects, spay/neuter in addition to nature & responsible pet ownership Kindergarten 5 Animal interaction, why we have pets Page 24

25 High School 6 Similar to 6,7 & 8 th with work at shelter, solving pet overpopulation Community Groups 7 Responsible pet ownership, spay & neuter Adult Education Classes 8 Responsible pet ownership, spay & neuter Once a successful classroom program is up and running, adult and community group programs can be developed and implemented. In Summary Humane education is one of the puzzle pieces in a comprehensive program to reduce euthanasia rates and pet overpopulation. Because of its cultural diversity, illiteracy and drop out rates, and lack of a strong humane society offering spay/neuter education, San Joaquin County is a prime location to successfully change attitudes and increase awareness of humane issues. Page 25

26 VETERINARY/SHELTER MEDICINE/SPAY AND NEUTER SERVICES The Hayden Bill directs that public shelters should aggressively promote spay and neuter programs to reduce pet overpopulation. The Vincent Bill (1998) states that it is the intent of the Legislature, by enacting this act, to reduce the number of unwanted dogs and cats in California The single most effective prevention of overpopulation among the dog and cat population is spaying and neutering. A comprehensive Veterinary/Shelter Medicine program is widely recognized as a critical component in animal services programs. A comprehensive program includes medical treatment, disease prevention in a shelter environment, and spay/neuter services. Despite its importance, none of the survey participants have a veterinary/shelter medicine program. All the agencies studied outsource veterinary services to community for profit veterinary clinics. Some Coordinating Committee members recognized that San Joaquin County communities cannot adopt their way out of the pet overpopulation problem; a regional spay/neuter program needs to be developed to reduce the base population of dogs and cats. Current State of Veterinary & Shelter Medicine/Spay & Neuter Services Programs The results from Coordinating Committee discussions coupled with survey data regarding municipal humane education efforts are as follows: SJ County Animal Control San Joaquin County contracts for shelter services with the City of Stockton, therefore has no Veterinary/Shelter Medicine program. Animals requiring veterinary services are taken to one of three private veterinary offices. Fees range from $45 to $200 maximum. Exceeding this amount for veterinary services requires supervisory approval. Animal Services officers do not have access to any outside low-cost spay/neuter or vaccination services, but are working with Delta Humane Society and VIP (a private vender) to provide rabies vaccination clinics and sell county pet licenses. City of Lathrop Animal Services The City of Lathrop contracts with the City of Manteca s Animal Services to provide sheltering services and therefore has no Veterinary/Shelter Medicine program. For animals requiring veterinary services, Lathrop utilizes five veterinary offices, with varying costs. Some veterinarians do not charge at all, while others charge only for materials and supplies; still others charge standard rates. Emergency clinic visits are a minimum of $91. The City of Lathrop does not offer or coordinate any low-cost vaccination or spay/neuter programs. The City does employ one Registered Veterinary Technician (RVT) who serves as an Animal Control Officer. City of Lodi Animal Services The City of Lodi Animal Services utilizes five veterinary offices that bill according to a contracted fee schedule. Low-cost vaccinations are available and low-cost spay/neuter services are attained through a voucher program designed to offset surgery costs. The vouchers are funded by Community Development Block Grants (CDBG). Page 26

27 Veterinarians occasionally visit the Lodi shelter for health checks, to confirm care is being provided properly, check injuries, and to vaccinate for rabies. This is not a formally scheduled program as visits occur only when requested by staff members. City of Manteca Animal Services According to survey information, the City of Manteca does not have a standardized shelter medicine program. Manteca Animal Services utilizes one private veterinary office, primarily for spay and neuter services. They do not offer any low-cost spay/neuter or vaccination programs, however they do used donated monies on a case-by-case basis to create low-cost and free spaying and neutering opportunities for the community. City of Stockton Animal Services Survey information indicates that the City of Stockton does not have a standardized shelter medicine program. Stockton Animal Services contracts with three veterinary offices for spay/neuter services for recently adopted animals, veterinary care of shelter animals, and animals picked up in the field by animal services officers. The veterinarians are paid according to the City fee schedule, and additional billing by veterinarians is reviewed by shelter staff prior to submission to accounts payable. Until recently, City of Stockton Animal Services worked with a local veterinarian to hold lowcost vaccination clinics on Wednesday afternoons and evenings. Because of budgetary considerations, this program was suspended. The low-cost clinics are now provided by a private vendor. The City of Stockton teamed with a non-profit, Animal Protection League (APL), to convert four rooms at the Animal Shelter to a spay/neuter clinic. The clinic is open every-other Sunday and performs surgery on shelter animals, mostly cats, slated for adoption, cats in managed feral colonies, and other low-cost need situations. The clinic also holds two-four weekday clinics per month to perform surgery on shelter dogs. The Stockton Shelter does not have a standardized shelter medicine program or a veterinarian on staff, although they do employ one Registered Veterinary Technician (RVT). The City has a classification of Animal Services Assistant II that provides a higher salary for an RVT certification. City of Tracy Animal Services The City of Tracy s survey indicates that they do not have a standardized shelter medicine program. Tracy Animal Services utilizes one private veterinary office for emergencies, vaccination, and spay and neuter services of shelter animals. They do not offer any low-cost spay/neuter or vaccination programs. Tracy s shelter is not visited by a veterinarian. What California Joint Power Authority s (JPA s) are Doing Santa Cruz Animal Services Authority (SCASA) Santa Cruz Animal Services Authority employs five Animal Health Technicians, two of which are assigned to the Watsonville Animal Shelter. One technician is a Veterinarian Assistant and works with a contract veterinarian who performs shelter medicine and spay/neuter services. Page 27

28 $120,000 was spent in under the budgetary line item, Veterinarian Services. The clinic veterinarian is an independent contractor with a $90,000 contract. Revenue generation includes fees for micro-chipping ($20 per animal), and spay/neuter fees for impounded animals (recommended fees can be found in Table 48 on page 205 in the Appendices). SCASA veterinary services provide shelter medical protocols for agency shelter staff, medically treats and vaccinates all shelter animals, and performs spay/neuter surgeries on shelter animals and impounded animals. Santa Cruz has a differential animal licensing structure that encourages spaying and neutering of companion dogs (see Table 48 on page 205 in the Appendices and the Licensing section of this report starting on page 64 for licensing fees). SEAACA SEAACA has a veterinary services division as part of its organizational structure. In addition to providing shelter medicine, establishing shelter medical protocols, and treating shelter animals, the clinic is open to the public for general medical services, low-cost vaccinations, and microchipping of animals. SEAACA budgets $1,000 for Veterinary Services Overtime, $201,500 for maintenance and operations (medical supplies, uniforms and accessories contract services such as oxygen suppliers, medical waste disposal and laboratory diagnostic services), and $50,885 toward retirement benefits. The unit took in close to $400,000 in revenue for vaccines to the public in SEACCA s total Veterinary Services budget: $609,938 SEACCA S Veterinary Services revenues: $775,000 Net Gain $165,062 Marin Humane Society (MHS) The Marin Humane Society s veterinary and shelter medicine program has two separate managers. The Director of Animal Care and Adoptions has a staff that includes one Animal Care Supervisor, eight Animal Care Technicians, one Shelter Medicine Coordinator who tends to shelter animals by performing duties such as feeding, kennel cleaning, and overseeing socialization and exercise of shelter animals. The Director of Customer Services manages the veterinary clinic and employs one full-time veterinarian, who is the Director of Shelter Medicine. This division is also staffed by a part-time veterinarian, a Veterinary Services Supervisor, one Registered Veterinary Technician, and one Veterinary Technician. MHS is in the process of hiring a second full-time veterinarian through a partnership/externship with University of California, Davis Veterinary Shelter Medicine program. MHS has a full-service shelter medicine program that provides in-house spay/neuter surgeries of both shelter and community animals and treatment/vaccinations of all MHS shelter animals. Included is a health evaluation and care for stray, impounded and surrendered animals, guidance by veterinarians for the Animal Care Department, and spaying or neutering all shelter animals prior to adoption. The clinic works extensively with the Foster Care Program to rehabilitate many animals that might otherwise not be considered for adoption and also works closely with the Animal Services (Field Services) Department to evaluate and consult on cruelty and neglect Page 28

29 cases. MHS Animal Care staff also develop veterinary protocols and oversee their implementation within the shelter system. The MHS clinic also provides veterinary care to Marin residents participating in the SHARE Program (Special Human-Animal Relationships). This program allows pet guardians to care for pets of participants when life circumstances make it difficult for them to do it alone. By working with volunteers, participants can arrange for transportation and assistance to respond to their pet s veterinary needs. The veterinarians and clinic staff assist other animal rescue organizations and feral cat colony caretakers by providing discounted spay/neuter surgeries and health care. As part of the K9 Care Fund, the clinic provides vet care and temporary housing to Marin s K9 Police Sheriff & Fire Department public service dogs throughout their lives. The MHS Veterinary Clinic performs low-cost spay/neuter surgeries and micro-chipping for cats and dogs of Marin County residents. In addition, every January, May, August and November, the MHS s Cat Fund, in conjunction with several local veterinarians, provide low-cost spay and neuter surgeries specifically for cats. Other California Jurisdictions According to a report commissioned by San Joaquin County and submitted by Citygate Associates, LLC in March 2008, Contra Costa County, California combines a low-cost spay/neuter clinic with an education program and cooperative relationships with non-profits to lower the number of animals euthanized in the County s shelters annually. Contra Costa County had integrated its animal control programs and the County has service contracts with all but one of the County s 19 cities. The Contra Costa County Animal Services Department has operated a low-cost spay/neuter clinic since 1977 and a public education program since From 1971 to 2006, the number of animals impounded decreased from 53,570 to 14,780 and the number of animals euthanized decreased from 45,689 to 5,451 while the human population increased from 533,800 to 930,570. The human population increased by 74% but the number of animals impounded decreased by 72% and animals euthanized decreased by 88%. Stanislaus County opened a new $8.8 million animal shelter in January, 2011, with the first private spay/neuter clinic within a municipal shelter in California. This venture was made possible through a combining of resources of Stanislaus County and the cities of Modesto, Ceres, Patterson, Hughson, and Waterford. Many communities throughout the State of California have an overpopulation of dogs and cats because of unchecked breeding. San Joaquin County is no exception. The traditional method of dealing with the problem has been to euthanize the surplus animals to make room for the continuous flow of stray and unwanted animals. Page 29

30 Government-run animal control began as a method of rabies and disease control primarily for dogs and cats, but has deteriorated into the euthanasia of hundreds of thousands of surplus animals per year in California alone. California is not the only state with very high euthanasia rates. The problem is pervasive nationwide. Many of these surplus animals are healthy and have suitable personalities for adoption. The core problem is that euthanasia remains a necessity because of unchecked breeding. There simply are not enough permanent homes for all of the animals. In some communities, non-profit organizations such as the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) have partnered with local government to reduce euthanasia rates. Tragically, the rates have not decreased in most communities. One article entitled Spay/Neuter bill merits passage, notes that each year, more than 800,000 dogs and cats are abandoned in California. About half of those animals are euthanized. The California Healthy Pets Act website states that on August 16, 2008, in the 229 days since January 1, 2008, 314,280 animals were killed in California shelters at a cost to tax payers of $156,952, Pet owners often lack discretionary income for expensive spay/neuter surgeries at veterinary offices. Many shelters and non-profit groups have had success in reducing euthanasia numbers by offering voucher programs for free or discounted spay/neuter surgeries. Voucher programs are typically underwritten by grants, fund raising, or the proceeds from differential licensing fees (the government charges more money to license an unaltered animal than an altered animal, and the difference goes toward funding voucher programs.) Dog and cat overpopulation problems are often treated the same even though the problems and challenges are as different as the two species. Some dogs automatically face discrimination because of their breed. Dogs such as American Staffordshire Terriers, commonly known as Pit Bulls, and Rottweilers are often euthanized at shelters at a greater rate than other breeds because of their reputation and fears generated by the breeds and their supposed temperaments. Most communities have a number of thriving feral cat colonies. It is estimated that approximately 70% of the cats killed at animal shelters are feral cats. Feral cats generally fall into two categories: 1) they are born outside and have never lived with humans, or 2) they are companion cats that have strayed from home and over time have become unsocialized to humans. The typical animal control strategy for handling these colonies is to trap the cats when a complaint is received and kill the cats. There are a number of problems with this strategy and statistics prove it will not eliminate or even reduce the populations of the colonies. The proven strategy to reduce or maintain the populations of cat colonies is to utilize volunteers to manage the colonies. Colony management includes trapping the cats, spaying or neutering them, notching their ears for identification as an altered cat, and returning them to the colony to live without reproducing. This practice, known as Trap/Neuter/Return, works because there are no more kittens added to the colony. Eventually, the cats in these managed colonies dwindle and die unless more unaltered cats and kittens are dumped at the sites. The colony s population gradually decreases and the impact on the surrounding area improves. Mating behaviors such as yowling and fighting are greatly reduced. Conversely, when cats are removed from a location and killed, survivors breed to capacity or new cats move in. This vacuum effect is well documented. In the Trap/Neuter/Return program, the cats are also vaccinated to prevent disease Page 30

31 in the colony as well as the community. Trap/Neuter/Return appears to be a much better solution to the euthanasia problem than the prevailing catch and kill strategy. Many communities have taken foundational steps toward addressing the animal overpopulation problem such as re-writing and implementing municipal code and county ordinance sections relating to animal services, adding sections containing differential licensing fees, litter permits, vicious dog language, and other codes intended to assist animal services officers do their jobs more efficiently and effectively. The City of Stockton recently updated its municipal code to give animal services improved tools and funding sources to implement the programs needed. Unfortunately, staff and resources to enforce the codes have not been made available. The 2008 Citygate report lists several strategies for increasing the number of spay/neuter surgeries in a community. These include partnering with veterinary schools, use of volunteer veterinarians, mobile clinics, voucher programs, stationary clinics and providing a shuttle to transport animals to spay/neuter services. Each of the three comparison agencies studied has an in-house clinic and shelter medicine program. The idea of employing a veterinary staff was embraced by the Coordinating Committee members. A committee member who was previously employed by Orange County, where there were three shelter veterinarians on staff, stated that the most cost effective program for sheltering is to have vets on staff rather than contract with private veterinary hospitals. Not only is the veterinary staff used to provide spay/neuter services, but they also developed protocols for improved and efficient sheltering such as cleaning protocols for disease control. Officers in the field can also call the staff veterinarian when faced with handling injured animals. Committee members suggested a possible partnership or externship program with the University of California, Davis veterinary medicine program to provide shelter medicine/veterinary services. The Committee also discussed Stockton and APL s partnership with a local veterinary technician training program, suggesting that if a shelter medicine program could be developed, students could be utilized to assist with observing, handling and treating shelter animals. Consultants Conclusions and Recommendation for Veterinary/Shelter Medicine/Spay and Neuter Services Program The critical component to lowering animal shelter intake and reducing the euthanasia rates is the availability of affordable, or no-cost spay and neuter surgeries for all pet owners regardless of income. It is, therefore, recommended that the participating agencies either expand the existing spay/neuter program at the Stockton shelter or combine resources to open a larger consolidated shelter medicine and spay/neuter clinic until a new shelter is built. Should the participating agencies build a regional shelter, a veterinary clinic offering low-cost spay and neuter services would be included in the design. A shelter medicine clinic would offer immediate relief in two areas. First, the clinic can support implementation of Trap/Neuter/ Return programs for free roaming and feral cats. Second, the clinic can perform spay and neuter surgeries on dogs and cats impounded by participating agencies for a fraction of the cost of private veterinarians. This would lower adoption fees by subtracting the cost of expensive surgeries. Presumably, lower adoption fees will increase the Page 31

32 number of adoptions of shelter animals that would otherwise be euthanized due to lack of shelter space. By offering spay/neuter surgeries at very low cost, participating agencies could apply for grant funding, utilize a portion of differential licensing revenue, and utilize non-profits to raise money to support a voucher program to underwrite surgeries for low income citizens. It is also recommended that a veterinarian be jointly hired by the participating agencies as Shelter Medicine Director to oversee the shelter medicine clinic and develop shelter medicine protocols to be implemented at all shelters within the county. This would involve cleaning procedures, treatment of all incoming animals, including sick and injured as required by California Penal Code Section 597f(b) and Civil Code Section 1834, criteria for all veterinary treatment, vaccines and all aspects of humane animal care. Once procedures have been implemented, this Shelter Medicine Director would visit each shelter regularly to treat animals and train staff. Average veterinarian salaries range from $75,000 to $105,000 depending on experience with an additional 30% for benefits. SEAACA has shown that a veterinary/shelter medicine program with one full-time veterinarian and a small staff can be a money-maker as well as provide spay/neuter service and a shelter medicine program for a shelter program that handles approximately the same number of animals as San Joaquin County jurisdictions combined. Table 10 - Sample Veterinary Services Unit Amount Description Veterinarian $95,000 Veterinary Technicians $192,000 4 RVT positions at $48,000 each Clerk/Receptionist $32,000 Benefits $95,700 estimated at 30% of salary costs Supplies $150,000 medical supplies, uniforms Staff Development $2,000 Contract Services $10,000 emergency med, lab, diagnostics Expense Total $576,700 Potential Revenue ($387,000) vaccine & spay/neuter clinics NET COST $189,700 Details for these figures are outlined on pages in the Appendices A potential yearly expenditure of $189,700 and finding space to make centralized adoption and clinic facilities a reality can change the fate of companion animals in San Joaquin County. As the animal birth rate is reduced, so will costs associated with field services, sheltering, and veterinary care over the next decade. In a depressed economy, partnerships between public agencies and non-profit organizations are crucial to assist with various shelter tasks and spay and neuter programs. Non-profit partners with tax-exempt status have fundraising options not available to public agencies. Non-profits can provide volunteer labor to transport animals to off-site adoption events, assist with shelter Page 32

33 operations, evaluate and socialize the animals housed at the shelters, and manage off-site adoption centers for shelter cats. Non-profit partners are critical to help achieve the goal of pet overpopulation reduction and raise revenue to fund humane programs through donations from the public. In Summary Consultants believe the implementation of a Veterinary/Shelter Medicine/Spay and Neuter Services program in San Joaquin County would provide protocols for shelter operations, assist in reducing pet overpopulation, reduce the euthanasia rate, and provide statutorily required humane medical treatment for shelter animals (see Table 4, Page 13). A small medical staff can significantly improve the lives of animals in our community and can generate revenue if properly run. Utilizing techniques proven successful elsewhere creating and implementing a medicallystaffed shelter medicine program including a spay/neuter clinic to make surgeries more accessible and less expensive, utilizing volunteers to assist with shelter and veterinary clinic operations, implementing a Trap/Neuter/Return program for free-roaming and feral cats, and utilizing a spay/neuter voucher system to assist citizens who do not have the discretionary income to sterilize their animals the goal of significantly reducing the overpopulation of dogs and cats and ultimately shelter intake and euthanasia rates can be accomplished in San Joaquin County. Page 33

34 JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY A Joint Powers Authority (JPA) is an entity permitted under California law (Code Section 6500 found on page 257 in the Appendices) whereby two or more public government agencies or districts operate collectively where the nature of the activity crosses municipal boundaries. The purpose of forming a JPA is the economies of scale or market that can be achieved such as streamlined operating costs or purchasing power. A JPA is distinct from the member agencies and has separate operating boards of directors. These boards can be given any of the powers inherent in all of the participating agencies through its authorizing agreement, which also outlines term, membership and standing orders of the board. The JPA may employ staff and establish policies independently of the member agencies. JPA s in California came about in the s when public agencies were faced with rising insurance costs and little coverage. Private insurance companies were unwilling or reluctant to provide insurance products to public agencies. In the mid-1970 s, the California Legislature amended the Government Code to add the ability for two or more public agencies to join together, under a JPA, to provide more effective and efficient government services or to solve a service delivery problem. With this came the ability to lower premiums to their members and reduce taxpayer dollars. The advantages of forming a JPA are the economies of scale that a larger entity realizes as opposed to numerous smaller entities. These would include reduction of administrative activities, shared resources and equipment, purchasing ability, combined bond pooling, and the ensuing cost savings that can result from more efficient operation. The California Association of Joint Powers Authorities states that when JPA s are formed with an eye towards common geographic, functional and philosophical needs, it allows entities to more efficiently deliver services that meet the needs of the people we serve. The savings of tax dollars, through the use of economies of scale, allow the individual JPA members to deliver a higher level of basic services, such as education, public safety and infrastructure maintenance, to its primary benefactors, the community and its taxpayers. The disadvantages are largely in the form of diminished autonomy and control by the individual member agencies. In the case of animal services if a regional shelter were to be built, there are considerations of increased driving distances for officers and the public, what to do with existing, albeit outdated, shelter buildings, and variances in ordinances in each jurisdiction. Recommendation for a JPA The consultants recommend that San Joaquin County and its cities form a JPA to operate animal services for all of the reasons stated above regarding efficiency and economies of scale. The existing animal service agencies do not operate at the standards for animal welfare that the SPCA, Humane Society of the United States, the National Animal Control Association and the Association of Shelter Veterinarians advocate because of lack of resources, antiquated shelter facilities, and a lack of goals and an underlying mission. Page 34

35 While the police and agriculture departments under which animal services in San Joaquin county agencies operate certainly take this charge seriously, animal issues are not their main focus. The formation of a JPA would create an organization whose primary function is to advocate for the welfare of animals under its care and serve the public s needs. The requirements for formation of a JPA are found in California Government Code Section The code requires that the public agencies create an agreement that states the purpose of the power and the method by which the purpose will be accomplished or the power will be exercised. The agreement must also contain the name of each partner, how the authority will be funded, which member agency will act as treasurer, who will perform annual audits, designate an agency to execute the agreement (a party to the agreement or a commission or board) and term of the agreement. The agreement must be adopted by the boards and councils of each participating agency and filed with the Secretary of State. The agreement would also designate how costs and interests would be divided between participating agencies, as well as formula for updating the division. For the purposes of animal services, it makes sense to use population served and animals handled as a fair method of distributing costs. If the ratio were to be equally split between those two criteria, the cost breakdown is as follows: Table 11 - Agency Cost Percentage Jurisdiction Population Population % Animal Intake Animal Intake % Combined % Lathrop 17, % % 2.66% Lodi 61, % 2, % 9.67% Manteca 67, % 2, % 10.97% San Joaquin County 156, % 3, % 19.99% Stockton 291, % 9, % 45.07% Tracy 81, % 2, % 11.64% TOTAL 675,963 21,152 This is just one example of how costs could be assigned to member agencies. The actual formula used would need to be negotiated between participating agencies. Likewise, should the agencies above choose to opt out of portions of a JPA (shelter services, field services, shelter medicine, adoption, etc.) or the JPA entirely, these ratios, as well as all cost estimates within this report, would need to be adjusted. Because the animal intake numbers could be a result of the number of staff and effort put into enforcement by individual agencies at this time, these percentages should be reevaluated regularly should a JPA be implemented. SEAACA also uses a tiered method of charging each of its member agencies depending on when they came into the JPA. Original members are charged based on a percentage similar to that proposed in this report. Members who request to join the JPA at a later date are charged Page 35

36 additional fees determined by the JPA Board. The consultants recommend that this practice be implemented if a JPA is formed in San Joaquin County to discourage agencies from sitting back and seeing if it works prior to committing to JPA success. JPA Operating Costs The sample operating budget provided is based on salary costs and expenses of the two comparison JPA s, SEAACA and Stanislaus Animal Services Agency, that have animal intake numbers similar to San Joaquin County s. Details are provided in Tables 30 and 32 starting on page 160 in the Appendices. San Joaquin County and participating cities indicated that they collected $667,527 in revenues for FY With the addition of a veterinary clinic and licensing division, the consultants believe that this figure can be increased dramatically. A detailed explanation of potential revenues can be found starting on page 208 in the Appendices. The Shelter Operations expense budget includes funding for 12 Animal Services Technicians to care and feed the animals and clean the kennels areas (including laundry, dishes, disinfecting, etc.). Stanislaus County, as well as Solano County and other animal services agencies, use Alternative Work Program (AWP - inmates) crews supervised by staff to do feeding and cleaning. It is recommended that San Joaquin County agencies also plan to use AWP crews for cleaning and feeding. Use of AWP crews reduces the number of Animal Services Technicians to three, for a cost savings of $315,900. Table 12 - Sample Summary Operating Budget & Revenue Division Staff No. Expenditures Revenue Net Cost (Profit) Administration 4 $874,500 $20,000 $854,500 Field Services 30 FTE $1,740,300 $50,000 $1,690,300 Shelter Operations 16 $796,300 $5,000 $791,300 Adoption Center 3 FTE $131,080 $800,000 ($668,920) Veterinary Center 6 $576,700 $387,000 $189,700 Licensing Center 6 FTE $275,320 $1,000,000 ($724,680) TOTAL 65 FTE $4,394,200 $2,262,000 $2,132,200 Using the cost ratios for each agency from the table above, the following sample net operating cost breakdown for each agency is as follows: Page 36

37 Table 13 Potential Agency Costs Jurisdiction Cost Ratio Net Cost Breakdown Net Cost Breakdown with use of AWP Crews Lathrop 2.66% $56,716 $48,314 Lodi 9.67% $206,184 $175,636 Manteca 10.97% $233,902 $199,248 San Joaquin County 19.99% $426,227 $363,078 Stockton 45.07% $960,982 $818,607 Tracy 11.64% $248,188 $211,417 TOTAL $2,132,200 $1,816,300 Sample Fee Schedule A detailed sample fee schedule is provided in Table 48 on page 205 in the Appendices. Fees are recommended based on existing fees of San Joaquin County agencies and those from the comparison JPA s. Those fees that are significantly higher than existing fees in San Joaquin County could be gradually adopted over a five-year period to minimize the impact on the public until all fees are constant throughout the county. SEAACA s fee schedule has not been used in the comparison because each city that is a member of the JPA adopts its own fee schedule. This is not recommended for a JPA in San Joaquin County due to the difficulty in collections, revenue estimates, and accounting. In Summary Formation of a Joint Powers Authority could allow the County to join with like-minded cities to perform animal services more efficiently and allow for development of humane education, spay/neuter and veterinary programs to reduce pet overpopulation. The efficiencies of shared resources and economies of scale to be realized combined with enhanced veterinary and licensing revenues make such an organizational structure financially viable. Five of the most effective municipal animal service agencies (Santa Cruz, Marin County, SEAACA, Contra Costa County and Stanislaus County) in California have formed JPA s and are effectively and efficiently addressing the problem of pet overpopulation in their communities. Page 37

38 REGIONAL ANIMAL SHELTER Current State of Local Animal Shelters A comprehensive study of the municipal animal shelters in San Joaquin County was conducted in 2000 by George Miers & Associates. Some changes have occurred, but, for the most part, this study is an accurate picture of the shelters. SJ County Animal Control San Joaquin County contracts for shelter services with the City of Stockton. City of Lathrop Animal Services The City of Lathrop contracts for shelter services with the City of Manteca. City of Lodi Animal Services The Lodi shelter was built in the late 1960 s with an addition made in the early 1980 s. It currently houses 48 dog kennels, 24 of which are indoors and 24 are outdoor covered runs. These kennels are used for holding dog and are cordoned off for quarantine and isolation as needed. There are 60 cat cages used for holding that are also moved to quarantine or isolation areas as needed. City of Manteca Animal Services The City of Manteca currently has 12 holding kennels for dogs and four quarantine kennels. They have 38 cat cages and an outdoor pen for livestock. The only change made to the kennel is an added laundry/storage area. The shelter was built in 1974 and is approximately 1,500 square feet not including outdoor kennel areas. The construction is similar to kennels built during this time: concrete block exterior walls on slab with open trench drains, slope roof and no air-handling system. Manteca is in the process of building a new animal shelter. The new shelter will feature 26 stateof-the-art double-sided stainless steel dog kennels and 4 isolation kennels that can house up to 56 dogs. They will be using the 38 cat cages from the existing shelter in the new shelter. City of Stockton Animal Services The original Stockton shelter building was built in 1964 of similar construction to Manteca; concrete block, open trench drains, slope roof and no air-handling system. It is approximately 5,560 square feet not including outdoor kennel areas. A pre-fabricated kennel building was added to the shelter site in The total capacity for dogs at the shelter is 110 indoor kennels, 22 outdoor kennels (which cannot be used in extreme weather), 12 temporary dog drop holding cages and 9 quarantine kennels. There are 64 cat cages and 6 isolation cages for quarantine. Page 38

39 City of Tracy Animal Services Tracy completed a study in December, 2009 ( Animal Control Community Conversation Study for the City of Tracy by Citygate Associates, LLC) that examined their aging animal shelter and made recommendations for a new shelter with veterinary care and a spay/neuter program, and suggested that the city should look for public partners to achieve economies of scale. The existing shelter was built in the early 1970 s of wood framing and masonry block on concrete slab with an office modular building added at a later date. For dogs, the shelter has 20 holding kennels, 3 quarantine kennels, 3 overflow cages and 3 night drop cages for Police Department use. There are 24 cat holding cages and a cat medical treatment area with 8 cages. Animal Shelter Best Practices Municipal animal shelters funded through taxpayer dollars have an expectation placed on them to serve the public s vision of reasonable care for animals and an attempt to reduce the number of animals euthanized in the community. As with all public services, there is an assumed rapid response time to field and telephone calls, assistance with animal-related issues and regulation of animal complaints and cruelty. The animal shelter model of today is dramatically different from those designed in the 1970 s when most of San Joaquin County s shelters were built, largely because animal services have changed over the past forty years. Originally, animal control focused on impounding dogs to protect livestock and prevent the spread of rabies. This is why many county animal agencies are under the jurisdiction of agriculture departments and under police departments in many cities. In the 1970 s, animal welfare groups began to influence the legislation process to change perceived indifferent or inhumane treatment of animals at municipal shelters such as holding animals to give owners time to claim them prior to euthanizing them, banning altitude chambers for euthanasia, and requiring sterilization or spay/neuter deposits prior to adoption. Modern animal shelters are adoption centers, contain spay/neuter and veterinary clinics, have reception areas, classrooms, volunteer offices and are built to be inviting places for the public, not just repositories for unwanted animals. Shelters now have climate control, advanced cleaning and air handling systems and epoxy surfaces for disease control, separate dog and cat holding and quarantine areas, public viewing windows for citizens searching for lost pets or adoptable animals and a myriad of other options depending on the needs of the community. Each of the comparison JPA s have some or all of these features at their shelters. The Marin Humane Society shelter was built on 7 acres in the late 1960 s. The shelter has been determined to have good bones structurally and has been remodeled and added-on to over the past forty years. The shelter is 13,144 square feet with an additional 1,300 square feet in outdoor kennels. There are four quarantine kennels, four isolation kennels, 20 adoption kennels, three outdoor dog exercise areas, three outdoor dog get acquainted rooms, and two indoor dog get acquainted rooms. For cats, there are eight feral cages, eight isolation cages, 20 stray cages, and 32 adoption cages. The stray and adoption cages have plexi-glass and separate cubbyhole areas for hiding and separate area for litter box. They have found that this cage type has cut down on upper Page 39

40 respiratory infections in their cats because they are less stressed and the public can t touch the cats and spread disease. The kennel area has been sealed to make the concrete non-porous and they utilize a SMT (Spray Master Technologies SMT - kennel.htm) power washing system. The agency handled 6,334 animals in Southeast Area Animal Control Authority (SEAACA) in southern California gutted an existing shelter ten years ago and rebuilt it into a state-of-the-art facility. The 17,000 square foot building has 73 dog kennels, 140 cat cages which housed 19,131 animals in The kennel area includes a food prep room, laundry, locker room, break room, freezer, euthanasia room, isolation kennels, storage room and an intake/examination room. The office portion includes 11 offices, a conference room, a large reception area with a separate office and counter for licensing, an intake office, dispatch area, and a copy room. Because the number of animals handled by SEAACA, they are a good model for comparison for San Joaquin County. SEAACA upgrades its shelter as advances in shelter disease control and practices are made. They have made significant additions to mechanical systems since opening their shelter. Air handling systems differ in the kennel areas where no air is recycled and the administrative portion of the building. The air exchanges in the quarantine and veterinary area are higher than the hold area to help contain the spread of disease. They even have an ultra-violet light system in their air ducts to kill germs. The Stanislaus Animal Services Agency (SASA) just opened a new 33,000 square foot shelter in January 2011 (see floor plan on page175 in the Appendices). The cost for the shelter was approximately $8.8 million for a square foot cost of $ including fixtures. They were able to utilize lightly used furniture no longer needed by another county department to save money. The facility has 225 dog kennels and 216 cat cages to house small animals and a barn for larger animals. Sound control, proper air handling equipment, the latest in cleaning systems (SMT), a drainage system through the middle of the kennels, epoxy floor and up eight feet on the walls for disease control are some of the features included in the shelter. The shelter has separate general and adoptable animal holding areas, a veterinary clinic, a detached public low-cost spay/neuter clinic, a public adoption interactive corridor, a public reception area, dispatch, field service and volunteer offices in addition to administrative offices. Stanislaus County utilizes Alternative Work Program (AWP inmates) to clean the kennels and feed the animals each morning before the shelter opens. The crews are overseen by staff and are gone before the public enters. Other shelters use inmate labor for maintenance, landscaping and kitchen work. Solano County had some issues with inmates harassing female volunteers, as well as stealing, and advised that the work performed is sometimes inadequate without proper supervision. They eliminated their AWP program and are in the process of starting up again with Work Release crews instead. Solano County indicated that good supervision is the key to making this type of program work and contract for peace officers to supervise crews on-site. The City of Manteca is in the process of building a small shelter of 6,500 square feet with 26 two-sided kennels four isolation kennels, and 38 cat cages. It will be block construction on slab with a steel roof. The shelter is modeled after the Stanislaus County shelter with epoxy floor and Page 40

41 walls in the kennel area and modern cleaning and drainage systems. The $1.1 million cost is lower than the California average as the shelter has minimal adoption areas, no veterinary clinic, no conference or classrooms, and only one office. Both the cat cages and the furniture will be moved from the old shelter or taken from surplus. Recommendation for a Regional Animal Shelter It is recommended by the consultants that San Joaquin County and cities within the county join together (recommended as a JPA) and build a regional animal shelter as each of the existing animal service JPA s in California have done. All of the shelters in the county, with the exception of a modular addition in Stockton, were built at least 30 years ago and are inefficient, unattractive buildings that 1) don t have non-porous surfaces that help control disease in kennel areas, 2) are difficult to clean, 3) don t provide public viewing of kennels or sufficient adoption and volunteer space, 4) don t provide adequate climate control or air circulation, 5) don t have adequate office space, 6) don t provide space for a veterinary clinic, and 7) were not built with separate areas for cats and dogs, owner surrender, adoptable, quarantine, or puppies and kittens. Older shelters were built to hold large numbers of animals for short periods of time for animal control. Shelter stay duration varies greatly in California, especially due to the fact that the section of the Hayden Bill requiring a minimum of a 6-business day hold has been suspended indefinitely due to the cost, although there is no indication that this requirement will be repealed. The section that requires shelters to give owner-relinquished animals who are not suffering an opportunity for adoption or redemption is still in effect and its mandate to lower euthanasia rates have lengthened holding periods for many animals. Longer holding times increase the potential for disease outbreaks. The recently published Guidelines for Standards of Care in Animal Shelters by the Association of Shelter Veterinarians ( ShelterGuide.pdf) points out that despite the availability of substantial resources to guide shelter operations (SPCA 2009, HSUS 2010, NACA 2009, UC Davis website) deficiencies continue to occur. The shelters in San Joaquin County were not built with non-porous surfaces where germs can be hosed away. Through no fault of their own, staff spends more time cleaning and it is not effective. It is also expensive to medically treat sick animals. Many municipal shelters operate beyond their capacity which results in decreased welfare for the animals in their care and creates a vicious cycle. The Association of Shelter Veterinarians (ASV) contends that efficient population management requires a plan for intentionally managing each animal s shelter stay that takes into consideration the organization s ability to provide care. The factors that weigh into this capacity for care include the number of housing units, the length of stay, the number of staff, staff training and the environment. The National Animal Control Association (NACA) recommends 15 minutes of care for each animal per day within shelters. This is six minutes for feeding and nine minutes for cleaning. With 501 animal housing units reported by San Joaquin County agencies, assuming each at single capacity, this would be 125 hours of care per day or 15 staff members working full time on feeding and cleaning alone. Some of the members of the Coordinating Committee felt that one shelter for the entire county would not serve the community as well as several smaller shelters and there was a concern that the public would not drive to a centralized adoption center. The consultants conclude that it is Page 41

42 inefficient to operate four separate animal shelters and animal service centers in San Joaquin County. Each animal services agency duplicates the efforts of the others and are unable to afford the humane services (veterinary care, adoption/fostering, and education programs) discussed in this report. There is a trade off between the economies of scale realized by running one operation out of one central location and travel expenses to and from this central location to outlying areas of the county. This is a legitimate concern as Animal Services Officers would likely start and end their shift at the shelter with animal transportation to the shelter during their shift. The County officers already deal with this distance issue. It might make sense to utilize existing shelter space as temporary holding areas and transport animals from these satellites to the main shelter at the end of a shift. However, this would add cost due to the necessity to clean additional kennels everyday. The reason that the comparison JPA s utilize single central shelters is because it costs less in the long run to maintain kennels/cages at one location than it saves them in distance convenience. Page 42

43 Table 14 - Comparisons to Other JPA s Jurisdiction Expense Budget Revenue Budget Net Cost Population No. of Staff Animal Intake San Joaquin Co/Cit $3,832,418 $667,527 $3,164, , ,152 SEAACA $4,929,268 $1,415,792 $3,513, , ,370 Stanislaus County $3,281,875 $1,771,438 $1,510, , ,430 Stanislaus County Animal Services (SASA) and SEAACA are good comparison agencies because their animal intake numbers are close to San Joaquin County s. The per capita and per animal costs for each are listed below. A Shelter Floor Plan for the new SASA Shelter can be found on page 175 of the Appendices. Table 15 Per Capita Comparisons Jurisdiction Per Capita Net Cost Staff Per Capita Animal Intake Per Capita San Joaquin Co/Cities $ per 19,593 1 per 32 people SEAACA $ per 12,438 1 per 42 people Stanislaus County $ per 15,686 1 per 23 people While the numbers show different strengths and trends for each community, the main difference is that both SEAACA and Stanislaus County have veterinary medicine programs, spay/neuter clinics and strong adoption and foster programs, while San Joaquin County does not. It appears that the citizens in the JPA s are getting more for their money, largely due to the licensing and vaccine revenues that both JPA s have intentionally hired staff to generate. Shelter Size and Cost None of the existing shelters in the county are large enough to modify into a regional shelter. It is possible that an existing warehouse or large building could be converted into a shelter building but such an extensive modification would have to be weighed against new building costs. A formula for determining initial ballpark shelter size and cost has been developed by Lawrence Gates, Animal Arts: Gates Hafen Cochrae Architects of Colorado, as follows: Page 43

44 Table 16 Shelter Size Formula No. of dogs housed X square feet per dog = Estimated space requirements for dogs* No. of cats housed X square feet per cat = Estimated space requirements for cats* Sum of the above totals = Total building square footage Total building sq ft X Building cost per square foot = Total building cost * square foot allowance is not actual space for kennels; rather a formula that includes comprehensive animal care space requirements such as intake, adoption, medical facilities, etc. The number of animals housed at one time is determined by multiplying the total number of animals handled x the average length of stay (hold time) divided by 365. San Joaquin County animal hold times were not tracked by most agencies and were difficult to determine. The reports that were available indicate that the average hold time for all animals (adoptable vs unadoptable) is 10 days for dogs and 5 days for cats due to the need to keep adoptable animals that have been spayed or neutered longer than average. Calculations for number of animals housed are: Total SJCo Dogs = 9,871 X 10 hold days = 98,710 hold days divided by 365 = Total SJCo Cats = 10,923 X 5 hold days = 54,615 hold days /365 = These numbers also indicate the number of dog kennels and cat cages that would be needed to house the animals in a future shelter. Obviously, the numbers are based on current intake. Future population growth should be offset by implementation of aggressive spay/neuter and adoption programs. Contra Costa County built their shelter using future growth as a factor and then implemented what have proven to be very effective spay/neuter programs resulting in a shelter overbuilt for capacity. Shelter building costs in California today range from $200 to $300 per square foot. Using an average cost of $250 per square foot, the formula for size and cost for a shelter in San Joaquin County is: X 90 square feet per dog = 24,339 sq ft X 45 square feet per cat = 6,733 sq ft Sum of the above totals = 34,072 sq ft 34,072 X $250 = $8,518,000 Page 44

45 Other cost factors would include architect (8%), design and construction oversight and inspection (15%), permitting and environmental studies (3%) and a 20% contingency fund. This would add 46% to the actual construction cost, or $3,918,280 for a total project cost of $12,436,280. An assumption is made here that County- or city-owned land will be used. Additional savings could be realized if some fixtures and furniture could be used from existing facilities. As far as site size required, every zone has different minimum setback requirements. Depending on where the site is, it would likely fall under either Government or Agriculture zoning. Required parking, areas for landscaping, trash enclosures, driveways, etc. would need to be taken into consideration. For a building of this size, a minimum of 2 acres would be the estimate. If there were need to provide on site drainage (retention pond) or any other on-site services (well or septic), the minimum is more likely three acres. To provide a livestock barn and pasture, the minimum would increase to 5 to 6 acres. This is the recommended size to accommodate livestock. One consideration in site selection is the Pet Prison Partnership Program ( com) where inmates and homeless animals are teamed up for rehabilitation for both the offender and animal who is trained and, therefore, more adoptable. A shelter built near the County Honor Farm and Women s Jail or near any new prison facility could implement such a program. Based on the formula for dividing costs between participating agencies in a potential JPA from the Table 11 on page 35, the capital costs for each agency would be as follows: Table 17 San Joaquin Agency Share of Potential Capital Cost Jurisdiction JPA Ratio Shelter Contribution Lathrop 2.66% $330,712 Lodi 9.67% $1,202,904 Manteca 10.97% $1,363,785 San Joaquin County 19.99% $2,485,535 Stockton 45.07% $5,605,442 Tracy 11.64% $1,447,902 TOTAL $12,436,280 As with the sample operating budget in the previous section, should an agency opt out of the shelter portion of a potential JPA or the JPA entirely, both the ratios and the shelter cost would need to be adjusted. SEAACA financed the remodel of their shelter with a leasing company who funded the improvements and amortized the pay back through the life of the lease. JPA s also have bonding capacity and a municipal bond could fund the cost of a shelter. Capital costs could be funded by a combination of up front input by those agencies that have the money now and leasing or Page 45

46 bonding through the JPA with lease or debt payments built into the operating contributions of those agencies that choose to borrow. The SASA Animal Services Facility project was financed using funds from Stanislaus County's 2006 Tobacco endowment fund. The partner cities and the County will repay this debt over a 25-year period at the cost of lost interest earnings for this fund. The annual debt service costs are based upon the respective member agencies intake percentage of animals into the Animal Services Facility. The total estimated project cost for the development and construction of the new regional Animal Services Facility was $8.8 million. Originally it was estimated to be closer to $11 million. The costs provided here are estimates based on industry standards to give decision makers some basis to determine whether this community will upgrade to regional services that consider best practices in animal services or continue to provide the existing level of service. Table 18 - Shelter Services Unit Amount Description Shelter Supervisor $40,000 Sr Animal Services Technician $33,000 Animal Services Technicians Clerk/Receptionist $324,000 $64, at $27,000 each* $32,000 each Benefits $138,300 estimated at 30% of salary costs Supplies $90,000 shelter, custodial, euth, food, uniforms Staff Development Shelter Maintenance $2,000 $15,000 Utilities $90,000 Expense Total $796,300 Potential Revenue $5,000 euthanasia, quarantine, surrenders NET COST $791,300 Details for these figures are outlined on pages in the Appendices * Reduce this number to 3 AS Technicians if AWP crews are used for cleaning & feeding; cost savings would be $315,900 for a total net cost of $475,400 In Summary Just as municipal animal care administration can be more efficiently performed by combining resources in a JPA, housing of animals and public services in a single location will also streamline operations and allow for more programs to be offered. Although it remains to be seen if a centralized location will work for all of the participating agencies, it is clear that economies of scale have saved money in other counties. The existing shelters in our county are in need of replacement. It makes sense to build one modern facility that better meets the needs of the public, staff and the animals. Page 46

47 ANIMAL FIELD SERVICES The San Joaquin County Animal Services agencies participating in this study each operate a Field Services Program. San Joaquin County, Stockton and Lathrop Field Services officers work exclusively in the field handling calls for service and field duties. Lodi, Manteca and Tracy officers have both field and shelter operations duties. The comparison JPA Field Services officers only handle calls for service and field duties and have no shelter operations duties. Support staff for Field Services officers (officers) varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Support staff includes dispatchers, call takers (answer telephone or computer service requests or questions from the public), and data entry and processing staff. Only Stockton Animal Services has a dedicated dispatcher for officers. Most agencies within San Joaquin County utilize a combination of police dispatchers and animal services employees to answer calls. All the JPA agencies studied have dedicated Animal Services dispatchers. JPA agencies vary in assigning employees to answer the telephones. Only SEAACA has a 24/7 Field Services Unit when they are fully staffed. All other agencies examined rely upon local law enforcement dispatchers and police agencies to handle animal services field calls after hours (when animal services personnel are not on duty). Management of Field Services programs also varies from agency to agency, and from San Joaquin County agencies to the JPA s. Most San Joaquin County agencies operate under the authority of the local police departments and have oversight from police managers, usually a captain or lieutenant. All of these police managers allocate only a percentage of their time to managing Animal Services divisions. All of the police managers have other responsibilities in addition to Animal Services oversight. Lathrop Animal Control does not operate under police department authority. San Joaquin County s Animal Control Division formerly operated under the authority of the Agricultural Commissioner. The Assistant Agricultural Commissioner provided part-time management oversight of the County Animal Services Manager. The Division was recently reassigned to the Sheriff s Office. Lathrop s Animal Services officers fall under the authority of the Community Services Department of the City of Lathrop. Their manager is the Director of the Neighborhood and Community Services Department. All of the comparison JPA s employ Executive Directors. Additional management positions at all levels of the organizations are specific to animal sheltering and control (field services). Current State of Field Services Programs The results from Coordinating Committee discussions coupled with survey data regarding animal control efforts are as follows: SJ County Animal Control San Joaquin County Animal Control does not operate an animal shelter; therefore, the officers duties are related to handling calls for service and field duties specific to animal control. San Page 47

48 Joaquin County Animal Control is also the agency in San Joaquin County responsible for handling Rabies Control Enforcement. On May 23, 2011, San Joaquin County Animal was moved to the Sheriff s Office. Data in this study reflect Animal Control operations under the purview of the Agricultural Commissioner s Office. The Division is staffed by one Animal Services Manager (Field Manager/Supervisor) and has six officer positions allocated. Five of those positions are currently filled. Staffing also includes one Senior Office Assistant. San Joaquin County Animal Control does not have a dedicated dispatcher. The Senior Office Assistant is responsible for clerical support that includes processing bite reports, barking dog letters, warning notices, triaging incoming calls, and summarizing Sheriff s Office reports into the Chameleon Database. When officers are in the office, they are provided hard copies of any calls for service that are holding. When officers are in the field, their calls are dispatched by radio. San Joaquin County Animal Control officers do not have computers in their vehicles. Officers enter data into the Chameleon Database when they are in the office or at the end of their shift. The Senior Office Assistant answers the telephone, records calls and dispatches them when officers are on duty. When Animal Control staff are not on duty, the telephone calls are answered by the Sheriff s Office telecommunications center. If emergency calls come in afterhours, they are either handled by Sheriff s deputies, or an Animal Control officer is called in. Most non-emergency calls received during non-business hours are transferred to a voice mail system. The Senior Office Assistant retrieves the messages and dispatches them for service during business hours. Officers receive stand-by pay when on call during non-business hours. They are compensated at 20% of their regular hourly wage every hour they are on stand-by. If called in for an emergency, they are paid overtime at 1 ½ times their hourly rate. They receive three hours minimum pay even if the call takes less than three hours to complete. If the call takes more than three hours to complete, they are paid for actual time worked. If they are called in within the first hour after completing their shift, they are not paid the three hours minimum; instead, they are paid for actual hours worked including the first hour. Hours of operation for San Joaquin County Animal Control vary with the season of the year. During the fall and winter, officers are on duty Monday-Friday from 0700 hours to1700 hours. During the spring and summer, officers are on duty Monday-Friday from 0700 hours to 1900 hours. Officers work eight-hour days with one-hour lunch breaks. Shift times are staggered to provide coverage for ten hours per weekday in the fall and winter and twelve hours per weekday in the spring and summer. San Joaquin County officers address the majority of their calls for service on a daily basis, but on occasion low priority calls are carried over to the following working day. Page 48

49 San Joaquin County officers perform chemical capture 1 and carry the requisite equipment. Their arsenal also contains firearms including seven Ruger Mini-14 s with scopes, one Ruger.22 caliber rifle with scope, shotguns, one Magnum.22, one tranquilizer pump rifle, and two tranquilizer pump handguns. Officers do not carry side arms, but do carry OC (Oleoresin Capsicum) pepper spray, and bite sticks. 2 City of Lathrop Animal Services The City of Lathrop Neighborhood and Community Services Department/Animal Services Division does not operate an animal shelter. Officers duties are related to handling calls for service and field duties specific to animal control. Lathrop s Animal Services Division is staffed by two Animal Services officers and one Animal Services Assistant. The program is managed by the Director of the Neighborhood and Community Services Department, who also currently serves as the Interim Director of the Parks and Recreation and Human Resources Departments. Lathrop Animal Services Division does not have a dedicated dispatcher. Officers and the Animal Services Assistant all perform dispatch and data entry duties. All Animal Services Division personnel, including the Director, perform data entry duties in the Chameleon database that is utilized by Lathrop Animal Services. Officers have computers in their vehicles. When Lathrop Animal Services Division personnel are not on duty, animal-related calls are handled by Lathrop Police Services. Lathrop Police officers are San Joaquin County Sheriff s deputies that are contracted to perform as Lathrop Police officers. When Lathrop Animal Services officers are not on duty, Lathrop Police Services assesses the situation. If the call is deemed an emergency, Lathrop Animal Services officer(s) are called out. No routine animalrelated services are performed during Animal Services non-business hours. Hours of operation for Lathrop Animal Services vary with the season of the year. During the summer, Animal Services Officers are on-duty Monday-Saturday from 0700 hours to1900 hours. During the winter, Animal Services Officers are on-duty from 0700 hours to1800 hours. Lathrop Animal Services Division is closed on Sundays. Lathrop Animal Services officers perform chemical capture and have access to equipment to carry out chemical capture. They also carry OC pepper spray and bite sticks. They do not carry firearms. 1 Chemical Immobilization Capture or chemical capture is the method utilized to capture animals when all other methods have failed. The decision to utilize chemical capture is based on the need to capture the animal, the species, and its condition. The objective is to capture the animal while inflicting the least amount of pain, injury or stress. Chemical capture is carried out by using a controlled substance that is carried by a projectile, dart, needle, syringe, propellant, projectile or firearm to immobilize the animal. 2 Bite sticks are tactical (collapsible) batons. The ease of carry and lightweight, makes the tactical baton or "bite stick" an impact weapon that is both convenient and tactically effective for use by Animal Control Officers. This weapon is normally illegal to carry in California, however may be carried by animal control officers under the authority of section 12002(a) of the California Penal Code. (See Appendices for text of 12002(a) PC). Page 49

50 City of Lodi Animal Services The City of Lodi Animal Services Division is staffed by one Animal Services Supervisor, two Assistant Animal Services Officers, and two Kennel Assistants. The Animal Services Supervisor is currently filled by an Acting Animal Services Supervisor and they are carrying one Assistant Animal Services Officer vacancy. The Division is managed by a Police Lieutenant, who does not act as a full-time animal services manager. As mentioned earlier in this report, Lodi has a unique relationship with Lodi Shelter People Assisting Lodi Shelter (PALS) to perform all adoption, fostering and placement of animals. Because the City of Lodi contracts with Lodi PALS for all adoptions, licensing, revenue collection, and coordination with rescue groups, officers are able to focus on animal control work without the burden of sheltering issues. Lodi Animal Services officers are dispatched by the Lodi Police Department Telecommunications Center. Officers do answer some telephone calls. The City of Lodi uses a combination of the Police Department s Computer-Aided Dispatch (CAD) system and OSSI/Vangard database systems. Animal-related calls for service in Lodi are handled by the Police Department when there are no Animal Services officers on duty. Lodi Animal Services officers are on a 9/80 work schedule. They work eight ten-hour shifts with a one hour unpaid lunch, and one nine-hour day with a one hour unpaid lunch. One officer works from 0700 hours to 1700 hours, while the other officer works 0800 hours to 1800 hours. Two officers work Tuesday through Saturday with every other Tuesday off, in addition to Sunday and Monday, which are normal days off. The remaining officer and the Acting Supervisor work Monday through Friday with opposite Friday s off and every Saturday and Sunday off. Officers are on call for emergencies during non-business hours. They rotate on call assignments, with each officer on call for two weeks at a time. When officers are on call, they get $25.00 per week as stand-by pay. If they are called in, they receive a minimum of three hours pay at 1 ½ times their hourly wage. Lodi Animal Services officers perform chemical capture and have access to equipment to carry out chemical capture. They also carry handcuffs, OC pepper spray and bite sticks, but do not carry firearms. Lodi officers have computers in their vehicles. City of Manteca Animal Services The City of Manteca Animal Services Division is staffed by two Animal Services officers and one part-time kennel assistant. In addition to animal control, the Animal Services officers are also responsible for all duties related to maintaining and running the City of Manteca s Animal Shelter and clerical duties, such as licensing. The Animal Services Division operates under the authority of the police department and has oversight from a Police Captain. The Captain allocates a percentage of time managing Animal Services. Call taking and dispatch responsibilities are handled by the Manteca Police Department Dispatch Center. If someone calls the Manteca Animal Shelter with a field call for service, they are transferred to the Manteca Police Department Dispatch Center. Manteca Animal Services Division utilizes the Petwhere database software, which is no longer sold or supported. The Page 50

51 database can be converted, if necessary, to the Shelter Pro database system. Manteca Animal Services Officers do not have computers in their vehicles. Manteca s Animal Shelter is open Tuesday through Saturday from 1000 hours to 1645 hours, and is closed on Sundays and Mondays. Two officers are on duty from 0800 hours to 1700 hours. When the Animal Services Division is open, one officer staffs the Shelter while the other handles calls for service. If there is a need for animal services staff assistance after hours, one of the officers is called in. Manteca Animal Services Officers do not perform chemical capture or carry firearms or OC pepper spray. They do carry bite sticks. City of Stockton Animal Services The City of Stockton Animal Services Section consists of personnel dedicated to shelter operations and Animal Services officers who handle calls for service and related field duties. Staffing currently includes four Animal Services officers and one Senior Animal Services officer. The number of officers is down significantly due to budget cuts. In the FY , Stockton Animal Services had seven Animal Services positions and operated seven days per week. The Animal Services Supervisor position is currently unfilled; therefore, the Senior Animal Services Officer is handling some of those duties and rarely works in the field. The Animal Services Division is managed by a Police Lieutenant, who has other assigned policing duties in addition to the duties at the Animal Services Division. Stockton Animal Services has one dedicated dispatcher. Shelter staff members, volunteers, and officers fill in when the dispatcher is off duty or not available. When Animal Services officers are not on duty, the Stockton Police Department handles animal-related calls for service and the Police Telecommunications Center answers the animal services-related telephone calls. The Animal Services Section utilizes the Chameleon database, while the Telecommunications Center uses the Tiburon Computer-Aided Dispatch System. Stockton Animal Services officers have both radios and computers in their vehicles. Although Stockton officers do not receive stand-by pay, they can be called in after-hours if a call for service is received that police officers are not equipped to handle. If called in, Animal Services Section personnel are compensated a 1½ times their hourly rate of pay for a minimum of two hours and forty-five minutes or actual time worked, whichever is greater. Stockton Animal Services officers currently work Monday through Friday from 0700 hours to 1700 hours with a one-hour unpaid meal break. They work four nine-hour days and eight hours on Friday, with alternating Fridays off. Stockton officers perform chemical capture and have access to equipment to do so. They do not carry firearms, but do carry OC pepper spray and bite sticks. City of Tracy Animal Services The City of Tracy Animal Services Division is staffed by one Animal Services Supervisor and four Animal Services officers. Tracy Animal Services is a division of the Tracy Police Page 51

52 Department and is managed by a Police Captain. The Animal Services Division is just one of the management duties assigned to the Captain. The City of Tracy also operates an animal shelter that is staffed by the Animal Services officers. Officers are responsible for handling calls for service, as well as maintaining the shelter and all related clerical duties. The majority of the calls for service are handled by the Tracy Police Dispatch Center. Calls sometimes come directly to the animal shelter where they are answered by Animal Services personnel and relayed to the Police Dispatch Center. Tracy Animal Services does not have an official stand-by policy for handling calls for service during non-business hours. If a call for service needs to be handled by an Animal Services Officer, an officer is called in and paid overtime. Tracy Animal Services does not have a standby or callback policy. Their officers are paid a minimum of two hours overtime at time and a half if they are called in to handle an animal control matter when it is not contiguous to their work hours. Tracy Animal Services Officers have computers in their vehicles, but they are only compatible with the Computer-Aided Dispatch software and not the Chameleon Animal Services database. This means the computers are used for dispatching and viewing call information, but data entry into the Animal Services database must be done at the Animal Shelter. Tracy Animal Services personnel work seven days a week from 0730 hours to1800 hours. Staffing includes two officers on Tuesdays, Thursdays, Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays, and one officer on Mondays and Wednesdays. The Animal Shelter is open Tuesday through Sunday from 1200 hours to 1730 hours. Officers leave the shelter when calls for service are pending; however, when the shelter is open, at least one officer staffs the shelter. Tracy Animal Services officers do not perform chemical capture, nor do they carry firearms, OC pepper spray or bite sticks. Table 19 - Current Officers Assigned* Agency Mon Tues Weds Thurs Fri Sat Sun Lathrop Lodi Manteca San Joaquin County Stockton Tracy TOTAL *Some officers have both field and shelter responsibilities. Only Tracy staffs on Sunday. Page 52

53 Calls for Service Data Data collection from the participating agencies to analyze the calls for service was inconsistent due to a number of factors. Of the six agencies studied, four use the Chameleon Data Base to track their activities. Because only Stockton has a dedicated dispatcher and Stockton only has one dispatcher, all Chameleon agencies except Lathrop use a combination of the Chameleon Dispatch Module and Law Enforcement Dispatching. All agencies except Lathrop also utilize law enforcement officers to respond to animal-related calls for service and the best data the law enforcement agencies were able to provide were raw numbers of calls handled by law enforcement agency personnel versus those handled by animal control personnel. Most members of the coordinating committee agreed that there is currently no accurate way to reflect total calls for service in San Joaquin County. For these reasons, calls for service data is included to give the reader a general idea of the number and types of calls handled on a daily basis, but the data could not be used to make recommendations on the number of personnel needed to consistently handle calls for service. See Calls For Service/Deployment charts starting on page164 in the Appendices. What California Joint Power Authority s (JPA s) are Doing Santa Cruz Animal Services Authority (SCASA) SCASA Field Services is managed by a Supervising Field Manager who oversees the work of one Lead Animal Control officer, five full-time Animal Control officers, two part-time Animal Control officers (currently unfunded) and one full-time dispatcher. The Field Manager reports directly to the General Manager (Executive Director) and is responsible for management oversight of all animal control, field, licensing, and rabies control programs. SCASA provides animal control field services seven days per week. Their officers perform chemical capture. Officers do not carry side arms, but do carry OC pepper spray and bite sticks. Southeast Area Animal Control Authority (SEAACA) SEACCA s Field Operations Division falls under the management oversight of the Director of Operations, who also oversees shelter operations. The Director of Operations reports to the Executive Director. The Field Operations Division consists of one Sergeant, who is the line supervisor, one Animal Control Corporal, two Senior Animal Control officers and 17 Animal Control officers. The Corporal is responsible for participating in and overseeing investigations. The Sergeant is responsible for SEAACA s fleet management. SEAACA has two dispatchers, with personnel performing dispatch duties from 0800 to 2000 hours. There are six clerk/cashiers that assist with answering phones and filling in at dispatch. Dispatchers and Clerk/Cashiers fall under the supervision of the Shelter Operations Lead Animal Care Technician (ACT.) During times SEAACA dispatchers are off-duty, the Los Angeles Animal Control dispatch center contracts to answer the telephone and dispatches calls for service. When fully staffed, SEAACA Field Services Division operates 24-hours per day, 7 days per week. When positions are unfilled, the graveyard shift is not staffed. When there are no graveyard shift officers, the remaining officers rotate daily for stand-by. Officers typically are Page 53

54 on stand-by one night per week. They receive one hour of straight time salary for being on stand-by. For each phone call they answer, they receive 15 minutes pay. If they respond from home they get straight time from the time they respond to the time they return home. SEAACA Animal Control Officers work eight-hour shifts and rotate their days/hours worked every three months. SEAACA offers participating agencies to contract for an assigned animal control officer. If an agency chooses this option, an increased fee is charged, but they have the services of an officer forty hours per week and the same officer is assigned from week to week in order to provide consistency of service to the agency. SEAACA officers operate Ford F250 Xtra Cab trucks with climate-controlled compartments for the animals. They carry OC pepper spray, bite sticks and handcuffs. They do not carry side arms, but do perform chemical capture and have access to chemical capture equipment. They are required to attend eight hours of bite stick update training per year, and 1 to 2½ hour monthly meetings where advanced training is conducted. SEAACA also has a Licensing Services Division which consists of one Licensing Supervisor, who reports to the Director of Operations, four Licensing Clerks and twelve part-time Licensing Canvassers. Stanislaus Animal Services Agency The Stanislaus Animal Services Agency (SASA) is the newest JPA studied for comparison. SASA was established in SASA has 31 employees, five of whom are Animal Control Officers who handle calls for service in the field. During business hours, SASA has one dispatcher and two clerks that field telephone calls and dispatch calls for service. SASA utilizes a Chameleon Animal Services database. When there are no Animal Control officers on-duty, an officer is assigned to be on-call. Oncall pay ranges from $3 to $4 per hour. If the officer is actually called to work, they receive a minimum of two hours pay at 1½ times their hourly wage. SASA maintains a proactive licensing enforcement program which employs four full-time license canvassers. SASA Animal Control officers do not carry side arms, but do carry OC pepper spray and bite sticks. Marin Humane Society (MHS) The Marin Humane Society Animal Control staff is managed by an officer holding the rank of Captain, who reports directly to the Executive Director. The mid-manager holds the rank of Lieutenant and the supervisor holds the rank of Sergeant. The lead Animal Control officer holds the rank of Corporal. MHS has six Animal Control officers and two part-time Field Technicians. Page 54

55 Field Technicians handle calls for service that do not require the services of an Animal Control officer, such as picking up dead animals and transporting animals from place to place. The MHS JPA contract requires that MHS provide for a minimum of 32 staff hours covering the County during each 24-hour period, five days per week. On weekends and major holidays, MHS is required to provide 24 animal control staff hours during each 24-hour period. MHS is required to maintain a licensing compliance program and to conduct one license amnesty effort per contract year. MHS is also required by contract to carry out investigations and activities regarding Rabies Control in conjunction with the County Health Officer. The County provides dispatching services through the Marin County Sheriff s Department without cost to the JPA, although MHS Field Services Division has a dispatcher that fields and dispatches calls for service during business hours. Since forming the JPA, uniform County Ordinances were adopted by each of the agencies participating in the JPA. San Joaquin County Coordinating Committee Discussion Members of the Coordinating Committee talked about whether or not a consistent ordinance would be necessary if multiple jurisdictions formed a JPA. SEACCA did not pass an overriding ordinance. SEACCA officers are assigned to each city and carry cheat sheets for situations that overlap jurisdictions. MHS, on the other hand, has a Countywide Animal Control Ordinance that was adopted by each participating jurisdiction which allows officers to enforce one set of local ordinances. Although a countywide ordinance would be simplest, if it is not possible, it is workable without one. The group discussed the individual agencies abilities to provide information regarding calls for service. Four of the six participating agencies use the Chameleon database, although it was unclear whether or not they applied the data consistently. It became clear that the consultants would not be able to compare call data when each agency has different methods of tracking and dispatching calls for service. The group discussed what is available from each of their data collection methods and settled on attempting to get information for calendar year 2010, in quarterly reports. It was hoped that it could be determined if call load varies greatly by season. The consultants goal will be to make recommendations for Field Services staffing that will offer each jurisdiction at least as much coverage as they have now, and, hopefully, seven-day a week expanded coverage. The group spent some time trying to assess how much of Animal Services officers time is actually spent handling calls for service and animal control-related duties. It was noted that in three of the participating agencies Animal Control 0fficers split their time in the field with at least some time being spent handling shelter operations responsibilities (Lodi, Manteca and Tracy). Page 55

56 Recommendation for Field Services The animal services and control agencies studied vary greatly in the staffing models they employ. For purposes of these recommendations, Animal Control Officers are officers who are not Peace Officers, but may exercise the powers of arrest of a peace officer as specified in California Penal Code Section 836 and the power to serve warrants as specified in California Penal Code Sections 1523 and 1530 during the course and within the scope of their employment, if those officer successfully complete a training course in the exercise of those powers pursuant to California Penal Code Section 832, and are specialists in field work consisting of handling calls for service, issuing citations and administrative notices to violators, conducting humane investigations, conducting follow-up inspections, and proactively patrolling to advocate for responsible pet ownership, and do not have ancillary duties in shelter operations or licensing canvassing. The challenges in designing an Animal Control Field Program for San Joaquin County include the large geographic area to be covered, the combination of urban and rural settings, and the difficulty in evaluating current call loads of the agencies studied. According to the Animal Control Program Analysis for the County of San Joaquin Final Report filed March 14, 2008, the average staffing model consists of between 16,000 and 18,000 citizens per officer. Using this model with the 2009 human population of 675,963 reported by participating agencies, the number of Animal Control officers for this program would be between 37 to 42 officers. This number is clearly not feasible from a budgetary perspective. One method of designing an Animal Control Field Program is the Calls for Service model outlined by the National Animal Control Association (NACA), as follows: Determining the number of officers requires an assessment of citizen calls, officerinitiated calls, citations, written warnings, assisting outside agencies, the need for safety and security, a flexible beat structure, time spent on investigations, preventive patrol time and the specific types of service that the public wants and expects. The basic elements of the calls for service model are as follows: Each 8-hour Animal Control position requires 2,920 hours to fill one shift for 365 days. Officer availability for staffing is determined by deducting from 2,080 hours (the maximum for one year), and the time required for vacation, sick leave, court time, flex days and training. In using this model, the average number of hours dedicated to Animal Control for Animal Control will be 1,832 hours (a standardized ratio), or 229 days. Determine the relief factor (relating to the number of officers needed to fill one position for the entire year) by dividing the number of days of work required for each beat area in a year (365) by the average number of days officers actually work in a year. In using this ratio, the 365 divided by 229 = 1.60 officers per day, per beat area Page 56

57 Agencies in San Joaquin County currently assign 19 officers and 4 supervisors or lead employees to Field Services. As mentioned above, some of these officers and supervisors also have ancillary responsibilities such as staffing animal shelters, working the counter for duties such as answering phones and licensing animals, and supervisory responsibilities such as payroll, scheduling, performance monitoring and evaluation, and handling citizen complaints. Of the agencies participating in this study, only the City of Tracy provides animal control services seven days per week. Lathrop and Lodi provide coverage six days per week, with no coverage on Sundays. Due to budget constraints the City of Stockton and San Joaquin County only provide service on weekdays. The consultants recommend that animal control coverage should be provided seven days per week. The following recommendations are made keeping in mind that these are absolutely minimum staffing levels, and they should be analyzed and adjusted as justified by analysis of calls for service as it come available and as revenue is generated to fund staffing increases. Field Services Recommendation 1 Procure a Comprehensive Animal Care and Control Database and train all employees in its use, so the data entry is consistent and accurate. A database designed for animal sheltering and control should be utilized to track all activities of the Animal Services Authority. For purposes of this section, the dispatch and investigation modules should be utilized so that accurate tracking of types of calls for service, as well as response times, total time spent on calls, time spent on investigation and follow-up investigation, report writing and transportation are all tracked. Tracking of types of calls for service including domestic animal calls versus livestock and wildlife calls would also be beneficial. At this time, no data is available on the number and type of calls involving livestock handled. Field personnel should have computers in their vehicles that are linked to the database and allows them to communicate with dispatchers and each other without tying up the radio, and allows them to perform data entry and report writing in the field. Field Services Recommendation 2 Hire two (2) full-time and two (2) part-time dispatchers, and create a functional phone tree and message system. Employees familiar with the unique issues related to Animal Control calls for service should be on duty any time animal control officers are in the field. When officers are on duty, it is imperative that someone is monitoring their status for officer safety reasons. Also, some calls regarding animal control, such as answering questions related to the vaccinating and licensing of animals, as well as searching for lost animals can be triaged on the telephone and may save a call from being dispatched. Animal control calls differ from police and fire calls in that the calls rarely involve a lifethreatening emergency, although the calls are frequently emotionally charged. One dispatcher Page 57

58 can adequately handle the dispatching of the number of units recommended here, although assistance will be needed to answer the telephone during heavy call load times. One to two parttime dispatcher(s) that can fill in on days when a full-time dispatcher is not on duty and provide additional coverage for breaks and answering the telephones, coupled with assistance from clerk/receptionists would adequately handle the telephone calls and requests for information from the public. Field Services Recommendation 3 Hire a Director of Operations for management oversight of animal control and field services. Best practices in animal control and sheltering are unique and constantly evolving concepts. Animal control in San Joaquin County currently operates under an old model in which animal services are provided as a division or section of another government department. While animal control officers must be trained in municipal and county ordinances and various government codes of regulation, the focus of the comparison agencies is animal service and treating the causes of animal control problems, rather than treating the symptoms of the problem. The San Joaquin County Community Development Department is forecasting that the human population of San Joaquin County will hit 1,000,000 people by Using the formula by the American Veterinary Medical Association pet population calculators (the same formula used in Table 34 on page 162), and making no significant changes to the way San Joaquin County operates animal care and control, the dog population will be 252,800, the cat population will be 285,200 and the horse population will be 25,200 by the year This forecast illustrates the need for a dedicated Director of Operations who is cognizant of issues specific to animal care and control. Current circumstances warrant the formation of an independent agency to address the issues specific to animal care and control. A Director of Operations for an agency the size recommended in this report could effectively handle the management of Field Services, as well as Shelter Operations, Veterinary Operations, Adoptions and Licensing. Field Services Recommendation 4 Staff the Field Services Division with one Field Supervisor, two Lead Animal Control Officers, twenty Animal Control Officers, and four Animal Services Technicians. The staffing model recommended is the minimum number of field services staff the consultants believe would be needed in order to effectively provide animal control services to the areas studied. The assumptions made for field services and animal control are that service is provided seven days per week, twelve hours per day. Refer to Appendix Table 43 on page 167 for model schedules based upon deployment of staff working ten- or twelve-hour shifts. Each of the model schedules assumes deployment of personnel will be in a two-team format. Each team works as 4 Page 58

59 group with opposing two day off sequences. The exception is on Wednesday for the ten-hour shift schedule model presented. The Twelve-Hour Shift plan allows staff two full weekends and one partial weekend off during each four-week cycle. Because officers work twelve-hour shifts, in order to work 40 hours per week, four hours must be made up. For purposes of the model schedule, personnel were assigned to work staggered four-hour shifts with a skeleton crew one Sunday per month (this skeleton shift could be substituted for a Holiday as opposed to a Sunday when prudent.) Some of the advantages of twelve-hour shifts are that 1) full-staffing for twelve hours per day is provided, 2) each day off sequence team works for exactly half of the time that Field Services is on-duty, so desirable weekend days off are divided equally, and 3) staff never works more than three days in a row. A disadvantage of twelve-hour shifts is staff fatigue. Assuming personnel get eight hours of sleep per night, they only have four hours a day for personal time on days they are assigned to work. Personnel take ½ hour paid meal breaks during their shifts. The Ten-Hour Shift plan is the plan currently being utilized by a number of policing agencies in San Joaquin County including the Lodi Police Department, San Joaquin County Sheriff s Office, and the Stockton Police Department. Employees like this work schedule because it gives them set weekdays, as well as every other weekend off. Employees get two long four-day weekends per month. Ten-hour shifts are reasonable and the expectation is that employees work in a ½ hour paid meal break while in the field. This staffing model schedules all employees to work on Wednesdays. This can be beneficial because training can be conducted for half the employees on this day while the other half work the field. Later that day, the remaining employees attend training while the first group covers the field. This model also allows for special assignments such as follow-up investigations, proactive work and inspections to be conducted on Wednesdays. Table 20 - Proposed Field Services Staff Assignments Position Mon Tues Weds Thurs Fri Sat Sun Lead Officer Officers Technicians Dispatcher TOTAL Both staffing models call for one Lead Officer per team, while the Field Services Supervisor works a standard Monday-Friday 0800 hours to 1700 hours shift with a one hour unpaid lunch. This allows for the supervisor to work with both teams of personnel. The supervisor is responsible for scheduling leave, payroll, overseeing investigations, reviewing reports for consistency and accuracy, recommending and conducting training, investigating citizen complaints, and performance evaluation among other duties. Page 59

60 Because the supervisor is not always on-duty when Field Services staff are working, Lead Officers must be trained to assist the Supervisor and handle some supervisory duties when the Supervisor is not working. For these reasons, the Lead Officers are not assigned a specific beat or area to patrol, rather they are free to use their discretion to work with the dispatcher and handle calls for service as needed. This staffing model also calls for two Animal Services Technicians per team. Animal Services Technicians are field personnel who do not have the requisite training of the Animal Control Officer. Technicians can perform duties not requiring the expertise and authority of an officer, such as picking up dead animals, travelling throughout the county to work as a transport vehicle, and taking custody of non-threatening animals so the Animal Control Officers can remain in their assigned beat or area, rather than spend driving time transporting animals to the Shelter. Table 21 - Sample Beat Configuration 2 Shifts of one Lead Officer, 10 Officers, 2 Technicians, and one Dispatcher Beat Area Call Sign Lead Officer At Large, Patrol as Needed. Lead A or Lead B Officer 1 Northwest-North of Eight Mile Rd., west Northwest of Hwy 99, Woodbridge, Terminous, Thornton, Acampo, Lodi Overlap. Officer 2 Lodi City Footprint. Lodi Officer 3 Northeast-North of Eight Mile Rd., east of Hwy 99, Victor, Lockeford, Clements, Northeast Officer 4 Officer 5 Lodi Overlap. Stockton-Northwest, north of Calaveras River, west of El Dorado St. to west City Limits. Stockton-Northeast, north of Calaveras River, east of El Dorado St., including Morada, to Duncan Road. Stockton- Northwest Stockton-Northeast Officer 6 Stockton-Calaveras River south to Martin Stockton-Central Luther King Blvd. Officer 7 Stockton-South of Martin Luther King Blvd. to south City Limits west of the Stockton- Southwest U.P.R.R Tracks to west County Line. Officer 8 Stockton-South of Martin Luther King Stockton-Southeast Blvd. to south City Limits east of the U.P.R.R. Tracks to east County Line. Officer 9 French Camp, Lathrop, Manteca, to south South County Line. Officer 10 Tracy, Mountain House. Southwest North Technician At Large-North of Highway 4. North Technician South Technician At Large-South of Highway 4. South Technician Page 60

61 Page 61