In case you are wondering why your dog and cat has been acting strange, you should check out the recent action of your Huntington Beach City Council. Last night by a 4-3 margin, the voting majority gave direction to prepare a city ordinance that MANDATES all dogs and cats within Huntington Beach (with the exception of show dogs, service dogs, and police dogs) be spayed or neutered and microchipped. If you currently have a pet that is not spayed or neutered and microchipped, should this ordinance become enacted, you will be breaking the law.
I have been opposed to this from the beginning, and last night Council Members Joe Carchio and Jill Hardy joined me in opposition. Despite my best efforts, I could not pick up the fourth vote.
Yet....
To be written into the code, the ordinance has to be voted on twice. Given the significant waffleling this council has been prone to do, I will predict that this ordinance will not ultimately hit the books. If I were a concerned pet owner I would be sending my comments to Cathy Green
cgreen@surfcity-hb.org Gil Coerper
gcoerper@surfcity-hb.org Debbie Cook
dcook@surfcity-hb.org and the sponsor Keith Bohr
kbohr@surfcity-hb.org If one of these council member changes their position the ordinance will not go into effect.
Beyond the votes, there is a technical reason why this may not come to be. There is a critical point missed by the media covering the story. The OC Animal Control agency said the minimum amount necessary to enact this ordinance and delegate the enforcement/education component would be in excess of $70,000. The council only authorized $50,000 in the approved action. If the OCACA comes back and can provide the same service for $20,000 less, what does that say about their initial presentation? We would need some serious evaluation of their proposals and costs should they come to the table with the same service but for less money.
I am sure the "staff assistant" position they requested would require the funding in excess of $70,000 - which puts the council action well below the minimum funding requirement.
The side note is that regardless of the above detailed technicality, this City Council has NO BUSINESS intruding how pet owners choose to maintain their animals. I understand that animals who reach the shelters often are euthanized, and that is unfortunate. However, I believe that the negative reinforcement in this proposal will penalize responsible pet owners - and this is not the answer. This action is nothing more that a "donation" to OCACA for a desk job that will not produce any measurable result.
- DH
