 |
||||
  
 
 |
Animal control policy called potential 'black hole' in Smithfield
By Jeremiah
Stettler
SMITHFIELD -- "It could be a black hole," said Smithfield City Council member Jeffry Gittins, discussing the difficulty of enforcing an animal control policy last week. Issues concerning the management of stray cats and dogs sparked discussion among the council, after a report of 12 puppies left on a resident's doorstep last month. The puppies were not the primary concern, however. The issue was based upon the integrity of the Smithfield man, said City Clerk Dean Clegg. Clegg said the resident had licensed an Australian shepherd and St. Bernard that had not been spayed or neutered. Although the puppies had allegedly been dropped off, they resembled a mixture of both animals. Council member Duaine Erickson suggested that a policy be drafted, placing the responsibility of adoption or euthanization upon the shoulders of the individual. Gittins was skeptical of the proposal, stating that some allowance should be permitted. "As a farm owner, there have been times that those things have been dropped on us," said Gittins. "I think the individual should be responsible, but I also believe that there should be some allowance." Council member David Buys suggested a third possibility, indicating that responsibility could remain with the city if steps were taken to ensure that the animals had been dropped off. Not only would licenses be verified, but pets would also be checked for signs of recent pregnancy. Financial concerns were also addressed by the council in connection with the euthanization of stray cats and dogs. Clegg said the animal shelter requires a daily $6 housing fee for each animal. Although city ordinance permits only three days per animal, the combined three-day total of $18 adds up, said Clegg. Several options were presented, requiring pet-buyers to pay housing fees at the time of purchase. The cost of euthanization would still fall upon the pocketbooks of Smithfield city government, however. Further discussion regarding the implementation of an animal control policy will be entertained in November. The council also discussed the passage of three ordinances, but postponed approval until Nov. 10 to accommodate for further public comment. A proposal to authorize the city to collect a municipal energy sales and use tax has come under the most criticism. As explained by the council, the tax would impose a 6 percent franchise for individuals and businesses involved in the sale of propane, natural gas or electricity. During a previous meeting, citizens were hesitant to approve the tax, stating that it wasn't earmarked for any particular city service. Gass explained that certain taxes, such as a 25 percent sales tax for transportation, would not be enforced. The reason: the city does not use it. A second ordinance defining the responsibilities of landlords and tenants has received little opposition. The proposition was drafted to clarify the duties and obligations of both parties. The city's purchasing procedure was addressed in the third proposal. As reported by Gass, the policy was designed to "keep a handle on expenditures and make sure taxpayers money is being spent wisely." In contrast to figures reported previously, the council decided to increase the amount required to go through a formal bidding process from $1,000 to $5,000. The ordinances will be voted on Nov. 1. |
Archived Months:
September
1998 |
||