|
|
|
Independence, MO —
For a month, Independence and Jackson County officials worked on a compromise for an amendment to a 2009 contract involving operations of the new regional animal shelter.
City officials received many emails and phone calls from the public, both in support of and in disagreement with the Jackson County Legislature’s approval of an amendment in early December.
The city listened to those concerns and held a couple of study sessions on changes they wanted to incorporate into the agreement before sending it back to the county for a new vote. The City Council discussed nine of those changes Jan. 14, while four more were discussed Jan. 22.
So, when it came time for the council's final vote on its new amendment on Jan. 22, Council Member Curt Dougherty wanted to add one more change involving the new shelter accepting all animals dropped off by Independence residents.
Despite concerns from City Manager Robert Heacock about the significant change without county input and suspension of parliamentary rules to allow for consideration, all but one council member approved the substitution's inclusion.
District 4 Council Member Eileen Weir was the lone vote against including the change. Earlier this week, Weir explained her vote, saying she felt the time to negotiate adding in Dougherty’s change had passed and that it should have been brought forth sooner.
“To me, it was a major change,” Weir said. “I was concerned that since we had not talked about it previously with the county that they may not accept that change. I was eager to get a deal.”
Prior to Dougherty’s proposed change, the amendment stated the following: “The city acknowledges that the county or the operator may or may not receive animals from the public at the Regional Animal Shelter, depending on available capacity and resources.”
“What that says to me is that any time (the county or operator) doesn’t want to take a dog, they won’t, and then we have to pick them up with our trucks. Or, they may say, ‘We’ve underestimated what it’s going to cost to run this thing – we don’t have the money,’” Dougherty said.
That sentence was removed and replaced with the following: “The county guarantees to the city that animals delivered to the Regional Animal Shelter by residents of Independence will be accepted into the Regional Animal Shelter.”
District 3 Council Member Myron Paris said he agreed with Dougherty. After touring the new shelter, which is nearly four times as large as the existing shelter on Vista Avenue, Paris said he found the new shelter to include adequate cages and housing for animals.
For a month, Independence and Jackson County officials worked on a compromise for an amendment to a 2009 contract involving operations of the new regional animal shelter.
City officials received many emails and phone calls from the public, both in support of and in disagreement with the Jackson County Legislature’s approval of an amendment in early December.
The city listened to those concerns and held a couple of study sessions on changes they wanted to incorporate into the agreement before sending it back to the county for a new vote. The City Council discussed nine of those changes Jan. 14, while four more were discussed Jan. 22.
So, when it came time for the council's final vote on its new amendment on Jan. 22, Council Member Curt Dougherty wanted to add one more change involving the new shelter accepting all animals dropped off by Independence residents.
Despite concerns from City Manager Robert Heacock about the significant change without county input and suspension of parliamentary rules to allow for consideration, all but one council member approved the substitution's inclusion.
District 4 Council Member Eileen Weir was the lone vote against including the change. Earlier this week, Weir explained her vote, saying she felt the time to negotiate adding in Dougherty’s change had passed and that it should have been brought forth sooner.
“To me, it was a major change,” Weir said. “I was concerned that since we had not talked about it previously with the county that they may not accept that change. I was eager to get a deal.”
Prior to Dougherty’s proposed change, the amendment stated the following: “The city acknowledges that the county or the operator may or may not receive animals from the public at the Regional Animal Shelter, depending on available capacity and resources.”
“What that says to me is that any time (the county or operator) doesn’t want to take a dog, they won’t, and then we have to pick them up with our trucks. Or, they may say, ‘We’ve underestimated what it’s going to cost to run this thing – we don’t have the money,’” Dougherty said.
That sentence was removed and replaced with the following: “The county guarantees to the city that animals delivered to the Regional Animal Shelter by residents of Independence will be accepted into the Regional Animal Shelter.”
District 3 Council Member Myron Paris said he agreed with Dougherty. After touring the new shelter, which is nearly four times as large as the existing shelter on Vista Avenue, Paris said he found the new shelter to include adequate cages and housing for animals.
“I see no reason why an animal would be turned away,” Paris said. “I just can’t understand it.”
On the city’s website, the Animal Shelter is listed as taking owner surrenders by appointment only. Surrenders typically take place for a range of reasons, including the death of the owner or economic hardships.
“(The new shelter) is several times larger. They should have the capacity to care for these animals,” Dougherty said. “I want to make sure that they will accept animals from the public of Independence, just like we would at our shelter.
“I’m concerned. I don’t want those animals out in the cold or without shelter. I want them to be inside at that new shelter, and that’s my intent.”
District 1 Council Member Marcie Gragg said she also shared Dougherty’s concerns.
“Right now, if a citizen takes an animal to our shelter, they’re going to do everything they can to accept that animal, find space for it, and move it on,” Gragg said. “...Our residents need that guarantee. Otherwise, they are giving up a big benefit that they have for having a municipally run shelter.”
Prior to the Jan. 22 meeting, City Manager Robert Heacock said he had discussed the more than 10 other changes and additions to the contract amendment in cooperation with county officials. Heacock called Dougherty’s proposal “not a minor change.”
“This is something that I think would be a significant potential cost,” Heacock said, recommending that the City Council allow the county time to review the change in a working document prior to voting.
Council members voted 5-2, with Gragg and Dougherty opposed, to move forward their revised amendment for shelter operations. The Jackson County Legislature is slated to consider that revised amendment on Monday.
Regardless of what’s in a formal contract, Weir said she believes both sides have the best interest of the animals in mind.
“If it came to a point – if this agreement is accepted – where our residents’ animals are continually being turned away, then we’ll solve that problem,” she said. “I didn’t want to further prolong the agreement from happening, and I felt like that was a major change at this juncture in the negotiations.”
