Posted by K, a resident of the Fairmeadow neighborhood, on Jul 18, 2012 at 12:22 pm
Palo Alto, home to some of the world's most profitable tech businesses can't even keep their animal shelter afloat. The animals have to pay for the socialist policies that benefit no one aside from government officials.
Posted by raionbow38, a resident of another community, on Jul 19, 2012 at 11:03 am
Reducing the number of animal control officers is a poor choice for saving money. My experiences with them have been very positive.
More people would use the neuter/spay and other services if the drop-off times were expanded (ideally, whenever the shelter is open) and there wasn't a requirement to pick up the animals the same day. An overnight hold should be possible and would be better for the animals so they can be monitored and get prompt attention if/when needed.
Please correct the error "The loss of an animal-control officer would likely reduce response times..." when it would increase response time.
Posted by lazlo, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jul 19, 2012 at 12:25 pm
it's no secret that Keene and Klein want to outsource all city services and leave the managers in to "run" the operation. think your city services are bad now? wait until unaccountable outsourced contractors are running the city. only a matter of time before the contractors smarten up and get rid of the managers and replace them with more cost effective outsourced managers. worked great with the Haliburton and KLS model who took over government operations and now are a muti-billion dollar operation with no accountability.
Posted by Old Town Paly Resident, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jul 19, 2012 at 12:43 pm
I am happy to pay the increase in fees to help to keep the shelter up and running. Knowing lots of other pet owners in Palo Alto, I am sure they feel the same way. We need to keep our Palo Alto Animal Shelter OPEN. Seriously hoping PA City Officials realize that keeping the shelter open is vital to Peninsula residents who own pets.
Posted by Voter, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Jul 19, 2012 at 1:07 pm
City services are bad now because we are grossly overpaying for labor to staff the bureaucracy. Hiring one city union worker at a cost of 100K per year to sweep the streets (a real number -- see the salary links in the pension discussion) results in service that is half as good and just as expensive as hiring two private sector contractors to do the job at half the cost each.
Outsourcing will increase accountability, because in the private sector, you are fired if you underperform. Those on the city books: not the case.
Posted by Scottie Zimmerman, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 19, 2012 at 1:38 pm
I am a volunteer at Palo Alto Animal Services. I am also active in the SOS - Save Our Shelter group. And I'm a member of the new Friends of the Palo Alto Shelter (FoPAAS). Thus I'm in touch with many of the details of where we are now and how we got here.
The City Council and Mayor have been supportive of PAAS, at the same time making clear their obligation to balance the city budget. There's nothing simple about the job they do.
The City Staff, including Manager James Keane, Asst. Manager Pam Antil, Liaison Ian Hagerman, and others have also been supportive. They've heard our requests for time and negotiated fairly with us. Pam and Ian are active in the Stakeholders committee that meets to discuss fund-raising options, details of fee increases, continuation of a voucher system, and more. We're working on solutions with support from the city, from HSSV and other shelters in our area, from local veterinarians, from the Palo Alto Humane Society and other rescue groups. The positive energy and unselfish commitment of the Stakeholders is inspiring.
FIRST: License fees will be increased. We already estimate that 80% or more of the dogs who reside in Palo Alto do NOT have licenses. PAAS is cooperating with local veterinarians to notify owners that their dogs need licenses. The license fees are 100% income for the shelter. PAAS keeps all the money, and if more of the "missing" dogs would come in for licenses, that could provide a huge boost in income. Do the math: 25,000 dogs X $10 per year = $250,000 income. (And $10 per year is less than the actual fee.)
SECOND: All donations made to PAAS belong to PAAS. They have their own bank account. The money is not part of the City budget. The money is for PAAS to use as they see fit. Many generous donations have been coming in, they are greatly appreciated. Thank you, animal lovers! None of the money is diverted to any other city service.
THIRD: Keep your eye on Friends of the Palo Alto Animal Shelter. Web site www.pafriends.org We're just getting started. We're awaiting incorporation and recognition as a nonprofit. We've got BIG plans for projects in the community that benefit PAAS and all pet owners. We welcome new Friends!
Posted by Marrol, a resident of the Embarcadero Oaks/Leland neighborhood, on Jul 20, 2012 at 8:47 am
As I've stated before, I have no issue with maintaining our Animal Services just as long as the proposed fee increases, budget cuts, and fundraising efforts offset the amount of money the city could have saved by outsourcing. Also, these cost saving measures cannot just be a one time deal when supporters are in a survival mode. This cost saving measures must be met on an annual basis. They have to show that the center can sustain and support itself indefinitely.
Here is why this is important. Other friends groups, like the Palo Alto Children's Theater supporters, were faced with proposed participant fee hikes and budget cuts in 2010. The city was looking for ways to streamline the budget and this was one of the many measures. As expected the PACT Friend's Group bemoaned the proposal and essentially shouted it down. In return, PACT promised to offset the money the city would have saved through fundraising. They promised.
So here is my question which I believe is very relevant to this overall discussion. Did PACT in fact raise the sufficient funds or not? If our city leaders and elected officials are going to buckle to every publicly funded friend's group who avoid budget reductions by "promising" to make up the difference through fundraising, shouldn't they be held accountable for that promise. If they can raise sufficient funds to help support their special interest on a continual, annual basis then no problem. If they can't, then other measures have to be taken. We cannot simply accept a promise and not follow-up on it.
So, I will ask again. Does Palo Alto Online or anyone with legitimate knowledge know if in fact the Children's Theater Friend's Group were successful?
Posted by PA Tax Payer, a resident of the Fairmeadow neighborhood, on Jul 20, 2012 at 1:43 pm
At a recent public hearing employees of the animal shelter said nearly all the stray animals they rescue are in neighboring communities. Why should the taxpayers of Palo Alto continue to keep this animal shelter alive just for the benefit of neighboring communities?
It's time we consolidated tax payer animal care with Santa Clara County and no longer subsidize animal care for neighboring communities.
It's time to increase fees and reduce staff and have our neighbors pay their share for these services.
Posted by PA Resident & PA Tax Payer, a member of the JLS Middle School community, on Jul 20, 2012 at 4:09 pm
I agree 150% with "PA Tax Payer"
"At a recent public hearing employees of the animal shelter said nearly all the stray animals they rescue are in neighboring communities. Why should the taxpayers of Palo Alto continue to keep this animal shelter alive just for the benefit of neighboring communities?
It's time we consolidated tax payer animal care with Santa Clara County and no longer subsidize animal care for neighboring communities.
It's time to increase fees and reduce staff and have our neighbors pay their share for these services."
PA residents incur increases every year from having our own utility company and our own recycling/trash facility. We reap the benefits of these type of increases by having lower rates when it comes to services for our pet handled at the PAAS. And our neighboring cities also get this benefit??? for what? they do no contribute to our city, they do not get taxed by our city and they reap the benefits of their own cities as well...I say not anymore!
ANY Non-PA resident should incur these increases.
My 2nd and final point is this...why is a VOLUNTEER being cut? They are a volunteer...hello????? Free worker!
"2.6 full-time-equivalent positions would be cut from the 13-person staff, including the animal-services supervisor and one of four animal-control officers, along with the part-time volunteer coordinator."
Posted by Scottie Zimmerman, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 21, 2012 at 1:15 am
PA Taxpayer and PA Resident, you are misquoting or have misunderstood what you think you read or heard. It is not true that "nearly all the animals they rescue are in neighboring communities." Not so.
What is true is that a majority of the animals brought in for spay & neuter surgery come from communities outside Palo Alto and our partner cities, Mountain View, Los Altos, and Los Altos Hills. What is also true is that PAAS like ALL the shelters in the Bay Area encourages people to spay & neuter so we can avoid the tragedy (and drain on community resources) resulting from unwanted puppies and kittens.
The only animals PAAS "rescues" are from Palo Alto and our partner cities. If a citizen brings a dog to PAAS that they found running loose in a Menlo Park apartment complex, PAAS is not allowed to accept (i.e., rescue) the dog. An over-the-counter surrender is accepted only when the animal was found in Palo Alto, Mountain View, Los Altos, and Los Altos Hills. All those cities pay PAAS for the animal services we provide.
Finally, the Volunteer Coordinator is a paid half-time employee of PAAS. Her job consists of recruiting, training, and scheduling the 55 volunteers who work for free at PAAS. Through the volunteers she trains and manages, the VC can be credited with 3000+ hours of important work for the shelter -- at no cost to the shelter. Her half-time salary is little enough to pay for the returns she generates. In addition to managing volunteers, she also picks up the slack when PAAS staff need extra help answering phones, assisting customers, and completing paperwork.
Your comments reveal ignorance or a lack of concern for the truth. Which is it?
Posted by Marrol, a resident of the Embarcadero Oaks/Leland neighborhood, on Jul 21, 2012 at 10:26 am
And no longer will Mountain View be a partner city Scottie, which is one of the primary reasons Palo Alto looked to outsource our animal services. Let's not overlook that major detail as well. I sincerely hope that the PACT Friend's Group fundraising efforts and increased service fees offset what Palo Alto tax payers would have saved from outsourcing, and, can maintain that cash flow annually. If not, then the city's decision to outsource would be that much easier.
Posted by Scottie Zimmerman, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 21, 2012 at 4:57 pm
Marrol, You keep running on about PACT, and I have nothing to do with that. It has nothing to do with Palo Alto Animal Services. Why don't you ask your questions somewhere where PACT can answer? Or try writing a letter to the City Council?
I'm amused that you and Stop the Waste are offended by my reiteration of facts.
Yes, as of Nov. 1, Mountain View's animal services will be the responsibility of Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority (SVACA).
Another fact, 18 years ago, when Mt. View joined with PAAS, Palo Alto hired 1 (that's ONE) new ACO. PAAS went from having 12 full-time positions to having 14 positions; 2 of those are 1/2-time jobs. In other words, PAAS has the equivalent of 13 full-time salaries vs. 12 as of 18 years ago. Where's the "waste" in that?
Mountain View will be missed. But PAAS has not grown fat on their coattails. The shelter operates with great efficiency and provides services few other shelters can match. And I predict that Mountain View may miss PAAS....
PAAS is not, nor has it ever been, connected to PACT. Although I do think children's theater is a vital asset to our community. Art saves lives.
Posted by Marrol, a resident of the Embarcadero Oaks/Leland neighborhood, on Jul 21, 2012 at 6:05 pm
I never suggested that PAAS and PACT were affiliated. What draws the comparison however is that both services were faced with budget cuts and/or user fee increases/outsourcing. Friends groups from each service rallied and shouted down these measures in part by promising to raise private funds to offset what tax payers would have saved by taking those cost cutting measures. PACT avoided the budget cuts and user fees through this tactic in 2010, much in the same manner that PAAS spared itself from being outsourced most recently.
So, I'm curious to see if PACT was successful in their efforts and made good on their promise. Our city leaders cannot be pressured into reversing cost cutting measures every time a special interest or friend's group shouts them down with promises of raising private funds, and then not ensure that the objective is being met. These friends groups have to be held accountable to these promises, and if they come up short, it's time to make cuts or outsource services.
The PACT issue in this regard is absolutely relevant to what has transpired with PAAS avoiding being outsourced. If the city failed to hold PACT accountable, then I would have serious reservations about extending a similar policy to PAAS. That is why I'm drawing the comparison and has everything to do with policy making when it comes to dealing with these friend's groups. It's called the big picture.
Again, as I've stated on numerous occasions, I sincerely hope that the PAAS Friend's Group and user fee hikes can offset the half million dollars that tax payers would have saved annually by outsourcing. If they can sustain that indefinitely then more power to them. If they cannot, then citizens calling for fiscal responsibility in local government will be watching.
Posted by Marrol, a resident of the Embarcadero Oaks/Leland neighborhood, on Jul 22, 2012 at 10:35 am
I do not believe that East Palo Alto is a partner city, but I've heard that PAAS will extend certain services as if they were just to help out and support because they can't afford to join. Besides, you're in a different county so I think that may be a limitation as well.
Posted by Concerned, a resident of East Palo Alto, on Jul 24, 2012 at 2:38 pm
Arguments aside, the reality is that when spay and neuter fees rise, especially for those outside Palo Alto, fewer animals will be neutered or spayed. In the long term this will cost us more. I also think that the clinic needs to offer more convenient hours for the public. doing so would also increase revenue.
Posted by Scottie Zimmerman, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 24, 2012 at 11:58 pm
Concerned -- I agree that raising fees for spay/neuter surgery could cause people outside (or even inside) Palo Alto to hesitate because of the cost. The staff at PAAS also share your concern. The primary goal of the shelter is to ensure the health of animals in the community and to prevent unwanted pregnancies (puppies, kittens, rabbits).
PAAS, with generous support from the Palo Alto Humane Society, has a strong "voucher" system to mitigate the cost of spay/neuter for families with limited income and for local rescue groups that trap/neuter/release feral cats. The voucher system continues and is likely to be enhanced once Friends of the Palo Alto Shelter (FoPAAS) completes incorporation and gains nonprofit status.
We are determined not to forfeit our good record with spay/neuter services.