Re: Urgent Plea - Per Randy Grim of St. Louis Stray Rescue Archived Message
Posted by Wyld_Roze  on May 17, 2011, 1:00 pm, in reply to "Re: Urgent Plea - Per Randy Grim of St. Louis Stray Rescue"
Sorry, Daisy's Mom, I hope nobody got confused between the two, I should have made that clear. My Fibro fog was in full swing yesterday and so my thoughts were a bit jumbled.
Well, I did go to the meeting, and regardless of what the MO APA Director claimed, he was not there to argue against the mandatory spay/neuter legislation. In fact, that bill hasn't even been introduced to the city, so I'm not sure how he can have an opinion on it or not. He's already citing on the MO APA website why it's not a good idea and articles supporting that opinion. Trouble is, the articles supporting it are about all different programs where there wasn't support for low income people to be able to apply and pets were being euthanized.
He was there today, to try and argue that the funds raised from the Animal House Fund check box on the water bill should go towards a program for free spay/neuter. Now, I'm all for free spay/neuter programs, the problem is, is that money is specifically slated to go towards building or maintenance, only. There is already talk among the board members(before Kaufmann spoke) to change the ordinance and make the check box for spay/neuter funds, which would make any future donations available for that. So I still don't understand why Kaufmann was arguing for money he KNOWS he can't have?
He also didn't make any friends with any of the Stray Rescue volunteers. As this was last minute, we had several people who came in late or left early due to work or other prior engagements. Randy left after he spoke, because he became very frustrated when the aldermen kept pointing questions at him, but he was unable to answer because he wasn't up to speak. I think listening to Kaufmann would have been too much. Randy was already feeling attacked. Well Kaufmann made a statement that the volunteers had all left. Um, no the majority of us were still there.
There were also talks about mandatory microchipping or other ways of being able to prove whose dogs are being abused, neglected or dumped so that we can hold the people responsible who did it. Kaufmann had a very pompous attitude about "low income people", who unlike him or the board, would not be willing to pay to keep their dog if they were fined, but would just go get another one. I'm sorry, but maybe not the ones who are abusing and neglecting the dogs in the first place, but most dog owners would do everything they could to keep their dog. It's part of the family. Shows how much he thinks of people of "that class."
He also went on to talk about how rehabilitating dogs is not helping the stray population because you are taking up too much space in the shelter, etc. He'd rather euthanize them.
There was more talk about the problems of the strays than the talk of what Stray Rescue does and how else the money could be spent, considering Stray Rescue is the only facility in St. Louis that qualifies for all the requirements. The "study" was brought up, but I think they were able to shoot it down, and most of the problems that were talked about are ones that the city still controls, such as being able to take dogs away from neglectful owners or dangerous dogs (the city still deals with "bite" dogs).
There will be another hearing in 2-3 weeks to give everyone more time to prepare and more people to state their case. Unfortunately, what seems cut and dry has turned into one big mess. 
|
|
