HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0376.001 2000-2002
OCT-16-01 04:30 PM HIHS 8083294618 P. 02
m
HAWAif ISLAND +
~ ~_~i
- ~
()et®ber I0, 8001 ,
7°0: Constance 1~Ir1u91Legislative Aasdltor ~ ~ .
r..,;a
Frown: gays®>ra l~asblda, l~a~astfve Detector S
NACA lMJvislssatlon
We appreciate the opportunity to respond to the NACA report as well as the extension granted to us
by Your office. if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to give me a call.
;The NACA evaluators have produced a thorough report that includes a great deal of useful
infoertsation for both the I~avvaii Island Humane Society (HIHS) and the County. HIHS sasl?ports the
,vast majority of the report's recommendations, which form a blueprint for estate-of
the alt animal
control pr®g As v~ill obvious to even the casual reader of this mport, hodvever, fialfiling most
®f these reconarriendations will require a dramatic incr in staffing and fending, Ac the report
notes in l~xecutive Suas~snary, `"I'he employees of HIHS are striving to provide an acceptable
lzv+dl of service to the citizens they serve, insufficient staffing levels and funding-rotated pa•oblems
have affected pr®ductivity and psrfos~a,nance."
NACA recommends itscreasing the ntamber of HIHS officers and kennel workers from 16, our
,current total, to 25, plus adding a despatcher for each shit. As the cvalisators conclude in tp~ear
discussion of animal control Feld operations, "~fowever, an increase iri service cannot Ise if~troduced
at current masspoe+ver levels." (pg. Ss4}
Fulfilling the many of recomme~latioris covered ir;< the shelter operations and facilities chapters of
the report will require major ispgrades of both the Kona and Waimea shelters. ARer ~sumeiating the
numerous defsciencies of the Kona shelter in Claap~r t&ae report concludes, "VVhik iiIH4 should
be commended ors its fundraising et'orts directed to provide facility improveia~ents, the Study Tcarii
dots not believe that any major u e of the ICailu~ Kona shelter should be the sole respoissibility
of HIHS. The facility is county owned. It is ridicasloiss for taxpayers and government officials alike
to assume that flee cost of Basch inrprovernents should be borne entirely by the contractor... " (pg. 9-
.10).
,Many of the recommendations pint forth by NACA in this report have already been recognized by
HIHS and igrtprovernerits ate in process. For instance, HII33 supports NACA's suggestion that the
Standard ®perati:rs$ Procedure bo updated (1-1) and we have actively been working on this project.
74.5225 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy • Kailua-Kona, hiI 96740 • Telephone (808) 329.1175 • Fax (K(18) 329.4618 %>~y ~ 1
Keaau (808) 966-5458 • Kalnuela (808) 885.4558 Collzm. No. r
File No.
Ref, fior ~ ~
Inf. T~r~t~ _ ~ ~ _
OCT-16-01 04:31 PM HIHS 8083294618 P. 03
'1°he report recommends coordination of 13adging Cusses by s specific County Department. fi1HS
lass been limited in its ability to provide the necessary badging trainin$s due to a lack of coordination
within the County ants. V6~e strongly support the establishrrtent of a County entity to
organic and ttsandate par<eieipati®n by all requires County agencies involved itt the training process.
'ti?e believe this will more effectively faca7itate training classes in a timely manner, (2-25)
For many years, H1HS been under attack from a west ~iawaii group that wattle to obtain the contract
for animal control ott the west side. `The NACA report states, however, that the animal conb of
contract should not be split between east and west Hawaii: `°'The Study Team would not recoaaltnend
~ division of current contract responsibilities until such tune as the new Meld program has been
established." p 9-7
The NACA evaluation concurs with what HIHS has been saying for years, "The hlaevaii County
Animal Code (~ICAC) appears to be poorly organized and lacking in major areas..." (pg. la-1).
;HIHS supports, in concept, most of the changes and recomenea~dations outlined in Chapter 10
,'regarding Hawaii County ®rdinances. 1~Iost of these necomntendations should undergo careful and
>extensive legal research. Public discussions should be o~'ered on certain proposed changes,
'especially those recomrttendations that HIHS believes will generate tremendous feedback fibm the
public (i.e. laws relating to cart licensing and animal ownership limits).
HII~IS further suggests that various law enforcement, legal representative and representatives from
;public interest groups work together an a collaborative effort to draft a review of the Hawaii County
®rdinances based on the NACA review. Unlike anost of the recommendations in the NACA report,
upgrading the rude would cost very little, and the benefits would be great.
~6~Ve support the recotrtrrtendation that an Animal Control Advisory Board be establis6~ed according to
,the guidelines outlined on p. 9-3 of the report. This would be a far more efficient way of dealing
~?ith appeals, cotttplaittts, etc, than the current system.
'!n response to NACA' s coanments on public complaints (]-I), ~l1HS responds to approxin'ately
;7,000 animal related calls per year. Copnp]aints printed in newspaper editorials, addressed in written
;form to the executive ®irecte?r or board of Directors, and cotrtplaints to the Mayor's office equal
topproxitnately ] 00 per year, ~llten looking at public complaints, HIHS believes it is important tQ
;consider the nuartber of animal situations HIHS resolves relative to the cotrtplaints it receivt,~s. as well
as the validity of each of those complaints.
°1 he report also takes issue with the HIHS response times to animal control calls (2-16). alt; believe
this is an issue that needs further clarification with ATACA. HIHS is cotrtmitted in our goal tc? inrtiase
;response to priority one calls immediately. ~fowever, the logistics of driving and covering alt island
of this size limits our ability to be at she scene of the anirnat control situation irrtmediatcly, esp~ially
for the many rural areas of our comanunity.
In further review of H1FfS hssadIing of aaaianml control situations, NACA reports that a citati®n nc;ed
not be issued for every redeemed animal (4-19). `The I°IIHS supports this view and it a current
pxaeticc of i~€IEIS.
OGT-16-01 @4:31 PM HIHS 8083294618 P.64
'To improve the budget process, HIHS agrees with the NACA suggestion (1-1) of clarifying non-
Animal Control functions. I~ig believes 4his is an important step for all interested parties to have a
better apprecfation of what is paid for by the Anignal Control Contract.
Finally, we support NACA's recomattendationfhat the feld operations of Anirrtal Control be shifted
®o the police deparhrecnt. This would n®t®t mean that the existing police force would be saddled with
~n additional job. Rather, a separate division of animal contrrol would be established under the
administration of the ponce d ent. This division would employee people trained in ar<irraal
control, riot regular police ofD-leers.
'To quote from the report (p. 9-15); "Although many excellent animal control programs have long
'been privatised, problems have sometimes occurred when $overnments have failed to provide
adequate fuaad~g for animal care and control servacea and Yelled or1 the local barrette society to carry
the load, Overburdened local humane societies have b f®rced to curb their most essential
:services-including education progs~tt~s and spaylneuter assistance programs---or shutdown
:entirely, ~Vlaen this happens, local governments must ffiake last-minute fiandireg appropriations or
worse, attempt to handle animal control using untrained staft'and a makeshift facFlity."
The above paragraph accurately describes HMS's current dilemnna and sounds an alas~rn for our
future. In spite of increased support from the current County administration, HIHS has neither the
3ta4~` nor farads to meet most of the recotntrtetadatior~s in this repar~ 'The increase in our funding fot
PY2002 will only allow us to operate in the black for the first time in three ys~-it is not enough to
,increase staffing or expand services. While we have strived to build an efficient, innovative, and
,committed organi~tion, none of these virtues is a substitute for adequate facilities, staffing, and
operating budget,
°The Police I3epartrrlent has resources that we have no hope of acquiring in the foreseeable future,
including centralized, island-wide corrarraunica4ions, 24-hr dispatchitsg, access to a criminal records
database, and ad~uate vehicles. While HIHS would like do continue to contract with the County to
provide anirraal s9aeltering, we feel fluff the expectati®ns for our field operations have exceeded the
capacity of an understafTed non-profst.
`fhe people and scnirrfals of I-lawaii County deserve the 1eve1 of anirrtal care and control owlined in
.this report. ~e urge the County ~ heed the final recomancndation of this report and move swiftly to
establish a separate animal control division within the Police 1?epartment, while continuing w
contract with HII'IIS to rare the shelters.
Since ly,
Grayson l'Iashida
executive Director