HomeMy WebLinkAboutNB 1 VET HEALTH SVCS 04-20-81DATE: March 30, 1981
NE~ BUSINESS
NO. 1
4-20-81
Inter-Corn
TO: DAN RrANK~SHIP, CITY ADMINISTRATOR ..
FROM: NANCY MIr.r.ER, ADMINISTRATIVE. AIDE ~'~,~
SUBJEI~T: RENEWAL OF CONTRACT FOR COUNTY VETERINARY PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES
The contract between the City of Tustin and the County of Orange for animal
control services will expire on June 30, 1981. ~ne County has sent us a copy of
the new agreement, which we n~st sign and return to the County by May 16, 1981.
There have been a few changes initiated by Orange County and I will list them
below, and the effect, if any, on our current services.
CONTRACT PERIOD
Effective July 1, 1981, many contracts between cities and the County for most
Animal Control services will be on an indefinite oasis. ~he extensions will
commence on July 1, 1981 ar~ continue until terminate(] or sooner mo~ifieo by our
City or the County as provided in the contract .....
Effect on ~klstin: By having an indefinite contract with the County, it will save
the City on paperwork. There is no adverse impact anticipated from this change.
FEE INCREASES
In reviewing the County Fees Inventory, the County Auditor-Controller took notice
that the Animal Control Fees had not been revised in recent years. ~%qe County
Revenue Policy, adopted by Board Resolution 79-1451, states that "all cost
recovery revenue sources shoula be updated at least once a year to re~lect current
costs". I~arsuant to this policy, the Auoitor-Controller has confirme~ to us that
a cost study will be performed in the near future. It is contel~plated that there
will be an increase in most fees charged by the Shelter.
Effect on Tu5tin: In reviewing the current fees (set in 1976), it is apparent
that the fees are extremely reasonable and that an increase would not be a
significant factor. Since we do not know the amount of t31e propose~ increase at
this tim~, it is difficult to assess the impact. However, with inflation the way
it is, an increase is probably mot unreasonable and the City can certainly live
with it. This increase will basically impact pet owners, rather than the City
itself.
BILLING PERIOD
At the present time, the County is invoicing some cities for specified services,
e.g., shelter serviceS, etc. two week in arrears. The problem is that this does
not allow the County sufficient time to resolve the disposition of many animals
impounded by a City Animal R~ulation Department. 'fne County is proposing t/mat
they invoice those cities one (1) full month in arrears. The advantage of this
change, according to the. County, is that it will allow them more time for
disposition of all animals before preparation of the invoice begins. In addition,
~it will facilitate an efficient billing process. The change is incorporateO into
the contract by its inclusion in the extension..
Effect on Tustin: Since the City of Tustin contracts for complete Animal Control
'services, this change does not apply to us.
SHELTERING OF ANIMAr.q HELD AS EVIDENCE
From past experience, there appears, according to the County, somewhat of a
misunderstanding regarding the use of the Animal Shelter for the holding of
ยท animals as evidence. The County Counsel has concluded, that unless criminal cases
involve violation of the City Animal Control Ordinance,. the agreen~nt does not
require the County to house animals which are evidence in criminal cases. In
order to further clarify the County's role, they have inserted a clause in the
renewal specifying this limitation and conditions under whid~ the Shelter will
house these animals.
Where a city police ~epartment desires to have the Animal Shelter house animals
seized in non-animal contro~ criminal cases for the purposes of preserving
evidence, the City will be required to pay the Animal Shelter's usual and
customary charges for sudn housing. However, if such housing would interfere with
the normal operation of the Shelter, or would require facilities which co not
exist at the Shelter, the Shelter has no obligation to assume the duty of caring
for .the animals.
Effect on Tustin: According to Chief Thayer, the Tustin Police Department is
fully aware of this clarification of policy (as they received a large Dill from
the Animal Shelter after using the Shelter to house s~n~ fighting cocks,
confiscated as evidence). The City has no control over a policy such as this and
must accept it as it is.
RECYIM~LE~AT ION:
It is suggested that this renewal be reviewed by the City Attorney ana plaCeo on
the City Council agenda for the April 6 meeting. It is suggested that all seven
(7) copies be signed and returned to the County before the May 16 deadline. The
renewal will be then placed upon the Board of Supervisor 's agenda for ratification
along with the other cities. Upon their approval, a copy of the fully executed
contract will be returned to the City with a copy of the Board's action.
Should y~] have any questions concerning this matter, please let me know.
NANCY
Administrative Aide
NM:dmt
attachment:
County of Orange Contract (7)
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made by and between the COUNTY OF ORANGE, a body politic
and corporate, and the CITY OF TUSTIN, a municipal corporation,
W I TN E S S E T H:
IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED by and between the parties hereto that the Agreement
entered into between the parties hereto on January 11, 1977, for complete Animal
Control Services, is hereby extended for a term commencing July 1, 1981, and
continuing until terminated or sooner modified by either party as provided for
in this Agreement, upon the same terms and conditions; except if not otherwise
provided, (1) either party may cancel on at least three (3) months written
notice, (2) all records created or received by COUNTY shall be COUNTY records,
and (3) animals which are being retained in criminal prosecutions are not
intended to be within services contemplated by this Agreement. Housing will
be done at the discretion of the Animal Shelter and at the Animal Shelter's
usual and customary charges for such housing.
DATED: , 1981
CITY OF TUSTIN ,
a municipal corporation
ATTEST:
By
City Clerk Mayor
DATED: , 1981
COUNTY OF ORANGE,
a body politic and corporate
SIGNED AND CERTIFIED THAT
A COPY OF THIS DOCUMENT
HAS BEEN DELIVERED TO THE
CHAIRM;uN OF THE BOARD.
By
Chairman of its Board of Supervisors
JUNE ALEXANDER
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
of Orange County, California
APPROVED AS TO FOP~M:
ADRIAN KUYPER
County Counsel
Orang~ounty, California
*TED: , 1981