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