06/27/1984 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Councilor Ball stated that some divergent opinions existed within the subcommit- e tee. He felt that the City had a good program which fit into its comprehensive animal welfare program. He did not feel that any changes were warranted. Referring to Section III of the memorandum, Councilor Hansen stated that he had made some recommendations based on his belief that the City was unnecessar- ily involved in some areas. He said he was bothered by the City being in the vaccination business even though it supported the low-cost spay/neuter program. He recommended that other veterinarians be involved in the program and that walk-in vaccinations be eliminated from the program. Councilor Ball said the council needed to decide on any review or changes to the program. In response to a question by Councilor Obie, Mr. Whitlow stated that the spay/neuter program was self-supporting, adding that no appropriation had been made to the program from the General Fund during the last four years. Mr. Hansen explained that the cost of the program was supported by the vaccinations performed by the clinic. Mr. Ball commented that many of those vaccinations would not be done were it not for the low-cost clinic program which generated approximately $20,000 to $30,000 through vaccinations. In response to a question by Councilor Wooten, Ms. Goldman stated that a total of the April 1984 receipts showed 63 percent of the clinic customers were from Eugene, 17 percent from Springfield, 17 percent from Lane County, and 3 percent from outside Lane County. She stated that this was representative of the entire year. Ms. Wooten agreed that the City had a first-rate program and that she would support its continued operation. She suggested that staff review the surgery fees. Councilor Holmer supported the suggestion of explor- ing the surgery fees but also supported Mr. Hansen's suggestions as listed in the memorandum. Councilor Schue said she agreed with the comments of Mr. Ball e and Ms. Wooten, stating that the program reduced the number of stray animals without any cost to the General Fund. She felt that Mr. Hansen's suggestions would require a subsidy to the clinic operation. In response to a question by Counci lor Smith regardi ng any response recei ved from the veteri nari ans, Mr. Hansen said it was difficult to categorize the feelings of the veterinar- ians. He believed that their major concern was with the City being involved in their business; he felt that the City was taking away the vaccination income from those individuals. While he recognized that the spay/neuter program was working well, he felt that the number of pets in Eugene had also decreased. He suggested that the clinic perform vaccinations only in conjunc- tion with other services. Ms. Smith said the concern existed that the spay/ neuter program was needed and that both Mr. Ball and Mr. Hansen had agreed that the program should be continued. Councilor Ball said that the concerns of the veterinarians were not major enough to justify altering the program. He said the Lane County Veterinary Medical Association had responded that no veterinarian would be interested in participating in a low-cost vaccination program with the City. Councilor Hansen said there was no justification for further review unless the council had the philosophy that it should not be involved in any unnecessary business. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that the City Council review and attempt to adopt the recommendations as set forth in his addendum to the June 27, 1984, Advisory Committee memorandum. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 27, 1984 Page 6