Laserfiche WebLink
the shelter was too small, the county wanted increased service at a reduced annual cost, and intended <br />to focus on its animal welfare goals and shelter only voluntarily surrendered animals. In October 1975, <br />seven months after the Humane Society ended its contract with the County, the Lane County Sheriff, <br />hampered by administrative, logistic and financial problems, declared that he did not want his office to <br />continue to provide animal control services. <br /> <br />These controversies caused Eugene, Springfield and Lane County to explore various alternatives to <br />comprehensively resolve these issues. In July 1976, after lengthy review and discussions, the cities and <br />Lane County established one intergovernmental agency would be designated as lead for animal control. <br />The expected outcomes were enhanced efficiency of operations and simplified reporting relationships. <br />Lane County was selected to operate a revised animal control program that was to occur under a <br />consortium formed by intergovernmental agreement, titled the Tri-Agency Animal Regulation Authority. <br />This new authority was intended to provide uniformity of policy, action and service for the greater <br />metropolitan area. It was headed by a joint Board with one elected member from each of the governing <br />bodies of Eugene, Springfield and Lane County, and was supported by staff from the cities of Eugene and <br />Springfield. <br /> <br />As the Tri-Agency was being developed, a decision was made to base the agency on a nationally <br />recognized Public Health Model for animal services. This particular agency model included five basic <br />components that were seen as essential to a modern system of animal control: <br />1.Licensing Program <br /> <br />2.Enforcement Capabilities <br /> <br />3.Educational services <br /> <br />4.Shelter Facilities <br /> <br />5.Spay and Neuter Clinic <br /> <br /> <br />The Tri-Agency then developed a uniform animal regulatory code that was subsequently adopted by all <br />three participating governments. Both cities crafted a very specific set of guidelines which guided the <br />creation of their individual performance contracts with the Tri-Agency. The two most important goals <br />under the contracts were to provide more humane treatment of animals and to make and hold owners <br />more directly accountable for actions of their pets. To accomplish these goals, three main performance <br />standards were adopted. <br /> <br />Create a more pro-active adoption process. <br /> <br /> <br />Enact tough penalties for violators. <br /> <br /> <br />Establish a comprehensive licensing and educational program. <br /> <br /> <br />At its inception the Tri-Agency was charged with providing for property acquisition, shelter facilities and <br />enforcement capabilities. This activity was to be funded by a matrix payment formula based on number <br />of animals impounded, the number of officer assigned and the enforcement activity within each <br />jurisdiction. The original formula produced the following matrix: City of Eugene = 43%, City of Springfield <br />= 19% and Lane County = 38%. Funding for purchase of property and shelter construction was to follow <br />this matrix. Once constructed, the shelter was to be leased to Lane County by the Tri-Agency for a <br />nominal annual fee. <br /> <br />While developing goal statements and performance standards it became apparent that the established <br />management model of a board directly managing staff was needlessly cumbersome and inefficient. The <br />Tri-Agency Board decided to create the position of Director of Services within Lane County government. <br />The first Director, with a background in public health, was hired in 1977 and immediately began <br /> <br />