Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence - Non-Agenda Orozco, Norma From: Michael Mavrovouniotis < Sent: Friday, June 16, 2023 12:30 PM To: eComment Subject: OC Animal Care - Grand Jury report This is general public comment for the next city council meeting. The Grand Jury Report issued a HIGHLY CRITICAL report on OC Animal Care. You can find it on the Grand Jury website, here: https://www.ocgrandjury.org/pdfs/2022_2023_GJreport/Gimme_Shelter_and_a_Pound_of Advice.pdf * Write to your County Supervisor,your Mayor, and your City Council. Ask them to read the Grand Jury report, put an end to this scandal, and get OC Animal Care back on the right track. * If you'd like any reports emailed to you, please contact gmoses4819@gmail.com * Other reports on OC Animal Care: http://ocshelter.com * Another useful information site: https://opentheocshelter.com/ This is the SUMMARY taken word-for-word from the report: Orange County Animal Care has been a source of public concern since the 1990s,with no less than five previous Orange County Grand Jury reports detailing troubling conditions.The previous reports cited excessive euthanasia rates, poor leadership, inadequate numbers of animal care attendants, a lack of cooperation between staff departments, the exclusion of kennel staff from euthanasia decisions,the lack of proper assessment of animals chosen for euthanasia, and low morale negatively impacting operation of the shelter. Recent public outcry citing conditions at the shelter, recent litigation, and publicly circulated petitions calling for changes at the shelter suggest the previously expressed concerns remain. In addition to these publicly voiced concerns,the current Orange County Grand Jury received direct complaints requesting an inquiry.The Grand Jury determined a renewed investigation was warranted.The investigation focused on three major areas of concern:the management of the shelter,the welfare of animals under shelter care, and the communication and engagement with the public and the animal rescue community. A particular concern of the Grand Jury was the shelter's termination of its Trap, Neuter, and Return (TNR) program for community cats. In early 2020, the shelter decided to stop its TNR program.The Grand Jury's investigation determined that termination of the TNR program had detrimental consequences for the welfare of the animals under the shelter's care. The elimination of the TNR program also has contributed to substantial public dissatisfaction and alienation that undermines the public's and the rescue community's relations with shelter leadership. During the Grand Jury's investigation, it was reported by the shelter's senior management that the termination of the TNR program resulted from an opinion rendered by the County's legal counsel. Understanding the reason leading to the decision to terminate the TNR program would be important for considering whether the program can and/or should be reinstated.Toward that end, the Grand Jury endeavored to obtain a copy of the opinion of the County's legal counsel by directing a written request to the Chair of the Orange County Board of Supervisors. While the Grand Jury recognizes that 1 the opinion may enjoy confidentiality pursuant to the attorney-client privilege,the Board of Supervisors has the discretion to waive that privilege.The Grand Jury's request included its commitment to maintain the confidentiality of the opinion itself and its contents. Nevertheless,the request was declined, as was the Grand Jury's alternative request that the County simply identify the legal authority reviewed in studying the issue. Members of shelter management indicated their understanding the TNR program was terminated due to the opinion that the program violates a state law. The law makes it a crime to willfully abandon an animal notwithstanding that the program was designed to return cats to their original location rather than releasing them to randomly selected sites. TNR programs are widespread throughout California, not to mention the nation as set forth in a report from the American Bar Association. The Grand Jury is unaware of any published court case determining that a bona fide TNR program is prohibited under the anti-abandonment statute. Given the important benefits to animals and the public provided by such programs,the Grand Jury believes it would be prudent for the County to revisit the propriety of the former program and consider obtaining a second legal opinion. This report highlights analysis of data provided to the Grand Jury by the shelter indicating that euthanasia rates related to dog behavior and to cats have increased significantly within the last two years.The increase in dog behavioral euthanasia rates suggests that there is inconsistency over time as to how dogs are being assessed and evaluated for behavior-related euthanasia.The increase in feline euthanasia rates appears to be correlated with elimination of the TNR program. This report also addresses the challenges in maintaining quality staff at the shelter, especially in the Animal Care Attendant positions. Hiring practices for the shelter are too cumbersome, lengthy and lack consideration of how those practices impact animal welfare. Animal Care Attendant staffing at the shelter is inadequate and Animal Care Attendant staffing vacancies need to be filled more quickly. This report discusses major deficiencies with each of the issues identified above and makes specific recommendations to help support a more engaged community. Status quo at the shelter is unacceptable. Appropriate remedial steps must be taken as animal welfare is paramount! Finally,this report comments on the difficulties the Grand Jury encountered during its investigation. Without explanation,the entirety of the Orange County County Counsel's office determined itself to be conflicted with the Grand Jury's inquiry into Orange County Animal Care.The investigation was hampered and slowed during the six weeks the Grand Jury was required to arrange for outside legal counsel. z Orozco, Norma From: G Moses < Sent: Friday, June 16, 2023 12:57 PM To: eComment Subject: OC Animal Care - Where's the Strategic Plan? This is general public comment for the next city council meeting. Why did OC Animal Care chuck its Strategic Plan willy-nilly? And was OC Community Resources asleep at the wheel, or aiding-and-abetting? In 2018, the OC Board of Supervisors approved an excellent Strategic Plan. When the pandemic rolled in, OCAC found cover to quietly ditch the Strategic Plan and make up policies on a whim. The result is HIGHER COSTS and WORSE RESULTS. A short report on this scandal, "OCAC BOS-Approved 2018 Strategic Plan.pdf' can be found in this file-sharing Box folder: https://app.box.com/s/2gtbtfI17ai8xsd6i nt5g37dI p4huub3 In the same folder,you'll find the 57-page Strategic Plan that county management has been hiding from you, "OCAC Strategic Plan 052218 (004).pdf'. It was approved on May 18, 2018 by the Board of Supervisors. For your convenience, in the same folder,there is a short excerpt: "OCAC Strategic Plan Priority 1.pdf" is just the first two pages Strategic Plan, showing some of the big things that county bureaucrats threw overboard on their say-so. The Plan specified: -All qualified dogs socialized daily. - 100%Tracking to make sure animals get proper care (i.e., make sure the bureaucrats deliver what the citizen is asked to paying) - Reduction in average length of stay(i.e., REDUCTION in COSTS)All this was derailed and suppressed by OC Animal Care and OC Community Resources BEHIND CLOSED DOORS. With NO PLAN,the county is getting HIGHER COSTS and WORSE CARE. * Write to your County Supervisor,your Mayor, and your City Council. Ask them to put an end to this scandal, and get OC Animal Care back on the right track. * If you'd like any reports emailed to you, please contact * Other reports on OC Animal Care: http://ocshelter.com * Another useful information site: https://opentheocshelter.com/ i Middleton, Samuel From: An Doner < Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2023 3:13 PM To: eComment Subject: News Stories on the trouble with OC Animal Care This is general public comment for the next city council meeting. There has been a slew of HIGHLY CRITICAL News Stories on OC Animal Care. Here are the dates,titles, and web links,for the five-week period May 7-June 9 2023: OC Register, May 7, 2023: More adult dogs dying at OC Animal Care, kennels largely off-limits https://www.ocregister.com/2023/05/07/more- adult-dogs-dying-at-oc-ani mal-care-kennels-largely-off-I i mits/ KNX News, May 8, 2023 Orange County animal shelter kill rates double for adult dogs in 3 years https://www.audacy.com/knxnews/news/local/orange-county-animal-shelter-kill-rates-double-in-3-years OC Register, May 11, 2023: OC's animal shelter still a killing zone https://www.ocregister.com/2023/05/11/ocs-animal-shelter-still-a-killing-zone/ Voice of OC, May 31, 2023 Head of OC Animal Care Steps Down as Activists Fight for Open Shelter Policies https://voiceofoc.org/2023/05/head-of- oc-animal-care-steps-down-as-activists-fight-for-open-shelter-policies/ OC Register, May 31, 2023 OC Animal Care director temporarily moves jobs amid 'escalating negativity'toward her https://www.ocregister.com/2023/05/31/oc-a n i ma I-care-d i rector-tem pora ri ly-moves-jobs-a mid-esca lati ng-negativity- toward-her/ Voice of OC,June 7, 2023 Rhoades: OC Animal Care, Open the Facility https://voiceofoc.org/2023/06/rhoades-oc-animal-care-open-the-facility/ Voice of OC,June 8, 2023 Grand Jury: OC Animal Shelter Needs Updated Policies to Stop Killing More Animals https://voiceofoc.org/2023/06/grand-jury-oc-animal-shelter-needs-updated-policies-to-stop-killing-more-animals/ OC Register,June 9, 2023 OC Grand Jury raises concerns with management, animal welfare at OC Animal Care https://www.ocregister.com/2023/06/09/oc-gra nd-ju ry-ra ises-concerns-with-management-a n i ma I-welfare-at-oc- animal-care/ Los Angeles Times,June 9, 2023 Status quo at O.C. animal shelter'unacceptable' as euthanasia rates rise, report says https://www.latimes.com/cal ifornia/story/2023-06-08/orange-county-ani mal-care-shelter-grand-jury-report-dogs-cats- euthanized KTLA 5 News,June 9, 2023 1 Grand jury raises concerns about OC Animal Care's policies https://ktla.com/news/local-news/grand-jury-raises- concerns-about-oc-animal-cares-policies/ * An updated version of this list will be posted regularly, along with other reports on OC Animal Care, here: http://ocshelter.com * Another useful information site: https://opentheocshelter.com/ * If you'd like any reports emailed to you, please contact 2 Hall, Jennifer From:Keith Carpenter <edison@pacbell.net> Sent:Monday, June 19, To:eComment Subject:Rent Stabilization Ordnance Board and Tax Attachments:Letter to Council 6 5 2023.docm Please find attached my letter of opposition to the proposed Rent Stabilization Board and Tax. Keith Carpenter 1 June 5, 2023 Subject: Rent Stabilization Ordnance, Fee and Board Attention: Mayor of Santa Ana and Santa Ana City Council et al I am writing this letter in protest to the impending rental registration fee, rental board and the Rent Stabilization Ordnance in general. First, I would like to point out this Councils claimed commitment to transparency. I find that claim subjugated by several factors in relation to this Ordnance: 1. To claim the registration is a fee is disingenuous. It is a tax on landlords and tenants and should be called such. 2. To call this Ordnance Rent Stabilization is disingenuous; it is rent control. The Council, in my opinion, is playing semantics to make this Ordnance more palatable. 3. It is also, to be polite, disingenuous to claim the program will be “self-funding”. This claim cannot be substantiated. It is wholly unlikely that this scheme will be self-funding from the onset and most certainly will not be in the future. To claim the program will not incur higher costs as time passes, due to increased consultant cost and wages and benefits, is at best misleading and at worst dishonest. These costs will either be passed on as a higher fee, tax, to the landlord and ultimately the tenants or be funded by General Fund monies. This is tantamount to a tax on the citizenry as a whole. 4. To dovetail with 2 above, I challenge any member of the Council to find a government program that is wholly self-funding and that has not had a “fee” increase over time or other revenue source. 5. As I understand the City is already facing a law suit over this Ordnance. That alone makes the self- funding claim false as the City will spend monies defending this Ordnance, which the citizenry will pay to defend with tax dollars. 6. Again, this Ordnance is already in the red given the money spent on consultants to formulate a fee, tax, schedule. This to has been done at tax payer expense. 7. This Ordnance relies on 100% participation of landlords to finance. This again, is disingenuous and unrealistic. If 100% participation is achieved it will only be through draconian measures and most likely more Ordnances or decrees. We have an idea of what those measures will be; can’t advertise for rent, can’t evict, can’t increase rent, can’t petition for improvements. Now I would like to address issues of redundancy: 1. As the Council is fully aware the State has a rent control, rent stabilization if you please, laws in place. Creating a new Ordnance at the City level is, in my opinion, a waste of resources and motivated more by political than practical reasons. 2. There are State resources to deal with landlord/tenant issues in place and have been for years. To claim these State resources are ineffectual and cumbersome begs the question why the City resources would be more effective or streamlined. If the contention is the State government is not effective then it is wise to question how City governance, as a government entity, will be any more efficient or cost effective. 3. Adding this Ordnance, tax and review board can not be proven to alleviate landlord/tenant disputes or create a better environment for tenants more than existing law. Adding laws, ordinances, covenants or measures to existing laws, ordinances, covenants or measures is as redundant as this sentence. Cost 1. I trust that I am not the only one troubled by a $3.245 million dollar price tag for this Ordnance. This is no small sum of money. Given that this Ordnance will be administered by14.4 City employes, it would seem each employee will cost $231,785 a year. These are either very high paying jobs or there is definitely more cost associated with this. 2. Calling the Ordnance self-funding could be true. What is not true is calling the $100 per unit assessment a fee; it is a tax. This Ordnance is tax funded as is every service the City provides. 3. It has been stated that the cost of this Ordnance is “only” a few cents a day. I would caution you when anyone tells you it is “only” going to cost you X amount. What they’re not making clear is that it is still costing you. The sales tax is only 9.25%, the tax on gasoline is only $1.40 etc. 4. As stated previously there is very little possibility of the cost of this scheme not escalating, especially since the staff will be City employees whom, no doubt, will receive pay increases, benefit increases and promotions. A point to consider with promotions is that as people promote their position must be backfilled and this leads to an ever-growing organization. It is deceptive to claim that staff numbers will not grow over time; more staff = more costs. These staff increases are more likely to be based on administrative reasons rather than work load. 5. Has any thought been given to reducing employees if work load decreases? Has any thought been given to the heavy reliance on outside vendors for data analysis? It is naive to believe the vendor will reduce cost as time progresses. Equity 1. Some on the Council have touted this Ordnance as being necessary for equity, I can only question the logic of that. This Ordnance, and a degree of honesty must be exercised here, is biased heavily for the tenant. There are virtually no free legal resources afforded the landlord but a plethora for the tenant i.e., the eviction defense fund. Ignoring that there are bad tenants is utopian thinking. This Ordnance is neither equitable or fair. 2. It has been postulated by some that government is here to help and that the services provided are typically beneficial. This may be true for some services and to those of you whom have benefited I applaud you. Those services were not free though, they were paid for with tax dollars. Those tax dollars come from all of us not the government. There are no free services in government, someone has to pay and that someone is the citizens. In closing I would strongly urge each of you to review your Oath of Office, which you swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States and of the State of California. Then I would urge you to read Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. After doing so I believe, at a minimum, you will find it difficult if not impossible to support the registration tax and associated board and hopefully rescind the Ordnance in its entirety. Respectfully Keith Carpenter “It is a sin to be silent when it is your duty to protest” Abraham Lincoln Middleton, Samuel From: Lopez, Jessie Sent: Monday, June 19, 2023 6:28 PM To: eComment Subject: FW: ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Emily Su < Date: Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 10:02 PM Subject: Public Speaker statements? There is tremendous unrealized potential in this great city of ours. We are Santa Ana. A large, diverse community filled with beautiful historic places, rich cultural values and hard working people. People with dreams and children who have educational opportunities. We have so much potential. With experienced elected officials and a strong management team, we should be capitalizing on housing, infrastructure and service opportunities for our residents and businesses, but we are not. Why? Because special interests own Santa Ana and as long as the voters fall victim to the cons of those special interests led by the likes of Gerry Serrano and the Santa Ana Police Office Association, we all lose. Gerry 1 Serrano may be bankrolling the recall effort against Mayor Pro Tern Jessie Lopez, but it is everyone who sits on the Council that is being judged and watched. Who will stand idly on the sidelines watching as yet another person takes a political beating at the hands of the Santa Ana Police Officers union and its leader, Gerry Serrano? Will you do the right thing and oppose a senseless recall that will cost our City hundreds of thousands of dollars that could otherwise be spent on tangible improvements? Will you make false proclamations of neutrality and yet work behind the scenes to oust one of your own? The recall is nothing more than a misguided act of retribution that has worked for Gerry Serrano in the past and if it works again then the voters will get what Gerry wants them to get and that is a City Council of seven puppets who vote the way Gerry wants them to vote and the losers will be every tax-paying resident of Santa Ana who gets left footing the bill for Gerry's half a million dollar salary, benefits package and pension liability. 2 Yes, you all have political differences. That's not a surprise. You were all elected by the people of Santa Ana-diverse people with diverse political positions. Should any of you be recalled based on how you vote? In a very short time the voters will get to decide if Jessie Lopez should be re-elected. Let them decide in due course without making a mockery of our city. When a group of citizens rise up to support a recall it makes sense, but it makes no sense to allow Gerry Serrano and his puppet, Tim Rush, to disrupt our city, to waste hundreds of thousands of dollars just because Jessie Lopez dared to think independently and cast a vote that she believed was in the best interests of the City. The POA hired a law firm to prepare the recall petitions and it's the POA that paid for the political polls and professional signature gatherers to get people to sign the petitions. Doing so with your taxpayers dollars no less. The POA's revenue comes from the City. Millions of dollars flow from Councilmember 3 votes to the POA without any oversight whatsoever and then those same taxpayer dollars make their way into elections. What other labor unions in Orange County pour $400,000 into a local, city election. And why? Stop the nonsense already. Don't support the recall. Tonight on the agenda is a proposed MOU with the Santa Ana Police Officers Association. After many negotiation sessions and courage shown by the City Council when it imposed a last, best and final offer we end up with a deal that is even worse than what we started with. While residents in Santa Ana struggle to put food on the table, gas in their cars and pay for utilities, the POA members who don't live here get huge raises, outrageous benefits and millions of dollars will continue to flow into the POA coffers to fund political campaigns. Why? 4 Orozco, Norma From: Michael Mavrovouniotis < Sent: Monday,June 19, 2023 9:18 PM To: eComment Subject: OC Animal Care - Grand Jury Attachments: Grand Jury with Comments.pdf, OCAC Summary.pdf I am submitting two short documents on OC Animal Care for distribution to the City Council and inclusion in the record(along with the text of this message): A 6-page file "Grand Jury with Comments.pdf' contains comments on the Findings and Recommendations of the Grand Jury report on OC Animal Care. A 2-page file "OCAC Summary.pdf' contains a brief assessment of the decline in the performance of OC Animal Care. This assessment predates the publication of the Grand Jury report, yet reached the same conclusions. Compared to 2019,the length of stay for adult dogs has increased by 60%, and the kill rate has increased by 104%, even though adult dog intakes have decreased by 28%. This drop in performance is concurrent with changes in animal care and the adoption process: - Adopters can no longer view available dogs in the kennels. - Adopters select up to two dogs to visit per appointment by perusing an online photo lineup. - Play groups for large dogs that were in existence in 2019 have been suspended. A more detailed report can be found here: https://app.box.com/s/2Wxbl7kac7wjikyc88519ssjwi5pmt Newer reports and data can be found on the website OCShelter.com 1 The Grand Jury Report can be found here: https://www.ocgrandjury.orci/pdfs/2022 2023 GJreport/Gimme Shelter and a Pound of Advice.pdf It can also be downloaded from the ocshelter.com website, along with other reports on OC Animal Care. The text of each Grand Jury Finding is the intact text from the Grand Jury Report. Most (but not all) Findings are followed by a Comment in italics, which is the opinion of the author. The same format is used to show, and comment on, the Grand Jury Recommendations. GRAND JURY FINDINGS Management: F1 Management has limited flexibility utilizing personnel within Orange County Animal Care across departments due to structured work rules, volunteer work restrictions, and employees working in departmental silos. Comment. The consequence is that kennels are understaffed while the office is overstaffed. F2 Low staff morale exists within Orange County Animal Care. Comment. Management is not providing appropriate policies and resources to take care of the animals. The shelter is not providing proper cleaning, socialization, and enrichment programs. They advertise a luxurious adoption process which the insufficient numbers of kennel staff cannot possible provide. Stressed animals and overworked kennel staff, isn't that a recipe for low staff morale? F3 Orange County Animal Care staffing is negatively impacted by vacant positions remaining unfilled for greater than six months due to burdensome hiring processes. This delay in recruitment and completion of hiring has resulted in qualified candidates declining job offers. Comment. OCAC fails to recognize that good kennel staff have valuable skills and experience. Qualified candidates for these positions are the most likely to find other opportunities while OCAC keeps them waiting. F4 Based upon industry standards and best practices, Orange County Animal Care kennel attendants are understaffed to meet the needs of animals under care. Comment. The consequences of the understaffing are dire and cumulative: Dogs are not getting socialized and spend multi-day stretches shut in the kennels. Kennels cannot be cleaned frequently or thoroughly, and the dogs are typically still in the kennel during cleaning. Perhaps the management bars the public from the kennel areas so that they cannot witness these poor conditions. As to adoptions, there is no way that overworked kennel staff can provide time-consuming "concierge"counseling service; this has been false advertising on the part of shelter management all along. Page 1 of 6 F5 Orange County Animal Care's operating policies and procedures manual is out of date. Comment. Of course they are. The management's energy has been directed at producing outward-looking deceptive advertising. The PR documents are not truthful but they are polished. The substantive documents, including behavior evaluation, enrichment tracking, and adoption range from non-existent to outdated. F6 The Orange County Animal Care Volunteer program was stopped during COVID-19 and restarting the program has been slow, resulting in decreased animal socialization and enrichment. Comment. Instead of recruiting volunteers to provide better care for the animals, the management opted to lower care standards, keep the public from witnessing the deterioration, and present a false glossy image. Animal Welfare F7 Orange County Animal Care's Behavior Evaluation Committee evaluates dogs for euthanasia without written guidelines, policies, or procedures, resulting in inconsistent outcomes over time. Behavior evaluated euthanasia outcomes are dependent on the experience and personal considerations of the individual committee members and management rather than written objective standards. Comment. Indeed. Perhaps the shelter finds this convenient. It's easier to euthanize for space and label it as behavior. F8 The rate of behavioral euthanasia of dogs has increased significantly over the last 2 years. Comment.And this happened in the face of lower intakes in 2020-2022 than in the pre- pandemic period(2019). The shelter's policies, from inadequate socialization to sloppy assessment are at fault. Reliable studies have shown that no other explanation can be found for the rising kill rate. Analysis in https://app.box.com/s/nn5d/g95f37nhiip2/5jo720gazffs3z F9 Orange County Animal Care does not employ a professional or trained and certified animal behaviorist to oversee the shelter's dog enrichment program, resulting in dogs with declining behavior being placed at greater risk of being euthanized. Comment. This is part of the overall disregard of behavior issues (except as excuses for euthanasia). F10 While many county and city animal shelters throughout the state have active Trap, Neuter, and Return programs, Orange County Animal Care stopped its Trap, Neuter, and Return program, reportedly on the basis of the County Counsel's legal opinion that the program violates a California statute related to willful animal abandonment. Page 2 of 6 F11 The termination of the Trap, Neuter, and Return program is correlated with an increase in adult cat euthanasia rate at the shelter. Comment. No surprise. TNR is an investment that pays off in reduced intakes and euthanasia, especially for kittens. Here is a simple comparison: In 2019 the intake ratio of kittens :adult cats was 1.8:1;in 2022 that ratio rose to 4:1. The shelter is disproportionately taking in, and euthanizing, kittens. TNR can stem that. F12 There have been public concerns and requests expressed over the years for public programs to include a spay/neuter program by Orange County Animal Care. Comment. Whatever the method, it is in the best interest(monetary as well as humane) of the shelter and the participating cities to reduce the overpopulation of animals. Spay/neuter programs are a good way to do that. Communication / Outreach F13 The current adoption appointment system restricts public access to the dog kennels, thereby limiting potential adopters' access to all available animals. Comment. This diminished access has slowed down adoptions, and that means animals are staying longer at the shelter. Longer stays mean higher costs, more stress, behavior problems (abetted by inadequate enrichment), and more euthanasia. The rapid increase in length of stay is analyzed by the OCShelter.com website, specifically in Appendix A of this report: htWs.11app,box.com/s/2nrpxb/7kac7W kyc88519ssjwi512mt. F14 Orange County Animal Care's engagement with some animal rescue partners is negatively impacted due to differences of opinion in appropriate animal care policy. Comment. Rescue partners are being asked to shoulder the burden of bad policies. For adult dogs, in 2019 there were 6 adoptions for every transfer to rescue. In 2022, there were only 3.2 adoptions for each rescue. Adult dog intakes were 28% lower in 2022 than 2019. With fewer intakes, the shelter was unable to get animals adopted and resorted to turning up the pressure on rescues. It's only natural that the rescues do not want to shoulder the consequences of the shelter's self-inflicted problems. F15 Internal and community engagement does not adequately communicate the shelter's mission and operating strategy. Comment. The only discernible an operating "strategy"is putting out abundant untruthful PR. F16 The information currently on the Orange County Animal Care website for low- cost spay/neuter is not up to date with regard to referrals and prices for spay/neuter procedures. Comment. The information on the website has a strained relationship to truth. A prime example is the "Fact Check"document, filled with misleading and flat-out false statements. Page 3 of 6 Impediments to the Investigation F17 The OC County Counsel's office misstated to the Grand Jury the scope of its commitment to serving and assisting the Grand Jury in its investigations into County governance respecting managing conflicts between the Board of Supervisors, OC departments and agency clients, and the Grand Jury. GRAND JURY RECOMMENDATIONS Management: R1 By October 1, 2023, OC Human Resource Services should review and update recruitment strategies to significantly increase the timeliness of recruitment of vacant positions and to anticipate vacancies due to retirement, resignations, transfers. (F3) Comment. This must be done faster, in regard to kennel staff. The shelter is full and kennel staffing is even more deficient now(mid-2023) than at the time of the Grand Jury analysis. R2 By December 31, 2023, Orange County Animal Care, OC Community Resources, and OC Human Resource Services should review hiring practices to facilitate process improvements to expedite filling OCAC vacancies. (F3) Comment. Needed faster. See above. R3 By October 1, 2023, OC Community Resources and Orange County Animal Care should review their current staffing allocations of Animal Care Attendants to reflect NACA guidelines and to provide appropriate staffing allocations for animal care, feeding and enrichment. (F3, F4) Comment. Needed immediately. The shelter is full. As a result, quality of care has declined since the Grand Jury's report. Stress has increased, and so has euthanasia. R4 By October 1, 2023, OC Community Resources and Orange County Animal Care should review their current staffing allocations of all positions within the OCAC and reallocate resources to increase Animal Care Attendants to reflect NACA guidelines to provide appropriate staffing for animal care, feeding, and enrichment. (F3, F4) Comment. Needed immediately. See above. R5 By December 31, 2023, Orange County Animal Care management should review and update policies, procedures, guidelines, and practices to assure they are accurate and reflect current operating practices. (F5) Comment. There are steps that can be taken immediately, such as: Remove the deceptive "Fact Check"document and certain similar portions of the website. Remove the false claims of concierge service and oversold counseling that the shelter is in no position to provide. Page 4 of 6 R6 By June 30, 2024, the Board of Supervisors should evaluate the strategic option of creating a Joint Powers Authority for the County and fourteen contract Cities to take ownership and shared responsibility for the financial and operating policies and practices of OCAC. (F1 thru F16) Welfare R7 By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care management should establish written guidelines, policies, and procedures as standards for evaluating animal behavior for use by the Behavior Evaluation Committee. (F5, F7) Comment. Sorely needed. R8 By December 31, 2023, in the interests of transparency, Orange County Animal Care management should add a representative from a rescue organization to serve as a non-voting, at-large member on the Behavior Evaluation Committee. (F7, F14) Comment. Needed both to improve the decisions and to re-establish trust with rescue organizations. R9 By December 31, 2023, Orange County Animal Care, OC Community Resources, and OC Human Resource Services should hire an animal behaviorist or certified dog trainers to work with aggressive animals to reduce the high rate of dogs being euthanized and enhance their adoptability. (F8, F9) Comment. Needed, both to work directly with dogs and to systematically train volunteers and kennel staff, so that all can work as a team to preempt and address behavior issues. R10 By December 31, 2023, the Orange County Board of Supervisors and Orange County Animal Care management should request that County Counsel reconsider its opinion about the shelter's former Trap, Neuter, and Return program, or seek an independent second opinion to County Counsel's opinion, to ascertain whether the program can be re-established, or a modified version of the program can be implemented. (F10, F11) Comment. An outside counsel opinion could be obtained on a faster timeline. R11 By July 1, 2024, Orange County Animal Care should implement a low-cost public spay/neuter program. (F12) Communication / Outreach R12 By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care management should hold all- hands staff meetings at least every quarter. (F1, F2) R13 By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care, OC Community Resources, and OC Human Resource Services should conduct annual Page 5 of 6 surveys of staff to monitor morale and identify opportunities for operational improvement. (F1, F2) R14 By December 31, 2023, Orange County Animal Care management should open the shelter to the public for walk throughs to maximize opportunities for the public to adopt animals under the care of the shelter. (F13) Comment. There is no reason to wait until December. The shelter is full now and in dire need of more adoptions. Allowing the public to walk through the kennel areas is merely a return to the 2019 practices. It's nothing radical. If the shelter needs to ease into this, it can easily do that by designating certain days of the week as free-walk-through days. R15 By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care management should look for new ways to be more inclusive and engaged with volunteers and the rescue organizations that are necessary for the shelter's success. (F14, F15) Comment. Indeed. Both of these fall in the purview of the Community Outreach department, which has in the past run roughshod over volunteers and rescues. The entire mode of operation of this department will have to change. R16 By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care should schedule quarterly meetings with community stakeholders to facilitate transparency and engagement. (F14, F15) Comment. These meetings need to be inclusive and substantive. In the current Community Outreach Committee meetings, shelter management treats the community as an adversary to be undercut, not as a partner to work with. Anybody raising a question or a different point of view is beaten back. A different model is needed. R17 By October 1, 2023, Orange County Animal Care management should update the information currently on its website for low-cost spay/neuter of feral cats with regard to referrals and prices for spay/neuter procedures. (F16) Impediments to the Investigation R18 Beginning with the 2023/2024 Grand Jury training, and all training thereafter, County Counsel should provide detailed instruction about the circumstances under which the County Counsel's office might recuse itself from assisting with Grand Jury investigations and the alternatives available to the Grand Jury under such circumstances. (F17) Page 6 of 6 An Assessment of OC Animal Care —Summary Orange County Animal Care (OCAC) had excellent performance in 2019. The picture is different in 2022. For adult dogs: • The length of stay has increased by 60%. • The kill rate has increased by 104%. This is not the result of a higher number of incoming animals. Comparing 2022 to 2019: • Adult dog intakes have decreased by 28%. This drop in performance is concurrent with changes in animal care and the adoption process: • Adopters can no longer view available dogs in the kennels. • Adopters select up to two dogs to visit per appointment by perusing an online photo lineup. • Play groups for large dogs that were in existence in 2019 have been suspended. OCAC appears to be unaware of the decline in their critical metrics. • The only way to ensure continuous improvement is to have better data analysis. Length of Stay — Adult Dogs & Cats Dogs Length of Stay Cats Length of Stay 25 14 12 20 Increased length of stay 10 Increased length of stay 1s 8 10 6 4 5 2 0 0 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 201r 2015 2020 2021 2022 The length of stay was estimated from the average inventory (based on values from the first and last days of year) and the annual flow (based on incoming and outgoing animals). The graphs above show that the length of stay for adult dogs and cats has increased dramatically from 2019. Dogs Average Incoming& Outgoing Cats Average Incoming&Outgoing 6,000 4,000 5,000 3,500 Fewer dogs 3,000 4,000 2,500 Fewer cats 3,000 2,000 2,000 1,500 1,000 1,00a son 0 0 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 The change in the length of stay wasn't due to more animals coming into the shelter. In fact, the graphs above show that fewer adult dogs and cats were handled by the shelter than in 2019. Summary- 1 Kill Rate — Adult Dogs Adult Dog Kill Rate Adult Dog Count(Asilomar) 8,000 7,000 00 fi,000 4,005' Higher kill rate 5,000 Fewer dogs 3,00% 4,000 3,000 2.00% 2,000 1.00% 0.00% 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 The kill rate for adult dogs was calculated from the Asilomar data. The graphs above show that the kill rate has more than doubled since 2019 even though the shelter handles significantly fewer dogs. Are there other mitigating factors? Dog Intakes by Size Dog Intakes by Breed 9000 9000 8000 Intake of LARGE dogs is Puppy .11 Intake of three challenging Other LOWERthan 2019 small breeds is LOWER than 2019 ■Husky 7000 Medium 7000 Germ Shep 6000 ■Large 6000 ■Pit Bull 5000 5000 4000 4000 3000 3000 2000 2000 lllllll� _ 1000 1 IIt" 1000 . ■ ■ ■ = M 0 4 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2016 2017 2018 2019 202.0 2021 2022 The intakes for large dogs are somewhat lower than in 2019. The same applies for three of the more challenging breeds. If higher intakes for large dogs or challenging breeds aren't the problem, what is? The problem appears to be the long length of stay that results in: (1) a higher inventory, (2) more behavioral challenges, and (3) higher costs. What can be done? The adoption system is obviously performing poorly now compared to its performance in 2019. What was working in 2019 that isn't working today? Picking a dog: Why can't people walk through the kennels to view the dogs prior to picking a dog? An online photo lineup doesn't tell you anything about the dog's personality. Since a person can only choose two dogs to visit with, being able to see and connect with the dog prior to visiting is important. How does a person choose from multiple huskies that all look similar without seeing them in person? Reducing behavior problems& determining sociability: Play groups for the large dogs are no longer happening. Not only do play groups help reduce stress for the long term residents, but they also provide information to adopters that already have another dog at home. Summary-2 Middleton, Samuel From: Angela Capoccia < Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2023 11:44 AM To: eComment Subject: city council meeting- recall My name is Angela Capoccia.I am a resident of Santa Ana in Meredith Parkway and have lived here since late 2019. I am a devoted aunt of 10 who lives with my adult niece.I work less than 5 miles away from my home and am active in community events and fundraisers for CHOC and our local food bank.I love living in Santa Ana and don't plan to move. However,this is the second time in the short 3 years I have lived here that there has been a recall election pushed not because a city council member did anything wrong,but because the police union is angry at not getting their way and is manipulating the election system to force people out that they don't like.Not only is this a perversion of democracy,but it is costing our tax payers half a million dollars.That is money that can go to the library,to youth programs,to community events that make this city great.Instead,the city council is allowing the police union to manipulate the largest city in the county to allow themselves to take power.With elections only a year away,they have the ability to run a new candidate and win based on the merit of the two candidates.Instead,they are punishing my representative for voting the way she said she would when I voted for her. Who does the city council serve?I thought it was the residents who voted for them.But it appears that it is their donors,the police union.Not only that,but the signature campaign hounded people for weeks on end,refusing to leave people alone until they signed.This is the action of a group of bullies,not of people who are representing the interests of their constituents.If you want to get rid of Jessie Lopez because she did something unethical or illegal,than that is one thing.But to do so because she is doing exactly what we voted her to do shows you care more about power and money than the people of Santa Ana.Jessie Lopez cares about people like me,not powerful donors,and shame on you for caring more about lies than what is right. Angela Capoccia, Santa Ana resident 1 Middleton, Samuel From: Ginette Sanchez < Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2023 2:31 PM To: eComment Subject: Good afternoon Mayor, council members, and city officials... Good afternoon Mayor , council members, and city officials. . We are here as a group of merchants in downtown Santa Ana expressing a serious matter . We have fine a very brief survey and it seems more than 80 % of us , the merchants on 4 th street have not agreed to this parade and street closure , so we are wondering why after we didn't sign and too many times that we have told the city authorities that we don't want , with the exception of cinco de mayo, fiestas patrias , and noche de altar , the street to be closed , why still the city has issued the permit for this event and why we should suffer financially for almost 3 days with street closures ? If this parada is called OC PRIDE and in fact is so popular and profitable, why down town Orange or Anaheim, or any other city fight for it and take it , and if this is Santa Ana event why isn't moved to Bristol , South Main , south coast plaza ? Why we must suffer all the time after even we rejected the proposal ?! 1 This is part of gentrification of downtown Santa Ana plan to get rid of Latino families and it must stop . We appreciate your urgent help in this matter , please let us know what as a group of merchants we can do to assist you . Thank you Downtown Merchant Group Sent from my iPhone 2 Middleton, Samuel From: marcela prado < Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2023 2:40 PM To: eComment Subject: OC PARADE Good afternoon Mayor and council members .We are here as a group of merchants in downtown Santa Ana expressing a serious matter. We have fine a very brief survey and it seems more than 80%of us,the merchants on 4 th street have not agreed to this parade and street closure,so we are wondering why after we didn't sign and too many times that we have told the city authorities that we don't want,with the exception of cinco de mayo, fiestas patrias,and noche de altar,the street to be closed,why still the city has issued the permit for this event and why we should suffer financially for almost 3 days with street closures? If this parada is called OC PRIDE and in fact is so popular and profitable,why down town Orange or Anaheim,or any other city fight for it and take it,and if this is Santa Ana event why isn't moved to Bristol, South Main, south coast plaza?Why we must suffer all the time after even we rejected the proposal?! This is part of gentrification of downtown Santa Ana plan to get rid of Latino families and it must stop . We appreciate your urgent help in this matter,please let us know what as a group of merchants we can do to assist you. Thank you Downtown Merchant Group 1 Orozco, Norma From: Teresa Saldivar <teresa@teresasjewelers.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2023 3:12 PM To: eComment Subject: Regarding Street Closures Hello, Just a note to state that Teresa's Jewelers is opposed to unnecessary street closures. Broadway is closed all this week because the City of Santa Ana refuses to pay 33% more to have db Electric work at night. Workers on the street traffic lights left at 3pm today; why are they not working till 5pm? This weekend June 23rd to the 25t" our streets will also be closed. I approved the OC Pride Parade last year because it was a street closure from 6am to 12pm, but the whole weekend? Sincerely, Teresa ------------------------------ 7eresa SaCcdvar Teresa's Jewelers 223 W. 4th Street Santa Ana, Ca 92701 P: 714-834-9277 1 F: 714-834-0193 www.teresasjewelers.com