The Giuliani Administration and its City-Hall controlled Center for Animal Care & Control both lobbied aggressively to kill the State law amendment sought by SRAC that would have cleared the way for the NY City Council to create a Department of Animal Affairs without challenge by the Mayor. The CACC hired an expensive law firm who lobbied both in person (lobbyist Brian McMahon visited legislators to sway them with lies and misrepresentations about what this legislation does) and in a written memo (see below). Money spent by CACC to lobby only takes scarce resources away from the shelter animals. Shame onCACC.
While the misguided forces of oppressive government succeeded for this legislative session, come next January, the bills will be reintroduced, and State legislators will be apprised of the dishonest logic and unfair opposition to these bills so that they can fairly judge the merits of diluting the Mayor's power over NYC animals.
ON SENATE
COMMITTEE AGENDA
THE CITY OF NEW YORK
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
ANTHONY P. PISCITELLI
DIRECTOR
STATE LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS
75 Park Place
New York, NY 10007
(212) 788-1619
111 Washington Avenue
Albany, New York 12210
(518) 447-5200
MEMO IN OPPOSITION
LEGISLATIVE REFERENCE
S.3963 - by Senator Goodman - Rules Com.
A.1218 - by M. of A. Grannis - Cities Com.
TITLE
AN ACT to amend chapter 115 of the laws of 1894, relating to the better protection of lost and strayed animals and for securing the rights of owners thereof, in relation to authority over city's management of animals in any city having a population of over two million
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS
Section I of this bill amends Section 8-C of Chapter 115 of the laws of 1894, which established the power of any city having a population of over two million to carry out the provisions of the act, by removing reference to the Mayor.
REASONS FOR OPPOSITION
The City of New York opposes this legislation as an unnecessary intrusion onto the authority of the City Department of Health to perform its duties. This proposal would remove the authority of the Mayor to designate the Agency responsible for animal protection so that a separate Department of Animal Affairs could be created. Currently, the City Department of Health is the agency responsible for the overnight of this function. The City Department of Health has contracted with the Center for Animal Care and Control (CACC) since 1995 to manage the City's animal shelters. Since the Department of Health has contracted with CACC, we have made significant strides in improving a system which was characterized by inadequate facilities and outdated equipment.
The intent of the proponents of this legislation is clear if we look at an attempt in 1997 to file a petition for a ballot initiative to create this new department. The initiative contained numerous highly detailed provisions and mandates, and would have assigned to the new agency powers and substantial obligations not previously held by any municipal agency. The State Supreme Court determined that the ballot initiative conflicted with provisions in state law and that the administrative detail specified in the initiative exceeded the authority of the ballot initiative mechanism. This decision was subsequently upheld by the Appellate Court.
It is not at all clear what purpose a separate Department of Animal Affairs would serve. If the concern is, as the sponsors memorandum indicates, a lack of funding, then it is illogical to think that a separate Department would solve this problem. In. fact, under the contract with CACC, their annual operating budget has increased by over 70% since 1995. This appropriation does not include significant in-kind contributions from the City for administration and overhead and does not reflect the cost to the City for the purchase or rental of the facilities themselves.
The other concerns listed in the sponsor's memorandum and in recent newspaper advertisements also need to be clarified because they are untrue and misleading. The City has embarked upon an ambitious capital plan for expanding and modernizing the animal shelters in Brooklyn and Manhattan.
In addition, we are moving ahead with plans to establish a facility in Queens. Services will also be expanded at the Brooklyn shelter to a 24-hour a day, 7-day a week operation. Additional funding has been appropriated to hire additional kennel attendants and service representatives to improve cleanliness and increase adoption hours.
CACC currently handles more than 63,000 animals annually, an increase of more than 6,500 since 1995. Despite this increase, the number of animals who are euthanized has decreased by nearly 10 percent and adoptions have increased by nearly 20%. It must be noted that the rates of adoption and euthanasia in the City's shelter system can never be comparable to private shelter systems. Most private shelters do not accept animals that are not adoptable. The City shelters have the responsibility for animals that no one else will accept, as well as those that are seized because they have become a serious threat to people. We believe that the addition of another layer of bureaucracy will not change these numbers. Instead we should encourage policies that promote responsible pet ownership, which can have more of an impact, than a separate department.
Accordingly, it is urged that this bill be disapproved.
Respectfully submitted,
[no signature]
ANTHONY P. PISCITELLI
Legislative Representative
JJ/dgb
S:Al2l8
6/11/99
S - com.
Nixon, Hargrave, Devans & Doyle LLP
Attorneys and Counselors at Law
ONE KEYCORP PLAZA
ALBANY. NEW YORK 12207-3497
(518) 427-2650
FAX: (518) 427-2655
June 14, 1999
MEMO IN OPPOSITION
ON BEHALF OF
CENTER FOR ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL, INC.
LEGISLATIVE REFERENCE
Assembly Bill A 1218 - M. of A- Grannis
Senate Bill S 3963 - Senator Goodman
TITLE
Removes sole authority for mayors of cities with a population of two million to designate agency for animal protection.
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS
Section I amends section 8-c of the laws of 1894, which establishes the power of any city having a population of over two million to carry out the provisions of the act, by removing reference to the mayor,
PURPOSE OF BILL
To remove the sole authority of the Mayor for cities with a population of over two million to designate the agency for animal protection.
REASONS FOR OPPOSITION
The CENTER FOR ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL, Inc. is a not-for-profit which by contract administers animal control services in New York City and receivers private donations to support its mission.
Approximately four years ago the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) chose to end its contractual relationship with the City of New York to provide animal control functions within the city's boundaries. Following the transfer of animal control services from the ASPCA to New York City, the city did not receive any suitable external bids for comparable services. As a result, the CENTER FOR CARE AND CONTROL [CACC] was formed and incorporated as a tax-exempt organization. Over the last four years, CACC has assembled a team with years of experience and expertise in all aspects of animal control and veterinary care. The CACC is one of the largest sheltering agencies in the United States. On the average, its facilities receive 150 stray and unwanted animals per day, or the equivalent of 20% of its total housing capacity. National animal care and control experts suggest that in order to provide responsible animal care and control services, communities need a minimum of one field staff person for every 16,000 persons. CACC operates with a staff of only eight people, and serves a human population of over 7.3 million, translating to one field staff person per just under every one million people. In addition, CACC has only limited powers to enforce existing animal care and control laws.
Senate Bill S-3963 and Assembly Bill A-1218 would replace CACC with a city agency, Commissioners of city agencies do not have the discretion to lobby independently for additional funds for their agencies, In contrast, CACC has been able to successfully seek increased funding. Since June of 1997, CACC has convinced the city Administration to increase its budget by almost 50 %, from $4.85 million in 1997 to nearly $8 million effective July 1, 1999- During the same period, the city's capital expenditures for CACC facilities have increased from less than $4 million to over $12 million.
If S-3963 and A-1218 were to pass into law, it would undermine the benefits that accrue as a result of CACC's status as a not-for-profit. This status allows CACC to sponsor fundraising activities that supplement funds allocated by the city. In the last year alone, CACC has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars that would be lost if the proposed legislation were to pass. its not-for-profit status also allows CACC to negotiate the best prices with its vendors, rather than being subject to the Procurement Policy Board provisions governing New York City agencies. This has allowed CACC to realize considerable savings on food, pharmaceuticals, supplies and service contracts As a Department of the City of New York, the opportunity to cultivate private dollars would be lost to the detriment of both animal welfare and the taxpayers.
At the present time, 84 cents of every dollar that CACC spends goes to the direct care of the animals in its shelters, It is doubtful that a city agency could maintain its administrative overhead at less than 16%, while guaranteeing the same quality and level of service that is currently being provided
CACC, like many shelters across the country is under constant pressure to increase adoptions, and decrease "the killings". Too often, the perceived success or failure of animal care and control programs is erroneously defined by euthanasia figures alone. The goal of animal care and control agencies must not be to simply end euthanasia, but to end the need for it.
Adoption programs, while potentially effective in reducing euthanasia on an immediate basis, have little impact on the sources of the homeless pet problem, and therefore on reducing the need for euthanasia in the future. Euthanasia is not a solution to pet overpopulation but rather a tragic result of it. Through the efforts of CACC, euthanasia rates have been substantially reduced- According to a 1996 study, New York City has the lowest per capita euthanasia rate for any large municipality in the country.
Accordingly, on behalf of the CENTER FOR ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL it is urged that these bills NOT be approved by the Legislature.
Respectfully submitted,
NIXON, HARGRAVE, DEVANS & DOYLE LLP
By: [no signature]
James E. McMahon
A12471.1
[The following memorandum, believed to be written and disseminated by CACC board member Lia Albo, was withdrawn by the Fund For Animals national headquarters, which takes no position on this legislation]
THE FUND FOR ANIMALS, INC.
Have-A-Heart Spay & Neuter Clinic
356 WEST 52nd Street, New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (212) 977-6877, Fax (212) 977-6885
Edward J. Walsh, Jr.
Legal Counsel
Lia Albo
Director, Have-A-Heart Clinic
June 13, 1999
Memorandum in opposition to S3963 and A1218
The Fund for Animals, a national animal rights organization founded in 1967 by Cleveland Amory with thousands of members in New York State, opposes S3963 and A1218. In New York City the Fund operates the largest low-cost high volume spay/neuter clinic in the country. The welfare and humane treatment of dogs and cats in New York City is a priority for the Fund for Animals.
Providing animal care services for the City of New York is a monumental task and one that the public and legislators have been severly misled by a small group of individuals who have no professional experience in operating animal care facilities. While services must improve and increase for the abandoned and abused animals in New York City the Fund does not believe that S3963/A1218 will achieve this. In fact we believe this bill is not in the best interest of the animal and will only set the care and programs which have been initiatd by the Center for Animal Care and Control back.
We respectfully request your consideration of the above.
While the misguided forces of oppressive government succeeded for this legislative session, come next January, the bills will be reintroduced, and State legislators will be apprised of the dishonest logic and unfair opposition to these bills so that they can fairly judge the merits of diluting the Mayor's power over NYC animals.
ON SENATE
COMMITTEE AGENDA
THE CITY OF NEW YORK
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
ANTHONY P. PISCITELLI
DIRECTOR
STATE LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS
75 Park Place
New York, NY 10007
(212) 788-1619
111 Washington Avenue
Albany, New York 12210
(518) 447-5200
MEMO IN OPPOSITION
LEGISLATIVE REFERENCE
S.3963 - by Senator Goodman - Rules Com.
A.1218 - by M. of A. Grannis - Cities Com.
TITLE
AN ACT to amend chapter 115 of the laws of 1894, relating to the better protection of lost and strayed animals and for securing the rights of owners thereof, in relation to authority over city's management of animals in any city having a population of over two million
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS
Section I of this bill amends Section 8-C of Chapter 115 of the laws of 1894, which established the power of any city having a population of over two million to carry out the provisions of the act, by removing reference to the Mayor.
REASONS FOR OPPOSITION
The City of New York opposes this legislation as an unnecessary intrusion onto the authority of the City Department of Health to perform its duties. This proposal would remove the authority of the Mayor to designate the Agency responsible for animal protection so that a separate Department of Animal Affairs could be created. Currently, the City Department of Health is the agency responsible for the overnight of this function. The City Department of Health has contracted with the Center for Animal Care and Control (CACC) since 1995 to manage the City's animal shelters. Since the Department of Health has contracted with CACC, we have made significant strides in improving a system which was characterized by inadequate facilities and outdated equipment.
The intent of the proponents of this legislation is clear if we look at an attempt in 1997 to file a petition for a ballot initiative to create this new department. The initiative contained numerous highly detailed provisions and mandates, and would have assigned to the new agency powers and substantial obligations not previously held by any municipal agency. The State Supreme Court determined that the ballot initiative conflicted with provisions in state law and that the administrative detail specified in the initiative exceeded the authority of the ballot initiative mechanism. This decision was subsequently upheld by the Appellate Court.
It is not at all clear what purpose a separate Department of Animal Affairs would serve. If the concern is, as the sponsors memorandum indicates, a lack of funding, then it is illogical to think that a separate Department would solve this problem. In. fact, under the contract with CACC, their annual operating budget has increased by over 70% since 1995. This appropriation does not include significant in-kind contributions from the City for administration and overhead and does not reflect the cost to the City for the purchase or rental of the facilities themselves.
The other concerns listed in the sponsor's memorandum and in recent newspaper advertisements also need to be clarified because they are untrue and misleading. The City has embarked upon an ambitious capital plan for expanding and modernizing the animal shelters in Brooklyn and Manhattan.
In addition, we are moving ahead with plans to establish a facility in Queens. Services will also be expanded at the Brooklyn shelter to a 24-hour a day, 7-day a week operation. Additional funding has been appropriated to hire additional kennel attendants and service representatives to improve cleanliness and increase adoption hours.
CACC currently handles more than 63,000 animals annually, an increase of more than 6,500 since 1995. Despite this increase, the number of animals who are euthanized has decreased by nearly 10 percent and adoptions have increased by nearly 20%. It must be noted that the rates of adoption and euthanasia in the City's shelter system can never be comparable to private shelter systems. Most private shelters do not accept animals that are not adoptable. The City shelters have the responsibility for animals that no one else will accept, as well as those that are seized because they have become a serious threat to people. We believe that the addition of another layer of bureaucracy will not change these numbers. Instead we should encourage policies that promote responsible pet ownership, which can have more of an impact, than a separate department.
Accordingly, it is urged that this bill be disapproved.
Respectfully submitted,
[no signature]
ANTHONY P. PISCITELLI
Legislative Representative
JJ/dgb
S:Al2l8
6/11/99
S - com.
Nixon, Hargrave, Devans & Doyle LLP
Attorneys and Counselors at Law
ONE KEYCORP PLAZA
ALBANY. NEW YORK 12207-3497
(518) 427-2650
FAX: (518) 427-2655
June 14, 1999
MEMO IN OPPOSITION
ON BEHALF OF
CENTER FOR ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL, INC.
LEGISLATIVE REFERENCE
Assembly Bill A 1218 - M. of A- Grannis
Senate Bill S 3963 - Senator Goodman
TITLE
Removes sole authority for mayors of cities with a population of two million to designate agency for animal protection.
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS
Section I amends section 8-c of the laws of 1894, which establishes the power of any city having a population of over two million to carry out the provisions of the act, by removing reference to the mayor,
PURPOSE OF BILL
To remove the sole authority of the Mayor for cities with a population of over two million to designate the agency for animal protection.
REASONS FOR OPPOSITION
The CENTER FOR ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL, Inc. is a not-for-profit which by contract administers animal control services in New York City and receivers private donations to support its mission.
Approximately four years ago the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) chose to end its contractual relationship with the City of New York to provide animal control functions within the city's boundaries. Following the transfer of animal control services from the ASPCA to New York City, the city did not receive any suitable external bids for comparable services. As a result, the CENTER FOR CARE AND CONTROL [CACC] was formed and incorporated as a tax-exempt organization. Over the last four years, CACC has assembled a team with years of experience and expertise in all aspects of animal control and veterinary care. The CACC is one of the largest sheltering agencies in the United States. On the average, its facilities receive 150 stray and unwanted animals per day, or the equivalent of 20% of its total housing capacity. National animal care and control experts suggest that in order to provide responsible animal care and control services, communities need a minimum of one field staff person for every 16,000 persons. CACC operates with a staff of only eight people, and serves a human population of over 7.3 million, translating to one field staff person per just under every one million people. In addition, CACC has only limited powers to enforce existing animal care and control laws.
Senate Bill S-3963 and Assembly Bill A-1218 would replace CACC with a city agency, Commissioners of city agencies do not have the discretion to lobby independently for additional funds for their agencies, In contrast, CACC has been able to successfully seek increased funding. Since June of 1997, CACC has convinced the city Administration to increase its budget by almost 50 %, from $4.85 million in 1997 to nearly $8 million effective July 1, 1999- During the same period, the city's capital expenditures for CACC facilities have increased from less than $4 million to over $12 million.
If S-3963 and A-1218 were to pass into law, it would undermine the benefits that accrue as a result of CACC's status as a not-for-profit. This status allows CACC to sponsor fundraising activities that supplement funds allocated by the city. In the last year alone, CACC has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars that would be lost if the proposed legislation were to pass. its not-for-profit status also allows CACC to negotiate the best prices with its vendors, rather than being subject to the Procurement Policy Board provisions governing New York City agencies. This has allowed CACC to realize considerable savings on food, pharmaceuticals, supplies and service contracts As a Department of the City of New York, the opportunity to cultivate private dollars would be lost to the detriment of both animal welfare and the taxpayers.
At the present time, 84 cents of every dollar that CACC spends goes to the direct care of the animals in its shelters, It is doubtful that a city agency could maintain its administrative overhead at less than 16%, while guaranteeing the same quality and level of service that is currently being provided
CACC, like many shelters across the country is under constant pressure to increase adoptions, and decrease "the killings". Too often, the perceived success or failure of animal care and control programs is erroneously defined by euthanasia figures alone. The goal of animal care and control agencies must not be to simply end euthanasia, but to end the need for it.
Adoption programs, while potentially effective in reducing euthanasia on an immediate basis, have little impact on the sources of the homeless pet problem, and therefore on reducing the need for euthanasia in the future. Euthanasia is not a solution to pet overpopulation but rather a tragic result of it. Through the efforts of CACC, euthanasia rates have been substantially reduced- According to a 1996 study, New York City has the lowest per capita euthanasia rate for any large municipality in the country.
Accordingly, on behalf of the CENTER FOR ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL it is urged that these bills NOT be approved by the Legislature.
Respectfully submitted,
NIXON, HARGRAVE, DEVANS & DOYLE LLP
By: [no signature]
James E. McMahon
A12471.1
[The following memorandum, believed to be written and disseminated by CACC board member Lia Albo, was withdrawn by the Fund For Animals national headquarters, which takes no position on this legislation]
THE FUND FOR ANIMALS, INC.
Have-A-Heart Spay & Neuter Clinic
356 WEST 52nd Street, New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (212) 977-6877, Fax (212) 977-6885
Edward J. Walsh, Jr.
Legal Counsel
Lia Albo
Director, Have-A-Heart Clinic
June 13, 1999
Memorandum in opposition to S3963 and A1218
The Fund for Animals, a national animal rights organization founded in 1967 by Cleveland Amory with thousands of members in New York State, opposes S3963 and A1218. In New York City the Fund operates the largest low-cost high volume spay/neuter clinic in the country. The welfare and humane treatment of dogs and cats in New York City is a priority for the Fund for Animals.
Providing animal care services for the City of New York is a monumental task and one that the public and legislators have been severly misled by a small group of individuals who have no professional experience in operating animal care facilities. While services must improve and increase for the abandoned and abused animals in New York City the Fund does not believe that S3963/A1218 will achieve this. In fact we believe this bill is not in the best interest of the animal and will only set the care and programs which have been initiatd by the Center for Animal Care and Control back.
We respectfully request your consideration of the above.
