The Animal Foundation wants to build a $3 million animal shelter and wants the City to pitch in $1.5 million. If the City doesn't, then the City will have "to find a way to hold animals picked up under municipal ordinance which could include continuing to operate some functions out of the existing shelter".
If I'm understanding this correctly, the Animal Foundation is saying that if they don't get half of the new shelter paid for by the City, they would not go ahead with the construction of a full service facility and the City would have to continue to use the old building.
This is news.
According to the Animal Foundation's website, their goal is $3 million and they are "nearly halfway there!" I did not find any mention about the city's "contribution" to this endeavor.
Questions:
* How long has city staff known about this demand?
* Why wasn't the public informed about this before now?
* Who decided that the city's share of this project would be half the cost?
* Does the new shelter really have to be $3 million to be a good one?
Before a decision is made, the commission will be voting Tuesday night (5/20) to adopt resolution #9749, which would create an Animal Shelter/Enforcement Advisory Committee.
This committee's responsibility would be to "find the best course of action for the community to provide humane treatment of animals in the care and responsibility of the City of Great Falls within the limits of the City's financial means". The committee will also be "charged with recommending an appropriate level of City financial support to the new shelter and to the City's ongoing responsibility of enforcing the municipal animal ordinances".
Members of this committee would be made up of two members recommended by the Humane Society of Cascade County, two members recommended by the Animal Foundation and three members from elected Neighborhood Council members.
I am very glad to see that members of the Neighborhood Councils would be involved. These folks are elected, and as such, their input from the grassroots level is very much needed.
I am very glad to see that members of the Neighborhood Councils would be involved. These folks are elected, and as such, their input from the grassroots level is very much needed.
Thanks very much Mr. Doyon for not allowing this to become another expenditure without public knowledge or input.
7 comments:
Just when I thought the city could not do anything more dumb than taking over the animal shelter in the first place ($300,000+ in loses and still counting) combined with the $500,000 lost on Lewis & Clark tourism and millions lost (and still counting)on SME/ECP and now they want to spend $1,500,000 to help bail out the Animal Foundation. How many police officers and/or firemen can a million and a half dollars pay? The next question should be: How much taxpayer money is being contributed by the city to help pay for the new dog park and how much money has the city contributed to the AF in the past three years? It is nice that city is planning on appointing a committee. That way, when the committee comes back recommending the city pay a million and a half dollars to the Animal Foundation the city comissioners can all (with the exception of Mary) say, "It is the will of the people". How can the city not have money for additional police or fire protection but has money to donate for an animal shelter? WAIT.....! How silly of me. The city can say they are spending money on police protection! I almost forgot - the police department operates the animal shelter. Hopefully the new city manager is better at math than the people who hired him. So far it appears that is the case and my congratulations to him! Let's see; the city takes over the animal shelter and loses money. The city takes over tourism and loses money. The city enters into the power business and loses money. If there was a way they could lose money with the outdated downtown parking meters I am confident they would have found a way by now to lose money on about the only thing left they aren't losing money.
When Dona Stebbins got a letter concerning the hanimal shelter she had Gloria Lamott answer the call. Mrs Lamott(animal foundation) Dona and Gloria (best friends)
thats all there is to say about that. Dona probably approved the 1,500,000 before the city even took over the shelter.
I can't wait for this new committee to form. Its about time the people of great falls got a say in this crap.
I would normally agree the idea of forming a citizen's committee is a good idea. However, the deck is already stacked in favor of the $1,500,000 contribution. You don't really think Donna and crew will select people who are not already in favor of the idea? The fix is in..... The city commissioners decide who is on the committee and we all know where their loyalty lie with the exception of Mary. Why does the city not want current Animal Foundation and Cascade County Humane Society board members on the committee? It seems rather strange that people who know the needs the best are purposely left out and why is there a three year moratorium of having served on the respective boards? Why not one year or five years? Who does the city not want serving on the committee? Given the city's absolutley shameful treatment of the humane society board I can understand the city's continued demonstration of arrogance of power but what did the Animal Foundation board ever do to the city? I am sure the city consulted with the human society and Animal Foundation before setting up this resolution. I am very disappointed that both groups gave their blessing to this idea. Doesn't it seem a little strange the committee will have an initial life-span of 3 years? Neighborhood council members only serve two years before they are up for re-election. Why three years? (It cannot possibly take three years to make what is already a predetermined decision.) I can tell you why..........after deciding (predetermined decision) the city should contribute $1,500,000 it will then become the committee's responsibility to select what entity will operate the mother of all animal shelters. Any guess as to who will be in charge? You can bet the city will pay Gloria, er ah, the entity a princely sum every year to operate the facility. It will vastly exceed what the city paid the humane society before the city takeover last year. And once again you will see your hard earned taxpayer dollars going down the same rat hole as the generating plant. The city should go ahead and save the committee members time and just go ahead and give the $1,500,000 now instead of wasting everyone's time. Remember.....the fix is in. I am sure Mr. Doyon doesn't know it. No offense intended to Mr. Doyon as I think he is doing a terrific job! And Mary is doing a GREAT job but she is only one person. Stay tuned to see how your tax dollars continue to be wasted.
This is not news.
None of your questions are new. Go back and read everything on Overfield's blog.
She said all this and said it was dirty from the beginning, that's what got her dragged out of that meeting last year.
I bet she'll be right about a lot of other things to do with this inside mess, too.
Anon at 11:36am:
I cannot find anywhere on Susan's blog where my questions asked on this post were answered.
Since you're so sure none of this is news and has been covered before by her, send me those links and I will post them.
I guess the police, fire department and animal foundation can fight over the $1.4 million in SME's 'lockbox' which was a GIFT from Mr. Lawton to help their cashflow as he stated himself in the Tribune!!
Remember when candidate Dona was vilifing city leadership back in 2005 for a paltry $500K loss and the sums we're concerned with are now in the MILLIONS, besides the reputation and intregrity of our community.
The commission meeting this coming Tuesday is gonna be a real hoot!!
http://ecityblog.blogspot.com/2007/06/susan-overfield.html
Overfield's statement to the city.
Liars & Traitors: Oct 2007
The Foundation AND HSCC have a meeting.
All online city records about this bid before June 19 disappear.
The Foundation now "merges" with the Spay group.
No mention of the HSCC, the bid or the fact that the original people, (the Foundation, City, and others) remain working behind the scenes in this and your initial questions about their interrelatedness and the possible impropriety of the bid is unanswered.
Greg Smith's Post & Discuss:Nov 14, 2007
It looks to me as if the Foundation was not raising funds fast enough, for whatever reason, and this merging or interplay of City & Foundation was a means to accelerate the fund-raising process via passing it off to become the taxpayers' burden. There might even have been some bad personal blood on the part of ex-patriot HSCC Board members which helped make this City/Foundation connection viable. This might have been totally acceptable, but for the closed-door and irregular practices exhibited by the City, the Commission and Donna Stebbins and documented by others.
GF Animal Shelter Report: Dec 27, 2008
The City of Great Falls, The Animal Foundation of Great Falls, and Spay of the Falls would have you believe the fault all lies with the HSCC, when in truth it was a resource problem. All three of these entities, IN TANDEM, took and controlled the financial resources of the community for their personal goals and gain...
Overfield said all along that the city and Foundation wanted to get control and pass the cost to the people. How do YOU think half the funds will be raised? Bake sale? Try another tax increase, levy, or more creative bookkeeping.
Post a Comment