Rich Ecke did a good job of reporting what transpired at the City Commission work session last night with regard to the Animal Foundation report and the virtual animal shelter tour the city manager gave.
But he did leave out an important decision the commissioners made.
They decided to rescind the Animal Shelter Committee ordinance.
To recap, this committee was to be comprised of two members recommended by the Animal Foundation, two recommended by the Humane Society and three from sitting Neighborhood Council members. On June 6, Commissioner Bronson was very much in favor of getting this committee up and running:
"My concern is that if we wait too long to get the Committee up and running, we may lose some time in getting the entire animal control/enforcement/shelter operations issues resolved".
Well, it didn't happen. In fact, for two months we heard nothing. It wasn't until about August 8 that a concerned citizen brought it up again.
Now, a month later, we have the Animal Foundation, albeit in a nice way (there was humor in their presentation), putting the city in the hot seat. According to conversations they had with former city manager, John Lawton, the city was always going to be in partnership with them with regard to the shelter. (No monies were set aside in the 2008-2009 budget for this, simply because there is no $1.5 million, which evidently is the amount the Foundation was told it would receive from the city). They indicated last night that partial funding is not an option, because expenses keep increasing.
Commissioner Rosenbaum suggested a "construction" committee be appointed to get going on this deal. He just kind of appointed himself and a few others who were mentioned in the Trib's article. (I guess these types of decisions don't require a vote, because none was taken. In fact, I don't recall that he asked for anybody else's opinion about who should sit on this committee). He also "predicted the committee could finish its work in less than a month".
Interesting.
But he did leave out an important decision the commissioners made.
They decided to rescind the Animal Shelter Committee ordinance.
To recap, this committee was to be comprised of two members recommended by the Animal Foundation, two recommended by the Humane Society and three from sitting Neighborhood Council members. On June 6, Commissioner Bronson was very much in favor of getting this committee up and running:
"My concern is that if we wait too long to get the Committee up and running, we may lose some time in getting the entire animal control/enforcement/shelter operations issues resolved".
Well, it didn't happen. In fact, for two months we heard nothing. It wasn't until about August 8 that a concerned citizen brought it up again.
Now, a month later, we have the Animal Foundation, albeit in a nice way (there was humor in their presentation), putting the city in the hot seat. According to conversations they had with former city manager, John Lawton, the city was always going to be in partnership with them with regard to the shelter. (No monies were set aside in the 2008-2009 budget for this, simply because there is no $1.5 million, which evidently is the amount the Foundation was told it would receive from the city). They indicated last night that partial funding is not an option, because expenses keep increasing.
Commissioner Rosenbaum suggested a "construction" committee be appointed to get going on this deal. He just kind of appointed himself and a few others who were mentioned in the Trib's article. (I guess these types of decisions don't require a vote, because none was taken. In fact, I don't recall that he asked for anybody else's opinion about who should sit on this committee). He also "predicted the committee could finish its work in less than a month".
Interesting.
They couldn't get a committee comprised of residents off the ground in two months, but they can get a construction committee comprised of themselves organized in less than five minutes and get the job done in less than a month.
I can hardly wait.
14 comments:
Leadership - in my civic, military experience - is the ability to influence people to effectively solve problems, communicate and work as a team. I'm disappointed that leadership wasn't exibited to establish a consensus of concerned participants - HSCC and the animal foundation - and neighborhood councils did make a honest effort to fill the committee.
Now we've 'tossed' the orginal committee for what? A 'building' committee is practical, but the central questions and issues that the shelter committee was to have addressed cannot be ignored.
Maybe one more vigorous effort should be made to seat the shelter committee and dovetail it with the 'building'committee? Commission Bronson was rightly concerned about this issue last
June and it's still relevant.
Had you actually BEEN at the meeting, you would have learned that no decision was made to rescind the ordinance. There may be a motion to amend in the future, but NO decision was made. It was also discussed that the city never heard from HSCC regarding the committee, so HSCC must not have felt it important to participate. Get your facts straight.
Anna, I admit I wasn't at the meeting as I'm away on military business. Please advise on what ordinance you are referring if my facts are wrong, as I drew my information from the Tribune and blogs.
I would agree with you that the HSCC should have been there, but perhaps the 'setting' wasn't conducive for all parties? That's just my speculation.
I still believe we can meet the endstate of a better facility that's appropriate and let the police return to primary duties.
Well Anna, I WAS at the meeting and the city manager mentioned the ordinance that is "out there".
It was at that time the mayor said it will be rescinded. She and another commissioner (I can't remember who) commented that they felt it was nothing more than a delay tactic.
I was told by Commissioner Jolley that all are in favor of rescinding the ordinance.
GFgirl, it is my understanding that no formal action can be taken at a work session, and that rescinding or amending takes formal action at a commission meeting, with adequate public notice. Your assumption that the ordinance has already been rescinded in incorrect.
From earlier post by GF Girl and I would hope follow-through? Wise words but can it happen?
On June 6, Commissioner Bronson submitted proposed amendments to the resolution and in part said:
"...I anticipate that whatever arrangements we might work out with the Foundation will be worked out or will be close to being worked out by the time the Committee membership is chosen. They can then start on matters pertaining to future operations of the facility. My concern is that if we wait too long to get the Committee up and running, we may lose some time in getting the entire animal control/enforcement/shelter operations issues resolved".
Maybe one last chance to seat this committee before official rescinding?
"They couldn't get a committee comprised of residents off the ground in two months..." say you.
I might be mistaken but thought citizems applied for a seat on a city committee. Yhe Tribune prints committee openings all the time.
If people wanted to be on this committee, they would have thrown their hat in the ring. Did that happen and the city is refusing to appoint a committee? If so, that is VERY VERY wrong. Is that what happend at the meeting? Please clear this up.
If people did not apply, it is wrong to blame the HSCC, the Animal Foundation, the police department or the city commissioners for thinking about not having a committee. If no one applies, who are they going to appoint to the committee?
It is my understanding that three folks were recommended by various Neighborhood Councils.
The Animal Foundation and HSCC said they would not recommend anyone, but rather that the city follow their normal appointing process.
To my knowledge, the city did not attempt to fill the vacancies, of which there were four.
Apathy and cynicism contribute to lack of volunteers I'm afraid to say...it's the 'leadership climate' that needs to be addressed..it's one thing to get public notices and openings published in obscure back pages of the Tribune and it's another for public officials to advocate to the public directly, through word and deed and asking for the public's help directly. If the public doesn't respond to the personal appeal, then it's fair to assume a lack of interest perhaps, but then again it's been the usual summer 'doldrums' and we'll see how
citizens respond now.
PS - bravo to the neighborhood council volunteers and I salute them for willing to be appointed
to the shelter committee.
Finally, I don't have a 'dog in this fight' but my most favorite cowdog I got from the shelter several years ago.
I agree Richard.
The mayor never once mentioned at a City Commission meeting that there were openings available on this committee. (It's my understanding she was supposed to at the August 19 meeting).
The vote was 5-0 in favor of this committee, but then at this week's work session, she said she thought it was nothing more than a delay tactic.
If that is her feeling, why then did she vote for it in June?
http://www.greatfallsmt.net/records/minutes/yr2008/m06172008.htm
When I asked about the committee, I was told that the only applications were those of three neighborhood council members. HSCC didn't bother to reply at all, and the Animal Foundation preferred that the city follow their regular procedure of applications at large.
It isn't the city's fault that this committee failed to gel because of a lack of citizen participation.
The city published the openings - there were no further applications. For an issue that had people frothing at the mouth, I thought this was surprising.
"The city published the openings - there were no further applications. For an issue that had people frothing at the mouth, I thought this was surprising."
I do not find this surprising at all given the lack of leadership and their attitude towards the citizens lately.....
Rich Leibert is correct, this is basically a leadership problem!
Oh come on. A leadership problem? Quit blaming government when you don't get your own way. This issue(many stories) had coverage in the Tribune regarding the resolution, it was discussed at city commission meetings, and in blogs. It wasn't hidden in the back pages of the Tribune.
If people wanted to apply for this committee they would have done so. It wasn't a deep dark secret. Some of you are awfully hard on the concept of leadership. The commission provided an oportunity to apply and few did so. Maybe the public, unlike the bloggers, didn't think this was worth their time? It isn't the job of government to find people to apply for committees. It is the job of goverment to provide for citizen input and they did so. Give our leaders (all 5 of them) a break.
Let's be clear on a few things:
Originally, seating on this committee was NOT open to the public at large. The Animal Foundation and HSCC were asked to recommend two applicants each and the Neighborhood Councils, three.
At the 9/02 work session meeting, Mr. Doyon said that the AF and HSCC both indicated they would not recommend anyone and that the city was to use their normal process to find applicants. There was no comment made after his statement nor was there any discussion about it.
I was told the city asked Rich Ecke to put a "blurb" in the Tribune about openings on this committee. No other advertising for this was done through the Trib.
These openings were never mentioned at any City Commission meeting.
Post a Comment