|
2/6/2009 11:06:00 AM
Group's first meeting gets off to rough start
Ryan Jeltema
News Editor
STANTON - The Montcalm County Animal Shelter ad hoc committee's first meeting got off to a shaky beginning Thursday.
Some of the eight members engaged in a testy exchange about membership on the panel and its role with the county's controversial contract with R&R Research in Howard City.
Greenville veterinarian Dr. Randy Carpenter challenged County Board of Commissioners Chairman Patrick Q. Carr, who is leading the ad hoc committee and selected most of its members, about why County Controller-Administrator Chris Hyzer and Animal Control Director Patricia Lentz weren't included as voting members on the committee.
The two are instead attending the group's meetings as nonvoting advisory members.
Carr said both are department heads appointed by the Board of Commissioners. Traditionally those positions only carry out policies set by the commissioners and aren't charged with establishing policies.
"We're going to deliberate toward a proposal that ultimately will be approved as policy," Carr said. "I don't think it's appropriate to have them on the committee but I think it's appropriate to have them here and talk about things. The committee was mine to pick and I picked it that way."
"I thought we were going to work together," Carpenter replied. "I get the impression this has already been decided."
"Somebody had to set the committee and that was my idea," Carr explained.
Greenville resident Fran Schuleit said she was disappointed the committee appeared to have a goal of deciding whether the R&R Research contract should be extended instead of improving policies and procedures in the Animal Control Department.
"I see us all on one side of the issue," she said. "I think what we really want to see is enhancement of the operations, perhaps facilities enhancements. Not only that but making sure humane treatment of the animals is a goal.
"In doing that, not only are we looking after the people and looking after the stuff, all of that will drive us to what decisions we need to make, whether we contract with a Class B dealer," Schuleit said.
She then alluded to a possible conflict of interest with R&R Research owner Jim Woudenberg sitting on the committee.
"The outcome of this could affect the contract," Schuleit said. "To maintain the perception of propriety we need to make sure nobody has a conflict of interest."
Carr said the committee was formed during the Jan. 26 Board of Commissioners meeting where more than 150 people showed up mostly to speak out against the R&R Research contract. Based on that, he said he interpreted the motion creating the committee as saying its purpose was tied to that issue.
"We'd be sticking our head in the sand if we say we were sitting down to discuss policy at animal control without discussing the contract with R&R," Carr said. "I think that's the desire of the audience that was there and that's the desire of the commissioners - to decide what to do with the contract with R&R."
District 1 Commissioner Ron Blanding, who made a motion at the Jan. 26 meeting to create the committee but isn't serving as a member, said Carr must have misinterpreted his intent in creating the committee.
Blanding said he was attempting to expand on Carpenter's proposal made earlier during that gathering to create an advisory board broadly studying and evaluating the Animal Control Department.
"I was basically following Dr. Carpenter's recommendation," Blanding said toward the end of Thursday's meeting. "That was my intent."
|
Posted: Tuesday, March 03, 2009
Article comment by:
Toni
neighbornextneighbor - You're right about one thing, it is all about the money. The almost quarter of a million dollars that R&R made last year by selling our pets.You'd be surprised at how a respectable shelter can actually support itself. When the public isn't ashamed of their shelter it will help. Adoptions will be up which brings in money, you can have adopt-a-thons, pet parades, bake sales, etc. Look at any successful shelter and you'll see that what I say is true. The shelter in Ludington used to be nasty too. When the citizens got tired of the gassing, etc a rescue group was formed, a new "dog catcher" was hired and the rest is history. The rescue group did all sorts of things to raise enough money to build a brand new, public and animal friendly shelter. Alot of Ludington's industry has left the area and they're in a really bad financial place yet they always find a way to support the shelter.There are now two rescue groups that help with spay and neuter. One vet actually gives one day each year when he'll fix ANY male cat for only $15.00.One group has auctions, yard sales and other type of things to raise money. I can see the same thing happening with Montcalm, but you have to get rid of R&R in order to get the public trust back again.Then you can fix up the shelter, get the help from the rescue groups and make the shelter something you don't have to be ashamed of. You see, the residents won't have to pay more as the shelter would be able to support itself. Then it wouldn't all be about money cos R&R would finally be gone.
Posted: Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Article comment by:
DJ Freeman
in response to NeighborNextDoor:
It's not about the money they save with this contract. They've been offered the money to cover what they save with this contract and they didn't blink an eye.
Posted: Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Article comment by:
Beverly Hayes
This practice is cruelty to animals and should be stopped immediately. Bizarre that anyone would think this was right !!!
Posted: Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Article comment by:
NeighborNextDoor
Does anyone see the real picture here? It's all about money people, and Montcalm County is broke, so they do the partership with R&R to save money (refer to previous article about the cost of removing euthanized animals). If we want the inhumanity to stop, then the residents of Montcalm County will need to pay more money, bottom line.
Posted: Monday, February 09, 2009
Article comment by:
Alice Astarita
I can only assume that the reason this ad hoc committee continues to ignore the public outcry on this issue is because the committee itself already had an agenda. What is there to study? Clearly, some public officials want Montcalm County to be known as one of the last hold outs in support of this inhumane activity
Posted: Monday, February 09, 2009
Article comment by:
Montcalm Resident
The panel meetings are open to the public and are every Wednesday in February from 3:30 to 5:00 pm. We need people to attend these meetings and voice their opposition to this contract. The more we speak out, the better our chances to end this. Carr, Paepke, and Baker will vote yes for sure. We need to convince the other board members to vote NO.
Posted: Monday, February 09, 2009
Article comment by:
Toni
I think that some of the people who posted here should go to the meetings, write to the attorney general and our congressmen, senators, CNN, FOX and oprah. Especially the retired officer who was so kind to tell what she knew.This is a scary story of corruption and deceit. I think others would be interested in how Montcalm county treats it's people and it's animals. The so called blue ribbon board is nothing but a sham.
Posted: Monday, February 09, 2009
Article comment by:
Rev. Elizabeth Levy
I think it is truly unfair to subject any innocent little animal to the pain and effects of medical research and experimentation, and I think it is also unfair to give these sweet creatures the ultimatimum of having their lives taken.
Posted: Monday, February 09, 2009
Article comment by:
Michael G. Chapman
It is so inhumane to use dogs for research. There are plenty of other models that can be used. It is much more humane to put the dogs to sleep, if homes cannot be found for them. Please don't allow this.
Posted: Monday, February 09, 2009
Article comment by:
Polly Grunfeld Sack, Esq.
It's like a Hollywood movie--
THE DEATH OF DOGS, CATS AND DEMOCRACY IN MONTCALM COUNTY
(subtitle--How stupid do the Commissioners think Montcalm citizens are ?)
The show starts with pound seizure. Taking companion animals and turning them over for research. A barbaric and scientifically unsound practice carried out in few places around the country. The ultimate betrayal of an innocent animal and of a public that funds the "shelter."
The next scene is the uproar. Thousands of cards, letters and e-mails sent to the Commissioners from around the world. Countless phone calls. Mile long petitions. All against pound seizure.
Then we have the climatic scene. The commissioners' meeting. Standing room only. Everyone speaking out against pound seizure except the Class B dealer who benefits from it (to the tune of a quarter million dollars a year), his hired gun and a commissioner's wife.
Now you would think we would have the Hollywood ending. The Commissioners heard their constituents, examined the facts objectively, did the research and came up with the only result possible -- on financial, moral, ethical and public opinion grounds-- to cancel the R&R contract and no longer allow pound seizure.
Stop rolling the cameras. This is not Hollywood. And apparently it's not a democracy either. Despite the huge public outcry, despite the studies done by other cities that show the myriad objective ways in which stopping pound seizure benefits the community, despite the questionable practices of R&R as well as known violations of law, despite the outright misstatements and lies proffered in favor of continuing the R&R contract, the Commissioners did not reject the R&R contract but instead appointed a "blue ribbon" commission to evaluate it (and other pound practices) which commission includes as a member Mr. Woudenberg -- the owner of R&R.
If this was a movie, I would demand a refund of my ticket price at this point. But this is real life. The Commissioners need to do their duty. Listen to their constituents and get all the facts. Look out for the interests of the community--not just the wallet of R&R.
|
|
Article Comment Submission Form
|
|
