Animal Control To Stand Alone While Study is Completed
We covered the issue of who should Animal control report to you previously and everyone that spoke on that thread were in favor of placing Animal Control under the police.
From the RTD we learn;
The Richmond City Council last night approved Mayor Dwight C. Jones’ plan to eliminate the Department of General Services with a change that establishes an independent Office of Animal Care and Control.
With its 6-3 vote, the council overlooked recommendations of the Richmond SPCA and residents who argued that animal control should be part of the Richmond Police Department.
Several council members said they were willing to accept animal control as a stand-alone office while the Jones administration studies for six months where the division should be placed within the city bureaucracy.
and
The Office of Animal Care and Control will report directly to Deputy Chief Administrative Officer for Operations Christopher L. Beschler. Last night, he said the study group will be formed within a week and will welcome information from the SPCA and others. He said the group will include one member of council, but it was unclear who else might be allowed to serve.
The SPSCA has a blog post up were it expresses their opinion on who Animal Control should ultimately report to and why.
If the commission is sincere and serious in its efforts to place RAC&C where it truly belongs and includes the representatives of outside humane organizations mentioned above, it will arrive at the right decision, which is undoubtedly the Police Department. Or, it could cover the issue with even more red tape than it already has and delay the decision for yet another six months. Tick tock. Tick tock.
I think there are some inaccuracies. The vote was 6-3, and it was to make Richmond Animal Care and Control an independent agency,reporting directly to ACAO Chris Beschler. The CAO committed to appointing a study group who would report back in six months with a recommendation on where in the bureaucracy RAC&C should reside.
You are correct Sundagger, there was some mis-information in the post so I have rewritten the post. It is no excuse but I rushed previous post and want to apologize to any of my readers for the lack of effort and basic fact checking I failed to do.
So the SPCA (experts) recommend the RPD, and residents (end-users & customers) recommend the RPD, and yet council decides to appoint a study group?
I surely hope this study group is volunteer.
I wouldn’t be too quick to give RPD this responsibility.
There were rumors of a little issue up in Highland Park where at least one fella complained that RPD wasn’t being very helpful.
The city seems to think animal crimes are uncorrelated to other crime. I’ve heard anecdotal evidence that animal crimes are often committed before or in tandem with other violent crime and with drug and property crime. I hope this study group investigates that possibility, looks for scientific or statistical studies about such a link, and considers possible synergies between RPD and RAC&C rather than viewing RAC&C as a burden on RPD.
I’m going to write Councilwoman Graziano and tell her I believe RAC&C belongs with RPD.
I hope all who are interested will go to Channel 17 Comcast and listen to the rebroadcast of the council meeting relating to this issue. First, RPD has previously testified that they think placing RACC in RPD is not a good placement. In addition, Monday night at least two council members argued that it is inappropriate to burden RPD with a new and different task just as there is a spike in violent crimes across the city. Finally, there is the point of police powers, “conservators of the peace.” Placing RACC in RPD would not give AC officers police powers, and placing RACC in a different niche would not prevent AC officers from receiving training and being certified as conservators of the peace, able to carry firearms, and make arrest.
I don’t have a particular preference here, except to argue that quality of management and fiscal support is more important that location of management.
I agree with the council people who say that placing animal control under the cops wouldn’t be a good idea.
While they may be effective in attempting to shoot and otherwise control rogue animals and there would be some benefits breaking up dog fighting rings etc, I’m not sure they’d really be effective “go to” guys when it comes to taking seriously and protecting the rights of animal owners.
That alleged situation in Highland Park is a perfect illustration.
Is it logical to assume that putting RACC in RPD would automatically translate into all police officers becoming dog catchers? I doubt it.
Personally I think that RACC and RPD, and consequently the citizens of Richmond, will only benefit from a closer alliance between the two departments.
As Melissa already pointed out, animal cruelty crimes are considered ‘indicators’ of even more serious criminal activity.