1

Animal Welfare Task Force Meeting Minutes

Thursday, November 15th, 2012 2:00 pm

Buena Vista Conference Center Dining Room

Task Force members present: Sen. Patricia Blevins, Delaware State Senate Sen. Karen Peterson, Delaware State Senate Rep. Earl Jaques, Delaware House of Representatives Secretary Ed Kee, Delaware Department of Agriculture Andy Lippstone, Office of the Governor Jennifer Ranji, Public Member Hetti Brown, Public Member Kathy Gallagher, Public Member John Rago, City of Wilmington Kristin Dwyer, New Castle County Mike Petit de Mange, Kent County Levy Ct. Hal Godwin, Sussex County Patrick Carroll, Delaware Humane Association Anne Gryczon, Safe Haven Jane Pierantozzi, Faithful Friends Animal Society Anne Cavanaugh, Delaware SPCA Kevin Usilton, Kent County SPCA Dr. Morgan Dawkins, DVMA Dr. Caroline Hughes, Public Member

Staff present: Carling Ryan, Delaware State Senate

Public Attendees: Julie Wilson Dr. Bob Thompson, DVMA Cheryl Heiks, Cozen OConnor Leigh Ann Harrison, Office of Senator Harris McDowell Cathy Samardza Carol Furr

The meeting was called to order at 2:05 p.m. Senator Blevins asked that everyone, Task Force members and public attendees, go around the room and reintroduce themselves. 1. Meeting minutes approval (meeting 2 and 3) Sen. Blevins noted that the meeting minutes from September 20th had been updated with the requested edits from the Task Force and asked if there was a motion to approve the minutes. Representative Jaques made the motion, all were in favor of approval, none were opposed.

2

Sen. Blevins then moved to the meeting minutes from October 18th, which had been sent out electronically to members the previous day. Dr. Hughes noted that she was not at the October meeting, but the minutes indicated that she was. Sec. Kee made a motion to accept the October 18th meeting minutes. Rep. Jaques seconded that motion. Dr. Hughes mentioned that there was a typographical error on one of the last pages, and Ms. Ryan stated that she would correct that in the final copy. All were in favor, none were opposed. 2. History of the Shelter Standards Law: Jennifer Ranji Sen. Blevins stated that Ms. Ranji would be walking the Task Force through the steps that led to Delaware establishing shelter standards. Ms. Ranji stated that the legislation was coming to light even before she began working in the Governors office. She felt the reasoning behind shelter standards was to try to establish some additional requirements, as the only standards on the books were regarding euthanasia. There was no language in the code to require shelters to perform tasks that the public expected, such as adoption and medical care if necessary. Before shelter standards, anyone could open a shelter and take animals in and do nothing but euthanize, and there was nothing in the code that could have prevented that. Sen. Blevins and Ms. Ranji approached the shelter community and asked if they agreed with establishing some basic standards of care, and in late 2009, they found that all of the shelters were in agreement that shelter standards were something that should be pursued through legislation. Initially, it was considered to only require these standards for dogs and tie it to dog control contracts, and at that time Kent County SPCA was the only shelter contracted with all three Counties, and the former director asked that cats be encompassed in the shelter standards as well. Through individual meetings and group meetings with the shelters and other entities, ultimately everyone had changes which were incorporated and by the time the bill was introduced, it had the support of all of the operating shelters as well as DVMA. The bill was introduced in early June, went through the committee process, received feedback from the veterinary licensing board, and passed both the Senate and the House unanimously. After the shelter standards bill passed, there were a number of meetings with the shelters, and the general feedback was that shelters ought to be performing these standards and the Counties would not incur additional operating costs. This law was a way to establish standards and make sure that bad actors would not enter the shelter scene. No penalty provisions were added to the bill, as there were already penalties for violation of euthanasia methods and provisions which were left in the code. The group was unaware of what concerns would develop in reaction to the implementation of the new law, so they would work out any conflicts and issues together. Some issues became more challenging, and after some period of time, they were unable to bring everyone to the table to discuss new issues, which was a big reason for developing the Task Force. Sen. Blevins asked if there were any questions for Ms. Ranji. Seeing none, Sen. Blevins moved on to the next agenda item.

3

3. Discussion of the Animal Shelter Standards Law and 4. Shelter Community Commentary Sen. Blevins indicated that there was a sheet which described all of the requirements of the Shelter Standards law in each members packet, as well as a copy of the section of the code where the law can be found. Sen. Blevins asked that the group go through each section of the sheet and discuss what was being done well and what needed improvement. She noted that she had some concerns about euthanasia, as regulations authorizing who can perform euthanasia were not put into place. Health of Animals

- Shelters must be advised by and follow care protocol written by licensed veterinarian - Required vaccination no more than 8 hours after entering the shelter - Examination of animal within 72 hours of entering shelter - Animals requiring veterinary care must be seen by licensed veterinarian within reasonable

amount of time - Must have isolation/quarantine area - Must prioritize acceptance of animals from within DE and must have health certification for

animals accepted from out of state Sen. Blevins stated that she was aware that the vaccination requirement had been challenged for KCSCPA. Mr. Usilton stated that, because KCSPCA has two offsite locations, and do not have a veterinarian on staff there, those animals do not get a veterinary examination until they return to the shelter because of the cost of paying a veterinarian for travel to those satellite locations. Sen. Blevins noted that the law only requires that they receive an exam, and Mr. Usilton and Ms. Gryczon stated that it needed to be done by a licensed veterinarian. Ms. Ranji and Sen. Blevins clarified that, while an exam needed to be performed, it did not need to be performed by a licensed veterinarian. Mr. Lippstone and Ms. Ranji stated that the only veterinary requirements of animal shelters were that a licensed veterinarian develops the shelters standard of care plan and that an animal be seen by a licensed veterinarian as needed. Mr. Petit de Mange stated that the vaccination requirements posed a fiscal issue when they were discussing a contract with KCSPCA for FY2013; mandatory vaccination was a cited reason for a 61% increase in the cost of the contract. He also noted that the County is only required to vaccinate dogs under the law, not other animals, so the County should not have to cover the cost of those vaccinations. Ms. Ranji said that the shelter standards go to every shelter choosing to operate. She stated that the question of cost increase was addressed during the development process of the bill; the former KCSPCA director was asked if this requirement would increase the cost of doing business with the Counties, and he stated that it would not, because vaccination was already being performed in the shelter. The Task Force also needed to decide what the basic standards of care should be in the animal shelters, what the public deserves if a shelter is allowed to operate. Sen. Blevins stated that this vaccination protocol was basic shelter care, and the general understanding was that it was already being performed prior to the implementation of the law requiring it.

4

Mr. Usilton stated that it was an unfunded mandate and that in 2009, money was better for shelters and so they could cover the cost of the standards. He stated that now, money is tight and it is difficult to comply with every standard and maintain the required record keeping. Mr. Usilton further stated that the unfunded mandate has been used to swerve the KCSPCA from their mission in order to be investigated, and they were forced to request money from the County in order to continue operating the shelter. Sen. Blevins wanted to clarify Mr. Usiltons statement that, in the past, KCSPCA vaccinated every animal within 8 hours but now that money is tighter, the cost cutting measure would be to reduce the number of vaccinations. Mr. Usilton stated that KCSPCA just shut their doors and now are not taking in that cats that they used to and not providing the services that they used to provide. Sen. Blevins asked what the cost of a vaccination was; Mr. Usilton estimated that the cost of the vaccination was around $8 for a dog and $5 for a cat. Ms. Ranji said that the term new mandate gave the impression that the government imposed something that wasnt being done, which is contrary to what she was told before. She added that everyone must decide if this is a cost of business that shelters must be required to meet. Ms. Ranji referenced a summit held by Secretary Kee that many members of the Task Force attended in which Dr. Moyer stated that vaccinations cannot be done early enough in order to avoid disease outbreak. Ms. Cavanaugh stated that when she came to DESPCA in 2008, they did not vaccinate on intake. She learned from the staff that many of the animals that had to be euthanized became sick at DESPCA. If the vaccination had been provided, then the animals would not have to be euthanized. She said that vaccination on intake is a nationwide standard. She believed it was a minimum requirement for operating an animal shelter. She added that keeping the animals healthy not only makes them adoptable, but allows them to be transferred to a different location to help them find a home. Ms. Ranji said that in the past money for Dog Control has helped support programs that werent in the bounds of the contract. So the SPCAs were paid for dog control, but they also did cats and animal cruelty. When those costs go up and income from other sources goes down, there is more pressure to get services out of the contract dollars. However, Ms. Ranji felt that vaccinations were a basic service that shelters needed to be able to do to operate a shelter. Dr. Hughes asked if an animal came into a satellite kennel, was it still considered entering the shelter. The group affirmed that satellite kennels were an extension of the shelter. Ms. Pierantozzi stated that originally, Faithful Friends was advised not to vaccinate for a couple of days. However, cats came into the shelter with diseases and caused an outbreak. Faithful Friends found that the national standard was to vaccinate on intake, which prevents outbreaks, reduces disease and reduces the severity of the illness. She stated that vaccinating on intake was just standard operating business. Ms. Brown stated that the other way to reduce the burden on shelters is to get the animals adopted, and if people adopt a healthy, vaccinated animal from a shelter, they will have a good adopting experience which will promote the shelter and bring in more potential adopters.

5

Mr. Usilton stated that he felt crowd control was important, and a shelter taking in 90% of the animals in the state is going to have problems with viruses in the shelter. He said if a shelter opens and as a rescue organization and they dont have a veterinarian on staff, no one sends the shelter a letter saying that there must be protocol from a veterinarian. He said he knew of a rescue in Delaware that was seeking a contract for animal control in Cecil County, MD, and Mr. Usilton asked if they would be able to bring animals in from Cecil County to New Castle County to put up for adoption. He also asked about shelters that take animals to Maryland to be euthanized. Some Task Force members asked Mr. Usilton what facility did these things, and Mr. Usilton did not want to share the facilitys name. Ms. Ranji noted that some sort of notice could possibly be sent for newly opened shelters informing them of requirements. Ms. Gryczon stated that the rescue group to which she believed Mr. Usilton was referring was called Buddy for Life. She said she believed that the groups plan was to rent kennel space in Cecil County. She stated that the dogs for this contract would be in Maryland, but she assumed the group may try to adopt some out in Delaware. They are Delaware based and provide a foster network. Sen. Blevins asked for some clarification about what the concern was for Delaware, and Mr. Usilton stated that they would be bringing dogs from Maryland into Delaware. Ms. Gryczon said that may be, but that the dogs would require the proper paperwork to enter the state. Sen. Blevins stated that there wasnt a clear process for informing start-up shelters about the shelter standards law. Ms. Dwyer asked if shelters were required to obtain a business license. It was noted that non-profits in the City of Wilmington do need a license. A suggestion was made to add a registration requirement for animal shelters so that officials would be aware when new shelters were opened. Ms. Brown noted that in Pennsylvania, there are varying degrees of operating licenses depending upon what type of "kennel the organization is, and included non-profit shelter kennels. The shelters must license and they are open to inspections. The cost, type of inspection, and inspection schedule depends on the type of kennel. This is a way of developing a paper trail to determine who is operating as a shelter. Mr. Usilton added that if there is a shelter standard, there should be a shelter permit. He also stated that there should be consequences for not complying with the standard. Mr. Lippstone followed up on Mr. Usiltons comment about a general lack of clarity, stating that where there is clarity is who is responsible for enforcing shelter standards, which was the Department of Agriculture. Secretary Kee stated that, after having their Deputy Attorney General review the law, the only aspect of the law over which the Department of Agriculture has enforcement jurisdiction is the euthanasia section. Sec. Kee noted that he would like to share the North Carolina model as a possible template for Delaware with the Task Force. Sec. Kee said all the Department of Agriculture currently does is take a complaint and forward it to the appropriate shelter and notify them of the complaint being made. The Department does not have the authority to go out and inspect.

6

Sen. Blevins stated that the law was written, with the participation of all of the existing shelters and Ann Gryczon, with limited oversight and no penalties, with the idea that these were the basic standards and everyone agreed they were already doing them. Attempts at creating regulations were made, but were not successful. Regular meetings with all shelters were happening monthly after enactment, and participation decreased. So, the Task Force was the next step to addressing some concerns about the law. Ms. Gryczon asked if the Department of Agriculture had the funding, would they be willing to fully oversee shelter standards. Secretary Kee noted that funding is the issue, but that he would defer to the will of the Task Force/citizens of Delaware as to where to assign the responsibility. Ms. Ranji stated that government would not be able to pay for all of this, and non-profits are subject to regulation in many different areas. When entering the business as a non-profit, it is understood that raising funds and contracting would be required to meet requirements to operate. Ms. Cavanaugh stated that she didnt think shelter standards was the cost driver; she felt the cost driver was holding animals for extended periods of time, sometimes years. The cost of caring for an animal is around $10 a day. They want to have low euthanasia rate so the public will donate. Ms. Ranji said that part of the issue was that shelter standards had become equated with a no-kill philosophy. Nothing in shelter standards states that a shelter cannot euthanize an animal. Dr. Hughes noted that shelters cannot euthanize while having empty cages. She felt that did prolong the per diem cost of keeping an animal which inhabits the cage. Mr. Usilton stated that there was no definition for adoptable so KCSPCA performs a temperament test. He noted that KCSPCA euthanizes when the animal is unadoptable for either a medical or temperament reason. He had concerns about not being in compliance with empty cages. Sen. Blevins discussed addressing the empty cage in the euthanasia section of the code, possibly allowing some percentage of cages to be empty for special circumstances, like hoarding cases. Mr. Petit de Mange brought up a public expectation for service, and that the service was unfunded. Sen. Peterson disagreed that it was an unfunded mandate, because no one was forcing an organization to run a shelter; but minimum standards would be set, as they were with all kinds of occupations. Ms. Dwyer asked if Kent Countys problem with funding was due to operational difficulty. She wondered if some of the shelters estimates for the Counties for dog control could be slightly off due to the services they may provide for other animals. Ms. Cavanaugh stated that DE SPCA had a computer monitoring program that tracked shelter activity. Ms. Gryczon stated that Safe Haven did an estimate of which employees/services are spent on dogs compared to the rest of the animals and general operations. Adoption and Reunion of Animals

- Shelters must be open to public after normal business hours, including evenings and weekends

- Shelters will hold an animal for minimum of 72 hours to allow owner reclamation - Shelters shall check for methods of identification on the animal, and post lost/stray animals

online and maintain updated lists of animals reported lost

7

- Maintain list of organizations willing to take animals for purposes of adoption (i.e., breed specific rescues)

Sen. Peterson noted that at the first meeting, the creation of a central repository for lost animals was discussed, so to include that as a recommendation. Ms. Dwyer added that any lost pet information should also be posted on the entity which is responsible for dog control. Dr. Hughes wanted to see clarification for what could be classified as a rescue organization and what standards they should be required to meet. Mr. Usilton added that it is difficult to get information about currently operating rescue organizations and where they post their animals, so KCSPCA began posting on craigslist.com, as well as their website, and that has helped reuniting owners with animals. Safe Haven said there are more reclaims from craigslist than from their website. Ms. Cavanaugh said she felt that there should be a requirement that animal shelters have a software program to track the microchip to help lost animals get home. Mr. Usilton asked that microchips be mandated; he said that there was an informal agreement that all shelters would microchip animals they adopt out, and the consensus was that all 5 shelters were already doing that. Ms. Cavanaugh noted that if the microchip isnt registered, the microchip company can only say which shelter they sold the chip to, and if that shelter doesnt have software to track the chip, they dont know in which animal it was implanted. Ms. Dwyer asked if, when a dog was adopted, the owner was charged for the microchip fee. Ms. Cavanaugh said that it was included in the adoption fee. Ms. Dwyer expressed concern that the dog control contract may increase if microchipping was mandated, and asked that if it was mandated, the adopter of the animal cover the cost. Mr. Usilton stated that the cost of the chip installation and registration was around 10 dollars. Dr. Hughes said that if microchipping was going to be the standard for shelters, mandating it may be necessary so that new shelters comply when they are established. Sen. Peterson and Rep. Jaques added that a mandate should include the software element. Sec. Kee asked for some clarification about how microchips are registered. If a member of the public bought the microchip, then the owner would need to register. Shelters are not required to register, but they all do microchip. Mr. Usilton wanted to discuss the length of time shelters are required to hold an animal. He noted that in Philadelphia, they hold the animals for only 24 hours, which reduces the cost for animal control to a municipality. Ms. Ranji wanted to clarify the separate hold time requirements; there is a 72 hour owner reclamation hold and then an additional two days afterwards before an animal can possibly be euthanized. Many Task Force members proposed scenarios in which reducing the hold time would have resulted in the owner not being able to reunite with their lost pet. The idea of reducing the hold time was left as an open question. Euthanasia

- Authorizes shelters to euthanize animals in care, subject to certain requirements: o Holding period of 5 days must have expired o No empty cages/kennels/ or living environments suitable for the animal in the shelter o Must determine other adoption organizations are unwilling to take the animal(s)

(usually done via group email) o Proper training required for individuals performing euthanasia

8

o Must follow certain procedures (i.e., trained staff member must stay with the animal until death occurs)

o Proper euthanasia methods to be developed by regulation and followed by shelters - Exception: Animal may be euthanized immediately if necessary to alleviate undue suffering or

protect shelter staff and/or sheltered animals Mr. Usilton had concerns about holding the animal for 5 days when there is an owner surrendered (not to be euthanized) animal which the shelter doesnt believe is adoptable. Ms. Gryczon said that some animals are deemed unadoptable because they are aggressive but in reality are not. Sen. Blevins asked if shelters charge anything for owner surrenders; Mr. Usilton stated that KCSPCA charges $20.00 and Ms. Cavanaugh stated that DESPCA asks for a $50.00 donation. Ms. Gryczon stated that if Safe Haven does take an owner surrender, which they dont for the most part, they charge the owner a fee. Dr. Dawkins asked what the purpose of the 5 day holding time was. Ms. Ranji stated that the 5 days was to give time for adoption as well as to get to know the character of the animal. Mr. Petit de Mange brought up issues of hoarding and what happens to those animals; Mr. Usilton stated that, as those cases are animal cruelty, they house the animals for the required 90 days. Mr. Usilton stated that having to hold animals that are owner surrendered cost a lot of money. Mr. Petit de Mange stated that, when KCSPCA investigates cruelty, they are likely filled to capacity when they take in those animals, so does an exception to the euthanasia law need to be made. Ms. Cavanaugh and Ms. Pierantozzi said that, as the animals are involved in a cruelty case, they cannot be euthanized. Ms. Ranji suggested working with the no empty cages part of the law which doesnt allow some type of cushion for an animal cruelty influx. Sen. Blevins asked what would be an appropriate cushion of empty cages. Mr. Usilton wanted the empty cages wording removed. Ms. Gryczon stated that Safe Haven tries to keep less than 5% of their cages open. Sen. Peterson suggested adding to the exception section of the euthanasia part of the code owner surrendered animals who are deemed unadoptable. Sen. Blevins agreed that that would address some part of the problem. Dr. Dawkins asked if the open cage language needed to be part of the law at all, and Sen. Blevins stated that it needed to be in the law if euthanasia rates were to be lowered. Ms. Gallagher asked where animals from cruelty cases were being housed at KCSPCA, and Mr. Usilton stated that they were being placed in a new warehouse building. Mr. Usilton stated that right now, they were using certain cages for animal cruelty cases, but if they dont have those cages full because of animal cruelty, they will never be able to euthanize an animal if those cages are open. Ms. Gryczon stated that they find that many dogs that some originally deem unadoptable in fact turn out to be very friendly and can successfully adopt them out. She said that some dogs may take weeks, months, or years to overcome a behavior issue. She added that sometimes Safe Have adopts out animals and notes that the animal may not like children, cats, other dogs, etc.

9

Sen. Blevins said that the issue of regulations never having been written needed to be addressed, as the law requires that those who perform euthanasia have some type of certification method, however, no certification method has been established by the Department. She acknowledged that organizations had created their own certifying methods, which she felt was the right thing to do in absence of any regulations. Efforts were made to put together regulations, but they didnt come together.

Record Keeping Must keep records regarding intakes, adoptions, reclamations by owners, euthanasia, etc. and must make some of this data available on website Mr. Usilton said that record keeping is important, and they show that there were around 1000 less animals euthanized than in 2011. Records show that there were 16,000 animals euthanized in 2003, and since January 1, 2012, the KCSPCA has euthanized 892 unhealthy, unadoptable animals. KCPSCA has a computer system now, but before, all records were paper records, so it is difficult to have the resources to have personnel to document and follow up with paperwork. The cost to copy records is adding to the administrative costs. Ms. Ranji asked if the notice to all animal rescues was done electronically, and Mr. Usilton confirmed that they do it by email. Mr. Usilton said he has spent a lot of dollars in the last year on investigation related issues, and that the management of getting all necessary information into each individual animal record was difficult. Ms. Ranji asked if the requirements in the code were things KCSPCA kept anyway. Mr. Usilton said the requirement for records showing compliance with vaccinations and medical treatment are in the computer system, but its the verification that they are in compliance which is the challenge. The vaccination/medical requirements which are specific to the dog are there, but the issue of if an animal notification was sent out on email is not necessarily being noted in an individual animals file, and it is difficult to go back through records to prove that an animal notification was sent. Sen. Blevins wrapped up the discussion. Rep. Jaques asked for the North Carolina model of animal control, which Sec. Kee had discussed, to be circulated. 5. Public Hearing format and 6. Topic for next meeting Sen. Blevins noted that the public hearing was Thursday, November 29th and discussed the format for the hearing. Sen. Blevins then noted that the next Task Force meeting was Thursday, December 13th and asked which topic the Task Force would like to discuss next, and the topic Animal Control Officers was selected. 7. Public Comment Cathy Samardza mentioned her frustration with filing complaints and her support for an unbiased, unaffiliated panel to handle the oversight of complaints. Ms. Samardza listed all of the people who have made complaints about shelter conditions, procedures and/or animal control officers. She stated that she was surprised to hear that the Department of Agriculture only had 5 complaints since the implementation of shelter standards, as she had personally referred many more people to the Department. She noted that most of the complaints were regarding the KCSPCA. She felt that the complaints regarding dog control and animal welfare were not being taken seriously. She was concerned about the confusion and apathy regarding who has responsibility and authority to inspect shelters. She

10

felt that the fact that the bill did not include penalties for violations as well as a lack of oversight demonstrated that the legislation was poorly written. She asked that the General Assembly rectify those problems and omissions. Carol Furr wanted to bring up two points. She stated that the Attorney Generals office contacted her to go over some subpoenaed records they had. She said that there was a large box that was supposed to contain emergency euthanasia records, but she felt that many of the cases were unnecessary euthanasia. She also stated that her group experiences verbal abuse when they attend the monthly KCSCPA meetings, adding that they are singled out individually and negative comments are made about them and that they are not allowed to speak. She addressed Mr. Usilton and stated that she would not give up going to the meetings. 8. Adjournment

There being no further business of the Task Force, a motion was made to adjourn. There being no objection, the motion was adopted, and the meeting was adjourned at 4:10 p.m.