Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ad hoc committee chair criticizes 'shadow campaign' to revive provisions of failed animal-control draft
Summary
Katie Titus Odom, chair of the former Fairfield County Animal Control Ad Hoc Committee, told council she and most committee members oppose efforts to reinstate provisions from last year’s draft ordinance 838 and described the ad hoc committee’s work and votes.
Get email alerts on the Animal Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Katie Titus Odom, chair of the former Fairfield County Animal Control Ad Hoc Committee, told Fairfield County Council on Oct. 13 that she and six of the seven committee members oppose what she called a "shadow campaign" seeking to reinstate provisions from last year’s draft ordinance 838.
Odom said the ad hoc committee was created after public outcry over the earlier draft and that the committee members — appointed residents representing diverse stakeholder groups — met nine times over four months and spent more than 18 hours in open session collecting public input. "The committee was given a hundred and 30 total days to take public input and draft a new ordinance for consideration," she said.
She told council that many proposals in the current shadow campaign had been offered to the ad hoc committee, were discussed and in many cases voted down. Odom said the committee had considered 25 sections: "Of the 25 sections proposed, 22 passed unanimously. The 3 remaining sections passed 6 to 1. The committee ordinance as a whole passed 7 to 0." She urged council not to expect a different public response to returning to provisions that prompted earlier opposition.
Council members thanked the committee at the meeting and several praised the volunteers’ work; no formal council action or vote was taken during public comment. Odom said she remained available to discuss the ad hoc committee’s draft and the compromise it produced.
Because the remarks occurred during the public-comment portion of the meeting, they were not a council or staff decision; they were testimony offered for the record and for council consideration.

