Lakewood committee, volunteers press law department to move TNR best practices into policy rather than code

Council and community volunteers asked the Lakewood Law Department on May 19 to separate operational guidance for Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) from enforceable code provisions and to revisit how the city will register and train volunteer caregivers.

The discussion in the Public Safety Committee examined a proposed update to Chapter 505 (Animals and Fowl) that adds a new section codifying a pilot TNR program and inserts specific operational requirements—training, trap monitoring, appointment scheduling and other “permitted acts.” Community volunteers who helped run the pilot said those provisions were intended as best practices for a policies-and-procedures document rather than enforceable ordinance text.

Why it matters: the draft ordinance would change what is and is not a misdemeanor, add mandatory registration and training requirements for community cat caregivers, and specify behaviors—such as “traps shall be continually monitored”—that volunteers say are difficult to define or enforce. Advocates warn that overly prescriptive code could discourage volunteers and unintentionally criminalize informal care that helps reduce cat populations.

Community presenters pressed several practical points. Kara Vlachlasher, former president of the Citizens Committee for Lakewood’s Animals and Shelter, said the policies developed with the shelter were “never intended to be codified” and warned that items such as “community cat givers shall have a plan for community cats that need extended recovery time” are not enforceable. She said, “I strongly recommend this whole section be removed from the ordinance and it continue to be used as a policies and procedures page as it was meant to be on the city website as it is now for citizens inquiring about TNR in the City.”

Megan Galeda, Community Cats Director for CCLAS (CLAWS), echoed that training and appointment timelines currently listed in the draft are operational details that can change; she noted the risk of making a narrow certification requirement mandatory if a single provider stops offering that training. Galeda said, in part, that the 24‑hour scheduling requirement “sets us up for failure” and urged the city to keep procedural details out of ordinance text.

Gary Crumley, Animal Shelter supervisor, confirmed the shelter’s participation in a registration pilot and said, “To date, none so far,” when asked whether TNR activity had overwhelmed shelter intake. Committee members and volunteers discussed modifying the registration form to be more “evergreen” (a standing registration rather than a date-specific trapping permit) and making training language flexible and administratively adjustable by the shelter supervisor.

Formal actions and next steps: the Public Safety Committee voted to receive and file the communication. At the City Council meeting later the same evening, Council referred the introduced ordinance to both the Lakewood Animal Safety and Welfare Advisory Board (LSWAB) and the Public Safety Committee for further work and recommended a joint review so LSWAB and Public Safety can consider a shared meeting and a revised approach.

The law department and the volunteer groups agreed to continue meeting to reconcile which items belong in enforceable code and which are better maintained as a published policies-and-procedures document.

Ending: Committee members said they expect further drafting before any ordinance would return to council for adoption, and volunteers suggested the city preserve flexibility so the program can adapt as best practices evolve.