Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Facility Inspection Program topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kansas Department of Agriculture briefs committee on animal-facility inspection program; agency cites inspection workload and complaints
Summary
Deputy Secretary Olsen briefed the Senate Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee on the Animal Facilities Inspection (AFI) program, reporting roughly 800 inspections per licensing year, a small inspection staff and use of a $50,000 fund to reimburse shelters when animals are seized.
The Kansas Department of Agriculture presented an overview of its Animal Facilities Inspection (AFI) program to the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources, outlining enforcement workload, staffing and funding issues and answering committee questions about seizures and open-records requests.
Deputy Secretary Olsen told the committee the AFI program "is a program that was built by the industry" and said the agency has worked to make enforcement and funding "more consistent." Olsen said the agency inspects and oversees companion-animal facilities required to be licensed under statute, including breeders, pounds, shelters, rescues, pet shops, research facilities, distributors and boarding facilities.
Olsen said AFI's field team includes three inspectors, one investigator, and office support, and that the program conducts roughly 800 inspections per license year (which runs October to September), including about 473 routine inspections, 98 complaint-driven inspections and 82 prelicense inspections. Inspectors also perform reinspections when facilities fail initial inspections and limited-scope inspections of unlicensed facilities.
The program reported driving about 76,000 miles a year for inspections. Olsen described a "no contact" statutory requirement that an inspected licensee must be present or have a designee on-site within 30 minutes of an inspector's arrival; the department said the $100 penalty and that statute have reduced the incidence of "no contact" cases from earlier years.
On enforcement, Olsen said AFI has an attorney dedicated to the program and that enforcement actions range from civil penalty orders to cease-and-desist letters and, in some cases, district-court litigation. When animals are seized after due process, Olsen said the agency works with shelters to house the animals and that the Legislature provided an initial $50,000 appropriation to help reimburse shelters for costs; that sum was expended in the first year and does not fully cover shelter costs.
Olsen also told the committee that AFI receives the agency's highest volume of open-records requests, and committee members asked for additional detail the department did not include in the brief (for example, specific core requests and multi-year core funding requests labeled as "core 17" and "core 18"). Olsen said the department would provide missing material after the meeting.
Chair and committee members thanked Olsen for the presentation and discussed the program's statutory tools and resource needs. The presentation was informational; the committee did not take formal action on AFI at the meeting, though Olsen noted the agency's ongoing work on related legislation (Senate Bill 130) and stakeholder engagement.
