Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
After broad public pushback council keeps voucher distribution approach, asks for monitoring and incentives
Summary
Council heard hours of testimony from humane groups and volunteers, rejected an immediate income-verification threshold, preserved voucher distribution through humane organizations with added free vouchers for very-low-income recipients and asked departments for data and incentive suggestions.
After extended public comment from rescue groups, humane organizations and volunteers, Los Angeles City Council declined to adopt the proposed income-verification threshold for the city’s spay/neuter vouchers and directed additional follow-ups including a short-term monitoring report and proposals to incentivize veterinarians.
Animal Regulation General Manager Mr. Knap described a $600,000 program: a subsidy coupon (about $20 for cats, $30 for dogs) with a proposed income qualifier at the HUD median (~$51,000) and a reserved set of free sterilization coupons for very-low-income residents (HUD very-low threshold ~ $31,000 and below), plus officer-distributed free coupons for those identified in the field. The commission recommended distribution through humane organizations and council offices for efficiency.
Dozens of rescuers, volunteers and humane organizations including actors-and-others-for-animals and Cat and Dog Rescue Association told the council that imposing verification or moving distribution to shelter clerks would create delays, deter needy residents and reduce the program’s effectiveness. "Simply giving a pet owner a voucher and a list of veterinarians is like giving a financially strapped person a list of restaurants without a menu description and price list," said Susan Taylor of Actors and Others for Animals.
Council debated tradeoffs between targeting limited taxpayer funds and avoiding barriers that would reduce voucher use. Several council members expressed support for keeping distribution with humane groups and for preserving a free-coupon tier for the very-low-income households. Council adopted a motion removing the financial threshold from the administrative plan and asked animal regulation and the commission to report back in months with usage data, geographic distribution, and proposals to incentivize veterinarians (for example by considering tax-credit mechanisms). The recorded vote on the deletion and associated package was 9 "ayes," 2 "nos."
