Animal Welfare Task Force

Meeting Minutes
Thursday, February 21, 2013
2:00 p.m.
Buena Vista Conference Center Buck Library
Task Force Members Present:
Senator Patricia Blevins (Chair), Delaware State Senate
Senator Karen Peterson, Delaware State Senate
Representative Earl Jaques, Delaware House of Representatives
Representative Kim Williams, Delaware House of Representatives
Mr. Andy Lippstone, Office of the Governor
Mr. Leonard Sophrin, City of Wilmington, Office of the Mayor
Ms. Hetti Brown, Public Member
Ms. Jennifer Ranji, Public Member
Ms. Kathy Gallagher, Public Member
Dr. Caroline Hughes, Public Member
Dr. Morgan Dawkins, DE Veterinary Medical Association
Mr. Hal Godwin, Sussex County Council
Mr. Michael Petit de Mange, Kent County Levy Court
Ms. Anne Cavanaugh, Delaware SPCA
Mr. Patrick Carroll, Delaware Humane Association
Ms. Jane Pierantozzi, Faithful Friends Animal Society
Mr. Kevin Usilton, Kent County SPCA
Ms. Rita Hughes, Safe Haven Animal Sanctuary
Staff Present:
Carling Ryan, Delaware State Senate
Rachel Linstead Goldsmith, Legislative Fellow
Public Attendees:
Pam Biddle, Delaware SPCA
Christina Motoyoshi, Delaware SPCA
Pam Biddle, Delaware SPCA
Megan McGovern, HSUS Volunteer
Lois Fargo, Safe Haven Animal Sanctuary
Marci Stewart, Safe Haven Animal Sanctuary
Carol Furr
Ruth Kimball
Lynn Lofthouse
Peter Siracuse
Crystal Sweeney
Donna Watson
Nancy Carol Willis
The meeting was called to order at 2:19 p.m.
Senator Blevins asked Task Force members and public attendees to introduce themselves.
1

1. Meeting minutes approval - 1/18/2013

Senator Blevins asked for any proposed changes to the minutes from January 18th. When no changes were
requested, Senator Peterson made a motion to adopt the minutes as official, and the motion was seconded. All
were in favor, none were opposed.
Senator Blevins noted that in the folders for Task Force members, there was a letter from a member of the
KCSPCA Board, but who was writing as a private citizen. Sen. Blevins had been asked to distribute the letter to
Task Force members. She noted that including it in the materials was not an endorsement of his views, just a
fulfillment of his request.
The Senator then introduced the topic for the meeting: the coordination of government functions and possible
broad consolidation, and presented a proposal to be used as a starting point for discussions. A handout was
distributed.
2. Discussion of proposed broad consolidation
Senator Blevins introduced a proposal for a statewide Animal Welfare Office to fall under the Department of
Health and Social Services, within the Division of Public Health. This Office would not automatically assume
responsibility for animal control contracts, but would begin consolidation of government functions that
currently exist under DNREC, the Department of Agriculture, etc. This would include Shelter Standards,
inspections, the Spay/Neuter program, the Dangerous Dog Panel, and rabies issues.
Senator Blevins then reviewed the outline (below) of the proposed office positions, listed on the handout:

Executive Director
o Represent office to the public
o Oversee staff and overall office function
o Research and make recommendations regarding:
Making licenses easier to obtain and beneficial to owners
Possible revenue streams (licensing, grants, license plates)
Animal control contracts and how best to structure
Animal cruelty statute
TNR
o Public education regarding spay/neuter, licensing, proper care, etc.
o Arrange training for prosecutors
Deputy Director
o Shelter standards investigation and oversight
o Inspection of shelters (and licensed retailers?)
o Rabies calls and follow-up
Spay/Neuter Oversight
o Run state spay/neuter program
Animal Control Officer (Or at least trained as one)
o Oversee training and certification for animal control officers
o Handle complaints
o Dangerous dog panel
Administrative Position
2

o
o
o

Operate statewide database, with all shelters participating

Oversee lost and found database
Provide administrative support for entire office

Ms. Ranji noted that the duties under these positions had been drawn from suggestions in previous meetings,
but were not reflective of official recommendations made, since that would be happening at the next meeting.
Kevin Usilton asked whether animal control would also be centralized to achieve a one-stop-shop, to which
Senator Blevins responded that the dog control contracts are not included in this proposal; the proposal was
focused on consolidating what the state government already does. She noted that reversing the decision to
move responsibility for animal control to the counties, and thus moving it back to the state, would likely take
more than one fiscal year. Ms. Ranji noted that it would be part of the Animal Welfare Offices work to consider
further centralization, including different models for animal control services and contracting. Andy Lippstone
noted that the state paramedics office could be used as a model for a state office which provides oversight, and
Senator Peterson added that the planning office model could also be considered.
Senator Peterson also asked whether the proposal included putting all companion animal laws and provisions in
the same place in the code, the same chapter, to which Senator Blevins answered that it would.
Michael Petit de Mange commented that the centralization proposal makes sense and met goals of efficiency,
consistency in application, standardization, and assuring a central organizing function. Mr. Petit de Mange was
interested in the Office potentially moving the dog control contracts back to the State, based on the
recommendations of the Executive Director position; Senator Blevins noted that the four major jurisdictions
would also need to have input into the process. Representative Jaques pointed out that, from a citizens
perspective, the state office proposal would give the public a central contact, and thus make things better for
the citizens.
Rita Hughes noted that she did not necessarily agree that animal control should be centralized, and argued that
a single contact could first be identified in each county so as to address issues locally. Representative Jaques
noted the proposed Office was only considering consolidating current state duties, to which Ms. Hughes agreed
made sense. It was also clarified that the Task Force is only making recommendations, not decisions.
In addressing fiscal implications, Mr. Lippstone stated that county cost sharing would continue as currently
administered under a state office. Senator Peterson asked whether the Secretary of Health and Social Services
would be in favor of the proposal, and Senator Blevins stated that Secretary Landgraf had been consulted and
was amenable to the proposition. Senator Peterson commented that it seemed to be a great fit.
Mr. Petit de Mange commented that putting animal control at the state level would further reduce
inconsistencies in services. Ms. Ranji pointed out that by forming the Office first, the necessary data could be
collected through statewide databases to better assess the need for services in each county, thus determining
the need for further consolidation. Mr. Usilton questioned the expectation of animal shelters to participate in
the data collection process, and whether what Ms. Ranji was proposing would become an unfunded mandate.
Ms. Ranji replied that it could be done in a way that is helpful to the shelters, making it easier to keep and report
the data they are already collecting.
Mr. Usilton then asked about animal cruelty calls that come through the animal control contracts, and wanted to
know who they would go to, how the information would be processed, and who would be reimbursed. Senator
Peterson noted that according to the proposal, the new Office would develop those standards and procedures.
3

Ms. Ranji specified that the Animal Control Officer position would involve new training and that the shelters
could come to the state office with concerns about animal cruelty procedures.
Senator Peterson also noted that this office would be the body to advocate for funding with the Joint Finance
Committee, or the Department of Justice, etc. Senator Blevins noted that more funding could be generated
through licensing efforts and that the Executive Director position could include researching best practices such
as the Calgary model; this model garnered much higher licensing rates and is able to pay for all animal control
services with the funds. Senator Blevins noted that there is a lot of potential for addition revenue through this
stream since the licensing rate is now under 10%. She added that owners just need to be given a reason to
license, and the reunion message that a license is your dogs ticket home really made an impact. Hetti Brown
pointed out that there are many states with state office models (including NJ and FL) and in the northeast they
actually write grants for additional funding, as practiced in Connecticut for TNR and Spay/Neuter programs.
Senator Peterson further suggested that oversight through the Office could be established in the form of a
permanent advisory board. Senator Blevins agreed that this was a common structure within state offices, and
that it could be added to the proposal as a recommendation.
Patrick Carroll asked for clarification that the office would cover only companion animals, which was confirmed.
Senator Blevins noted that in addition to Secretary Landgraf, Secretary Kee of the Department of Agriculture was
also supportive of this proposal.
Anne Cavanaugh commented that the central offices ability to run a central database would help with cruelty
calls if owner information could be included, and could also cover rabies, adoptions, and lost pets. Mr. Carroll
suggested including veterinarians in the database. Mr. Usilton noted that since the rabies fee goes to the state,
the Department of Agriculture currently gets a copy of each certificate and could very easily feed that data into a
database. Mr. Lippstone noted that the infrastructure was in place at DHSS for robust public outreach
campaigns.
Dr. Hughes noted that many states have veterinarians working for their respective Health and Social Services
departments. She also suggested that planning for emergency sheltering of animals be added as one of the
Offices duties and include exotic animals in the Offices purview (they are currently under the Department of
Agriculture and are not in the livestock area). Senator Blevins suggested that the Office itself could consider
these propositions. Dr. Hughes also noted that kennel licensing could be considered by the Office.
Ms. Cavanaugh stated a preference for running emergency response through DEMA. Senator Blevins informed
the group that the emergency response position is currently under the Department of Agriculture, but it is
vacant. When asked what the current plan is, Ms. Cavanaugh replied that during emergencies, Delaware SPCA is
the primary responder for New Castle and Sussex Counties and KCSPCA is the primary responder for Kent
County, and that they are both secondary responders for the counties not under their primary purview. They
also coordinate with the Red Cross shelters, but there needs to be some improvement in that process. Ms.
Brown noted that under the Federal Pets Act (post-Hurricane Katrina), every state is required to include animals
in its emergency plan as a condition for funding, and the Delaware is the only state she knows of that runs its
program through the Department of Agriculture rather than the Emergency Management Agency. She
suggested this may lead to less frequent Red Cross coordination than is typical in other states through their
Emergency Management Agencies. Dr. Hughes commented that there used to be grants available for
emergency response, and Ms. Brown confirmed that FEMA still offers training grants to states for coordinating
these efforts.
4

Hal Godwin stated that he was encouraged by the conversation. He noted that Sussex Countys ideal scenario
was to move dog licensing and dog control back to the State due to funding difficulties at the county level,
followed by not adding a new layer of bureaucracy on animal welfare at the county level. Mr. Godwin felt the
Office would help alleviate some of the burden on the counties. He also agreed with the placement in DHSS
since licensure was originally based on protecting humans from animals.
Dr. Hughes asked whether additional shelter standards investigation oversight would then come under the
proposed office. Senator Blevins confirmed that the regulations would but also noted that Secretary Kee has
started the regulatory process under the Department of Agriculture. If those regulations are written before the
office is created, they will come under DHSS when the office is created.
Mr. Petit de Mange asked whether legislation would be required to establish the office or whether it could be
handled through regulatory channels. Senator Blevins affirmed it would be statutory because of the goal to
centralize certain chapters in the code.
Ms. Hughes asked whether the Executive Director position would be appointed. Senator Blevins replied that
candidates would be hired by the Secretary of DHSS.
Mr. Usilton urged that animal control should be addressed at the state level along with the Offices other duties
at this time rather than performing the consolidation process twice. He noted that currently the public is
dissatisfied with the coverage of dog control, and expects more comprehensive animal control services. Mr.
Godwin agreed with this proposal, but Ms. Hughes disagreed.
Senator Blevins suggested discussing dog control further, as it had been brought up by Mr. Usilton, and would fit
into the general discussion on consolidation that had been set as the next item on the agenda. She also took a
moment to introduce Representative Kim Williams, from District 19, a new member of the Task Force.
3. General discussion on coordination and consolidation
Senator Peterson agreed with earlier comments that it would be very difficult to completely consolidate in one
legislative session, as dog/animal control can be a territorial issue. She pointed out that if the recommendation
and legislative effort was to consolidate all at once, the entire effort could fail. Senator Peterson also noted that
making this decision would be one of the duties of the office, and thus it should not be made in advance by the
Task Force.
In support of Senator Petersons comment, Senator Blevins noted that it took years to move responsibility for
animal control to the counties, as it was always discussed at the end of the Joint Finance Committee hearings
because it was such a heated issue. She agreed that animal control should go back to the state for oversight and
contract control at a minimum, but stated that it was too late in the session to expect successful a legislative
change this year.
Mr. Petit de Mange felt there was merit to an incremental approach and thought that, while a concise proposal
was needed to get something done in the short term, perhaps additional phases of recommendations could be
included in the report, including a vision of what the body should do.

Jane Pierantozzi felt DHSS was an appropriate body to house the state office, and stated a preference for the
term cat care over cat control as it implicates a Trap and Remove rather than a TNR approach.
Ms. Ranji stated that including in the recommendations a list of what county level dog control services are
currently not functioning well, then charging the Office with addressing that list, could address Mr. Usiltons
concerns.
Mr. Carroll inquired about the funding of the Office, and Senator Blevins estimated the ideal structure presented
would require a budget of under $500,000 a year.
Ms. Pierantozzi stated a preference for seeking a veterinarian for the Deputy Director position, ideally one that
had both small animal expertise and shelter medicine experience.
Senator Blevins asked the Task Force to discuss what it wanted to change about dog control as it currently exists.
Mr. Godwin started off by noting the burdensome cost to the counties.
Mr. Petit de Mange specified that the variability of costs was particularly difficult for a county to absorb.
Mr. Usilton stated that the public expectation is for animal control rather than dog control, and that
shelters need help in communicating the actual services provided. Mr. Usilton went on to say that the
state office will need to examine the data to better plan capacity for animal care and assure appropriate
funding. Currently, he pointed out that cats were not being cared for by KCSPCA and that the no-kill
shelters had not been able to fulfill MOUs to take cats either.
Ms. Ranji noted two of her concerns regarding the government structure: from the shelter side, there are major
infrastructure investments involved and thus difficulty in planning for the future with limited contracts, and
from the government side, there would still be little competition for the contract and difficulty in getting the
terms the government entity wants. She emphasized that she was not sure whether moving responsibility from
the counties to the State would solve the issue, but agreed that someone should take a look at whether it
would.
Dr. Hughes distinguished animal control from animal welfare, stating that animal control was about getting dogs
off the street while animal welfare was about what happens after.
Ms. Pierantozzi stated that some communities are using the terminology control and care and that a fee is
levied on each household of $5-7 per year. Ms. Pierantozzi noted that she would like to see all shelters be able
to take animals from animal control. Ms. Pierantozzi also wanted to see equipment upgrades for animal control
so as to assure more humane handling.
Rita Hughes stated that after trips to Maine, New Hampshire, and parts of New York, she recommended
requiring spay/neuter for all pets except those owned by licensed breeders. She acknowledged that
spay/neuter costs for this approach can be expensive.
Mr. Petit de Mange followed up on Ms. Ranjis comment about contracts; he wondered whether capital
planning assistance could be included in the contract, suggested recommending minimum contract lengths and
advised that the state office should do an annual review of financial reports to see what is currently being spent
on capital investments and to see if it matches up with the contract budget.

Representative Williams asked about a letter she received from a constituent regarding gas chambers. Senator
Blevins clarified that when the Shelter Standards law went into effect the methods of euthanasia were to be
addressed by subsequent regulation. There was some controversy that led to the regulations not being written.
Now, Secretary Kee has restarted the process. However, gas chambers have not been used in Delaware for a
very long time.
4. Final meeting information
Senator Blevins stated that the next meeting on Friday, March 15 would be the final meeting, where
recommendations would be presented and discussed. Senator Blevins requested that everyone bring their
recommendations, in case they did not make the compiled list, which would be sent around in advance of the
meeting. After that meeting, the report will go around to the Task Force, comments will be taken, and then the
final report will be issued.
Mr. Usilton asked whether there would be another public hearing. Senator Blevins stated that the previous
hearing had fulfilled the requirement, and that based on the limited timeline left, holding another would not
affect the recommendations of the Task Force or its report. But she noted that a meeting could be held after the
final report is issued if the Task Force decided to hold one.
5. Public comment
Donna Watson stated that she was happy to hear that the lost and found database idea was being discussed as a
high priority. She would like to see shelters and rescues included in the state database as well as increased
public education about what to do when people find a lost pet. Ms. Watson expressed concern about
Delmarvas swap meet for animals, where lost pets may be sold. She noted that she supports state oversight for
animal control but with officers or a facility for each county.
Peter Siricuse spoke about his complaint about his dog being euthanized by the KCSPCA before the 72 hour hold
was up, and being told that he was no longer allowed to adopt from the KCSPCA. He recommended requiring
training for Animal Control Officers to be more sensitive to the needs of pet owners. Mr. Siricuse expressed
disappointment that there had not been more follow-up and concern that he was being harassed by Animal
Control in Dover. Mr. Siricuse also suggested that the Army Corps of Engineers could develop its own animal
shelter at the base.
Lois Fargo, a Safe Haven founder, talked about the organization and reported that after six months of being
open, 70 animals had been adopted in January and the first week of February. Safe Havens cat food pantry for
community cat caretakers feeds 900 cats each month. In response to criticism of a decision to put dogs received
through animal control in private kennels, she informed the Task Force that these dogs are assessed and walked
at the private kennels daily. Ms. Fargo also congratulated the Task Force for its discussion on cats. She
advocated for a no kill approach and expressed her goal for Delaware to become a no kill state. Ms. Fargo
invited the Task Force members to come visit the shelter. She noted that while she believed that animal control
should stay with the county, but that state oversight would be excellent. She also later noted that the Las Vegas
animal control officer they had brought to Delaware was a great resource for training ACO officers in humane
handling.
Carol Furr of Kent County said she was a part of a group of animal advocates that had been working for
accountability for 16 months. She stated that though Secretary Kee had reported 5 complaints at a previous
7

meeting, she and other had brought 22 complaints, and had referred 8 more. She recommended amending the
Shelter Standards law to include oversight, penalties, certifying shelters and animal control officers, and
identifying a better system for complaint tracking. She also corrected a previous statement that Philadelphia
had a 24-hour hold period; it is actually a 48-hour hold. She noted that it is a national best practice to let an
animal acclimate for 72 hours before performing an evaluation. While she agreed that training for Animal
Control Officers was a concern, she felt that accountability and oversight to an entity other than the non-profit
board of the shelter in question was needed.
Lynn Lofthouse, a former KCSPCA board member thanked Anne Cavanaugh for making $20 spay/neuter services
and $10 vaccines available. Ms. Lofthouse noted that a woman she had met had been told by a veterinary office
that she would have to pay over $1000 to spay/neuter and vaccinate cats dumped on her property. She also
suggested having college students volunteer with shelters by helping care for the animals, as there had been
similar successful programs at Wesley College, where she is a Professor of Communications.
6. Adjournment
There being no further business of the Task Force, a motion was made to adjourn. There was no objection,
therefore the motion was adopted and the meeting was adjourned at 3:58 p.m.