Dog Warden Tom Skeldon does not want to become an “Animal Control Officer”
I was sent a link to this news blurb from WSPD, about Dog Warden Tom Skeldon:
Lucas County’s dog warden is headed to Columbus Tuesday to testify against a bill that would change his job drastically….and reclassify him as an animal control officer. Dog warden Tom Skeldon says the bill would also take more money from a dog license and send it to the state. The bill already has cleared the house…and is being considered by a Senate committee.
So, I headed over and looked up the actual bill. One of the largest changes is it requires that they make sure that a dog does not have a microchip before they adopt it or kill it, or we could use their wording, “humanely destroyed” – the word “humanely” was added to this bill. There is a training requirement but it also appears those who were appointed before this bill would be grandfathered into not having to follow it.
The majority of the rather lengthy bill concerns, ferrets, HB 446.
I’m not seeing where it dramatically cuts into the money that Lucas County currently keeps from the Dog Warden’s office, when you read the fiscal notes it states clearly that the fees that the County can charge can go up related to Kennel registration fees and if the County opts to increase those fees the amount sent to the State is increased. It appears the County would actually generate a larger profit than they currently do with this bill.
Dog kennel registration
· The bill increases the statutory minimum annual dog kennel registration fee from $10 to $50. This will result in a gain in revenue for counties.
· The bill eliminates the procedures under which five dog registration tags are provided with each kennel registration and each additional tag is provided at $1. Instead it requires the owner of a kennel to register each dog that is two months of age or older as specified in the bill. This provision will result in significant revenue gains for counties.
· The bill establishes a minor misdemeanor offense for dog kennel owners that fail to file an application for kennel registration, or that fail to pay the applicable registration fee.
· The bill increases the transfer fee for the transferal of dogs from 25 cents to $1, and increases and eliminates several fees related to the harboring and impounding of dogs.
· The bill increases from ten cents to twenty cents the amount that a county auditor must give to The Ohio State University College of Veterinary Medicine, if the county increases dog or kennel registration fees to above $10 and $50, respectively. Additionally, the bill alters the distribution of these revenues.
If you don’t want to read the full bill as shared here, you can also read the Analysis of the bill which is a bit shorter.
The main areas changed that would impact the Dog Warden or the “Animal Control Officer” are:
Adds to the duties of chief animal control officers the enforcement of dog rabies quarantines.
Requires dogs to be humanely destroyed under specified circumstances rather than destroyed as required under current law.
Revises the requirement that dogs wear a valid tag issued in conjunction with a registration at all times by instead requiring a tag to be worn by a dog while outside the owner’s residence, and exempts a dog from that requirement if a written certificate from a veterinarian states that the dog should not wear a tag.
Ok, I’m lost. What is Skeldon’s real objection to the bill? I haven’t read the entire bill, but from what I have managed to glean this wouldn’t hurt Skeldon a bit or cause him any extra work. Would it?
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:53 amWhat was shared with me as the reasoning against it:
While the bill would raise the statutory minimum fees for dog licenses and kennel registrations (from $2 to $10 and from $10 to $50, respectively), this would have no impact on the fees that Lucas County collects for the operation of our Dog Warden department. Those fees as of today are $25 for licenses and $125 for kennel registration.
At the same time, the bill would create new explicit and implicit responsibilities for the Dog Warden, primarily by creating a duty for all animals as the “Animal Control officer,” while only allowing the County to receive revenue from dogs.
In these incredibly difficult economic times, Lucas County does not want the self-supporting Dog Warden budget to start requiring general fund dollars, which would then negatively impact other key services the county is mandated to deliver.
December 2nd, 2008 at 11:01 amGod love Tom Skeldon for the fine, fine job he does by eliminating all those damn pit bulls.
TOM SKELDON FOR MAYOR !
December 2nd, 2008 at 11:09 amThis part however would increase the fees currently collected:
December 2nd, 2008 at 11:10 amFor a bit of irony, drive by his house sometime during the day. The only thing you can hear is dogs barking their heads off.
December 2nd, 2008 at 1:40 pmI hate when they say humanely destroy an animal. As a fellow animal lover, I know it must bother you too.
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:45 pmLisaRenee wrote:
Wow! That really increases fees for breeders, does it not? If you had a litter of 4 puppies, plus the mom, that would be $250 alone if you weren’t able to find homes for the puppies before the 2 month mark (which I thought was the exact point when they were old enough to leave their mother… what’s the grace period on this?)
Or, is the fee still $125 for kennel registration and each dog is $10 to register?
Of course, purebred dogs are already pretty pricey, so maybe you won’t care about the increased fees. Anyway, let’s think about the economy – it’s much cheaper to adopt a dog from a great establishment of “pre-owned” pets, such as the Toledo Animal Shelter… and you’d be doing a good deed.
December 3rd, 2008 at 12:28 amIt’s a $125 kennel fee and any dog that is over two months old is $25.00 – it used to be five free per year with the kennel fee and one dollar over the five. So, depending on how many kennels are in Lucas County? Could be a sizeable increase considering if I’m reading it right, the State is only asking for an additional ten cents per license.
December 3rd, 2008 at 12:51 amAt what point is this new measure going to stop Skeldon’s radical attacks on the pit bull breed?
It seems that most of those who own kennels are law abiding citizens, which go the extra length to remain in accordance of the city laws regarding dog ownership. The Dog Warden’s office is probably the most financially stable and lucrative department in the whole city and it seems as if this is another measure to secure more funding for other failings.
Sometimes you wonder if someone is sitting back concocting avenues to make life more difficult for those who chose to abide by laws. This increase is excessive. Modify the fees, however the percentage rate of increase is as ridiculous as the enormous interest pay day loans companies are charging.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:11 pmI think it was probably an eye opening experience for some to realize that Lucas County charges so much more than the previously allowed minimum charges and even if the legislation passes, will still charge quite a bit more than the minimum.
I understand the concern over the doubling of the fee, but we are talking about ten cents more per license unless I’ve missed some other increase in the funding being requested from the State. Even if we only had 50 kennels in all of Lucas County, who only had five dogs each, that would increase the revenue to Lucas County by $6,250.00 which would more than make up for the ten cent increase in money the State wants per license.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:48 pmWhile I agree that there is a serious cat problem, I am not sure that making our dog wardens “Animal Control” officers is the answer; they are overwhelmed just with their anti-pit-bull efforts. It’s no surprise that Officer Skeldon would dig in his heals and object to any change, or increasing responsibility, or need for revenue; but I am shocked that the dog wardens do not have the micro-chip scan capabilities! How many dogs that are lost or stolen, could end up at the pound, without a collar and overpriced Lucas County registration tag attached? Chances are, if a dog owner takes on the expense of having their pet chipped, the data base will have accurate information to locate the owner, and the owner is very likely to pay the associated fees to recover their dog. In reality, having a scanner could actually generate enough revenue to pay for itself. Scanning capabilities should be a must for the Lucas County Dog Warden.
December 5th, 2008 at 10:14 am