Work Session held at 5:00PM to address Animal Control issues:

After Commissioners voted to keep the Animal Control Officer (ACO) from taking the county vehicle home at the 1/5/09 meeting, the Sheriff raised concerns in at least one public meeting that his deputies wouldn’t be able to respond to normal calls.  Somehow the County Manager and the ACO seemed to think the ACO was no longer on call for emergencies after hours once the truck was not taken home and relayed that information to the Sheriff.

 After requesting 911 logs for Animal Control for a three (3) month period—October, November, and December 2008-- I found that there had been only three after-hours calls in the last three months! This confirms that the ACO is not in need of a county vehicle 24/7 to use as a personal vehicle while taxpayers pay for fuel and upkeep.  It also confirms that it will be very rare that the Sheriff’s deputies will have to spend any time answering after hours 911 calls for animal problems.

The ACO also told the BOC that she had to be compensated if she was on call.  Comm. Payne quickly informed her that he was familiar with the law and said she only had to be paid from the time she got the call until the time she got back home.  What the BOC didn’t understand was the fact that she didn’t require “on call” payment until the county kept the truck from going home with her. 

The Animal Control Statistics on my website show that our animal shelter is geared toward euthanasia.  More than 200 animals were euthanized, eight adopted, and 32 transferred during the last 3 months of 2008.  When asked how she could improve the adoption rate, the ACO said, “we place almost every animal we get that is adoptable.”

The statistics make that statement questionable; do we really believe that 90% of the animals that come into the shelter are unable to be adopted?   The ACO should make a better effort to let the public and rescue groups know of the animals that are in the shelter.

Most papers in surrounding areas feature a “Pet of the Week” as well as a list of many of the types of dogs and/or cats in the shelter and encourage people to come see them and consider adopting one.

 Jasper County can do better!  The Commissioners will review new/revised Animal Control policies at the 2/2/09 meeting.  If you have any ideas that can be incorporated into new policies and procedures, please let me or any other Commissioner know.

 
Regular BOC meeting—6:00PM

I was delighted to see the room full of citizens Tuesday night, and even happier that many people spoke at the meeting, both before and after.  Many people later said it was more like a Town Hall meeting and indicated they were happy with the proceedings.

 
Recreation, Curbside, and Roads dominated the comments from the public.

Recreation

Citizens have complaints with both the appearance of the Recreation Department buildings and fields and lack of noticeable work by the staff.  Many agreed that that current Recreation Board needs to be dissolved and reassessed for its effectiveness.

The County is the only entity that financially supports the Recreation Department.

Such comments as, “Things could be so much better if the staff worked 8 hours a day 5 days a week.”  “Someone needs to be held accountable.”  Many complained about the shape of the fields and how they weren’t taken care of and how other county’s facilities put Jasper’s to shame all because of a lack of work by staff.

I questioned the fact that there are 2 separate accounts for Recreation—one that the commissioners see on the financial statements, the other that they don’t see and haven’t realized how much it is overspent each year.  See the auditors findings from 2007 here.  The findings won’t be any different for 2008 because nothing has changed—little oversight and minimal accountability.  The Board voted to combine the 2 accounts as long as the auditor saw no reason to keep them separate.  This will allow the BOC to keep better oversight on the funds being spent.

Anytime the Recreation Director needs or wants something, he charges it to the account the BOC doesn’t get financial statements for (called “Concessions”)—and no one else from the County Manager to the CFO inform the BOC about the expenditures.  After reviewing the invoices attached to checks, we found that the Recreation Director defied a vote of the BOC.  The BOC voted over a year ago to deny letting Recreation lease a copier, but instead suggested they buy one for approximately $200 - $300 at an office supply and use it until it quit working (a year or two) and then buy another one.  Instead the Recreation Director leased a copier for 48 months at $279 a month and charged it to “Concession.”  I have asked for a copy of the lease and would like to know who approved a lease that will cost $13,392 instead of $1200 –the cost of a new copier each year!  As I promised you, waste is going to be cut and accountability for each tax dollar is being demanded.

 The BOC has asked that the Recreation Board meet with them at the 2/16/09 night meeting.  It was fascinating that only one member of the Recreation Board attended the meeting Tuesday night.  If you have any comments about Recreation, please let me know.

 Curbside

Everyone that responded to my email a few months ago indicated they liked their curbside service.  However there are many folks in this county that pay for curbside and don’t have a trash can, and in some instances can’t seem to get one.  The county is paying over $58,000 a MONTH for curbside pickup, which is approximately 5200 cans.  The county gets absolutely no count or any detail from Advance Disposal for how many cans they actually pick up.   I spoke with the county manager about 2 weeks ago and asked him, “Just how do we know they aren’t picking up 4000 cans and we’re paying for 5000?”  His answer was, “We don’t.”  Does this make sense to you?  It doesn’t to me.  It means we’re paying for cans ADS says were delivered years ago that might be destroyed now.  I have also seen several refund checks from the County to citizens for cans they haven’t had and couldn’t get but yet had to pay for.  Do you think any of these refunds have been taken off the ADS bill?  No one has even thought of it!

There also needs to be some exceptions to the ordinance, which now says if there is electric to a residence and it is livable, curbside fees have to be paid.  The BOC will have to revise the ordinance.  One example that came up at the meeting was where citizens have home businesses that require a dumpster and are paying for a trash can they don’t have and wouldn’t or can’t use.  The ordinance has to be fair to everyone and the BOC needs to have a work session to think of all the “what if’s.” 

 Roads

 I will write more on Road Maintenance in another email with pictures.  It still amazes me that a pot hole can be fixed and 3 days later it’s back like it was or worse.  You can read the Monticello News’ account of what the BOC discussed here.

 During the meeting the Public Works Director told the Commissioners he already had a road maintenance plan.  When Commissioners asked for a copy he said he would get us all one.  True to his word, he sent us the plan.  Here’s a copy for your review.  This “plan” certainly isn’t what I was expecting.  My idea of a road maintenance plan, is a list of every road in the county with an approximate time frame of when it will be mowed, repaired, scraped (if dirt), etc.  The plan submitted may well explain why some roads haven’t been touched by the county in over 8 years.

 Cooperation

This board of commissioners can accomplish some good things for our county with the cooperation that has been shown.  For the first few months, however, we will concentrate on issues that have been lingering such as those addressed at the 1/20/09 night meeting and outlined in this email.

If there are issues you think the BOC needs to discuss and revise the current policy, please contact any of us and let us know.  I always look forward to hearing from you.