Advocates rally around Oshawa Animal Services

Advocates were out in full force to voice their support for Oshawa Animal Services this week.

Members of the public held a rally outside of city hall prior to the latest community services committee meeting demanding a commitment to continue current service levels at the city department.

In late-March, the committee was presented with a staff report recommending the city enter into an agreement that would transfer most animal services to the Humane Society of Durham Region.

At that time, Commissioner of Community Services Ron Diskey said the recommendation resulted from a previous council motion in 2018 to investigate a low-cost spay and neuter clinic in Oshawa.

The details of the agreement were not initially made public, prompting rampant rumours the Animal Services department would be closed.

A petition opposing the move eventually received 6,500 signatures.

The Humane Society eventually withdrew its proposal to the city earlier this month.

In writing to council, board chair Doug Edwards referred to “significant misunderstandings among councillors and the public” on what the proposal would involve.

However, this did not stop several residents from speaking out in support of Oshawa Animal Services at the meeting.

Denise Harkins, who works with GTA-based rescue group Action Volunteers for Animals, told councillors she has been through “good and bad” with Animal Services.

However, Harkins said since current shelter manager Kathy Pittman-Feltham took over, the facility has improved significantly.

“She and her team have worked very hard to turn the shelter around,” Harkins stated.

Harkins said animal services are satisfactory in Oshawa, and should not be transferred to another municipality, as the Humane Society is located in Whitby.

Oshawa resident MJ Galaski also believes Animal Services has made huge gains in recent years.

Galaski said in the past, shelter staff was “exceptionally difficult” to deal with, and euthanasia rates were very high.

But this has changed under current management, as she says the Oshawa shelter is essentially a “no kill” setting.

“This total transformation should be held in the highest regards by our citizens and our city councillors,” she said while imploring for the city not to “fix something that isn’t broken.”

Under the proposed agreement, the Humane Society would have assumed shelter and licensing responsibilities for the city.

The Oshawa Animal Services building on Farewell Drive would have been vacated and used for equipment and supply storage by the operations department.

The potential impact on staff was not included in the public report.

In their report, Diskey and Beth Mullen, director of strategic and business services, estimated partnering with the Humane Society would have saved the city approximately $489,000 in operating costs over 10 years, and saved the city nearly $3 million over seven years for a low-cost spay and neuter clinic.

Staff also stated transferring services to the Humane Society would also help the city avoid $440,000 in capital investments to the Farewell Drive facility over the next four years.

Resident Martin Field questions these cost estimates, stating there is more to consider than money when evaluating city services.

Field says transferring services to the Humane Society would not be for the “greater benefit” of the animals.

Furthermore, he said the city didn’t appear to have a plan if it needed to take over animal services again in the future.

“What provisions has the city made to reclaim these services,” he said.

Field said he is considering asking the Ontario Ombudsman to investigate how the situation has unfolded.

“Unfortunately, this matter is far from over.”

With the Humane Society proposal off the table, the committee voted on a series of motions tied to the future of the Animal Services division.

Resolutions committing council to fully fund operations of the department at no less than current levels through the end of the current term, and declaring any future review of services must include a public meeting were passed unanimously.

However, a third motion calling for the termination of probes into “reducing or eliminating” current service levels was defeated by a three-to-two vote.

Mayor Dan Carter, Ward 4 Regional Councillor Rick Kerr, and Ward 4 City Councillor Derek Giberson were opposed, while Ward 5 City Councillor John Gray and Ward 1 Regional Councillor John Neal voted in favour.

Prior to voting, Gray said these motions would give animal lovers “piece of mind.”

He said it was time to “get the issue to bed.”

“Let’s move on, let’s get to the other things that need our attention, and be grateful we have great staff and great volunteers in the community, and great animal lovers,” Gray said.

Giberson felt failing to consider subsequent proposals would be a misstep.

“By just sort of snuffing this out, we wouldn’t be providing any sort of confidence, not just to council, but the community moving forward, that we are going to create a framework that is actually going to be responsive to their voices,” he said.

Kerr said he wasn’t supportive of the Humane Society proposal in the first place.

“I didn’t think it was good enough,” he commented.

However, he believes the defeated motion would  “handcuff” council and staff.

“It’s a responsibility of staff to investigate all proposals for the effective and efficient delivery of services for the taxpayers’ benefit,” he said. “To just say this is off the table [and] we aren’t going to look at any proposal, I don’t think is following the council mandate and staff mandate, which is doing their best for the citizens of Oshawa.”

This led Ward 5 Regional Councillor Brian Nicholson, who was sitting in on the meeting, to insist Kerr had interpreted the motion differently from “every other person who speaks the English language.”

“You can’t spin your way out of this,” Nicholson said.

The tense words between Kerr and Nicholson were not over yet.

Kerr, the committee chair, introduced a lengthy motion requesting other area municipalities be asked to examine opportunities to partner with Oshawa to enhance animal services and avoid duplication.

The motion also stated any future Humane Society proposal would require five-year financial statements, documentation of the agency’s ability to accommodate services currently handled by the city, and background on governance and board of directors.

Kerr’s resolution also stipulated the Humane Society would be required to provide a “comprehensive” business case that would include a comparison of city services, existing physical space, and staffing levels, and detailed records of the number of and types of animals the organization manages, among others.

Lastly, Kerr called for a public meeting on any proposal brought forward to the city and developing a communication plan through social media and newspaper advertising.

Nicholson was visibly agitated by Kerr’s proposal, claiming it was a “game plan to facilitate the elimination of [Oshawa Animal Services].”

A member of the public yelled out, calling the motion “slimy and sleazy.”

Kerr defended his actions.

“My contention is that we needed to have a very clear process for walking staff and council through [consideration of any proposal] with absolutely no guarantee that any such proposal would be approved. That’s all this motion is,” he said.

The committee deferred a decision on Kerr’s motion pending a public meeting later this spring