Animal Services Seeks Citation Clarity from Confusion Caused by Management

San Angelo's City Council will undertake an agenda item compelling citizens to appear in court for violations of Animal Services ordinances.  Here's the rationale:

Currently, the Animal Control ordinance of the City of San Angelo adopted in 2015 does not effectively designate those employees that should be authorized to issue citations for violation of this ordinance. The current language identifies specific positions that have changed names over the past few years which causes confusion during court hearings.

Current language: (d) Any person employed as a city peace officer, animal services director, animal services officer, animal services technician, or animal services dispatcher shall have the authority to issue citations for violations of this chapter.

Position names don't change spontaneously.  That's the job of Animal Services management.  It would be their and City Manager Daniel Valenzuela's job to keep operations consistent with ordinances.  Clearly, they did not since 2015.  Management created the confusion for Municipal Court in two short years.

Historically, Animal Services has picked and chosen which ordinances to apply and when.  During the City's extermination of Mejor Que Nada's community cats City Health Director Sandra Villareal defended animal control workers not following ordinances for nuisance animals, calling those procedures "the Red Tape way."

Here's the new language:

Any duly authorized agent of the City who meets all requirements imposed by state law shall have authority to issue citations for violations of this chapter.

Under the current ordinance citizens expect to be cited by an Animal Services worker, manager or a peace officer.  Those I can picture.

I cannot image a "duly authorized agent  of the city who meets all requirements imposed by state law for issuing citations for violations of Chapter 3:  Animal Control."  That sounds like a line in a job description or a qualification for job consideration.  This language is not a move to clarity for the public.

Updating the job titles management changed would be the best benefit for the public.  As Mayor Morrison stated months ago to City Council it's hard to see public benefit as the aim of Animal Services.  This proposed change may be another window into that world.

City Council should ask questions before approving this item.  One, will code compliance officers be able to write citations for animal control ordinances?

Two, how will Animal Control  handle situations when it's not following ordinances under this section?  It happened in 2013 and will surely happen again.  Will they ticket themselves?

And three, what was the recommendation of the Animal Services Advisory Committee on this ordinance change?  The item has not appeared on the ASAC agenda the last few months, so management skipped its advisory committee yet again. 

We have a new Mayor and a number of astute new City Council members.  We'll see if they allow an illogical change that makes it more confusing for the public to know who can issue them an Animal Control citation.

Update 6-6-17:  City Council accepted that management changed titles to make the ordinance problematic in Municipal Court.  Council approved the vague wording "Any duly authorized agent of the City who meets all requirements imposed by state law shall have authority to issue citations for violations of this chapter."  The vote was 7-0.  Council learned the Director had not focused on this part of his job for several years.  The number of Animal Control employees able to write citations went from 6 to 3 certified with 3 in training, to 3 certified with 2 in training and one having to use a workaround process.  Shelter leadership broke the ordinance by not following it.  As Council let them off the hook James Flores told an ever changing story.  New Council members have been oriented. The public has no idea which city employees can write citations.  Will Code Enforcement be able to write animal control citations?  No City Council members asked that question.