Central Missouri Humane Society

Board of Directors Open Meeting

August 22, 2005

 

Minutes: Draft

 

1.         Call to order by Connie at 6:03

2.         Board members present: Connie Sullivan, Chris Bouchard, Tiffany McBee, John Lane, Zim Schwartze, John Howe, and Denny O’Brien

3.         Board members absent: Darren Hellwege

4.         Staff members present: Jason Ramsey, Dr. McCoy, Shannon de Leon, Julie Aber, Amy Messic, Lauren Kintz,

5.         Guests: Dr. Jerry Ebers, Matt Rold, Karen Riney, Laura Reiss

6.         Approval of agenda: Moved-John Howe; Second Chris; approved

7.         Approval of June, 2005 meeting minutes: Moved John Howe, second Chris; approved.

8.         Progress reports

a.         Equipment and building: Chris no report

b.         Governance: John Howe introduced Laura Reis, a potential board member

c.         Fundraising: No further report on Critter.  John Lane asked about signs for van.  Jason still talking with Mr. Hunter.  Meacham grant was funded; Eleanor Patterson pending.  We did not receive Bob Barker foundation grant.  Several with December due dates in process.  First National Bank: August Fund-raising in progress. Mavericks: liability issues may prevent us from have a pet day fundraiser; Chris suggested some promotional activities not involving dogs.  Jason working on proposal.  Mo State Employees charitable campaign August 25th.  Bass Pro shop: interested in something end of Sept with Ducks Unlimited.  Attorney General’s Office: we are not required to be registered because we do not hire a professional fundraiser.  Dog houses calendar being sold.  Dining Out For Animals date has been set for March 30th.  Art League auction Jan 27th.  Homeless animals day was Saturday, Jason had interview on KOMU.  Chris asked if Jason is he’s appearing in the media: John Lane asked if we can get more exposure in the media for summer heat exposure preventions.

d.         Staff Development

i.          John Lane asked if counseling protocol has been developed for relinquishers.  If someone inquires, we now we ask them write a letter and Jason answers the letter.  Julie asked if we can tell them it’s in foster care or adopted to a rescue group.  Question was raised whether adoption counselors aren’t qualified to give info over the phone.  Connie raised the point that the communication problems have been with miscommunication and letter prevents any confusion.  John Lane asked for a formal proposal.  Connie suggested that the form is different from a notebook.  Zim proposed that guidelines be written up for the different scenarios that need to be addressed and passed on to Shannon.  Chris raised the point that we need to ensure that the news is delivered by someone trained to deal with these issues.  Connie reiterated that we need to prevent the negative PR consequences.  Shannon suggested that Julie and Lauren could be responsible for delivering that info as well.  Laura will draw up guidelines. 

ii.          Julie on maternity: Laua filling in for Julie Aker.  Julie Schultz supervising.

e.         Marketing: see fundraising: wrist bands and magnets selling well. 

f.          Education and Programs: Connie related that she was to speak to vet school: AALAS.  They had question about animal rights and our affiliation with HSUS. 

g.         Budget: Zim - broke even in July.  Doing well on expenses keeping them down and on track there.  Columbia contract income numbers are off because we got two months in June since we didn’t get paid in April.  July now includes increased contract figures.  Jason mentioned that lots of fundraising will occur at end of the year so hopefully we will catch up.  Dr. McCoy mentioned that we get discounts on many supplies.  Shannon reported that she’s doing more cost comparison to cut costs.    John Lane questioned if we had changed the disinfectant.  Dr. McCoy recommended that we stick with bleach as a disinfectant due to expense but importance of cleaning properly.  He reported that our infectious disease rate seems down. 

9.         Questions on staff reports

10.       Old business

a.         John Howe - Issue of release of intact animals & acceptable identification.  Connie recounted the difference categories of owners.  There was discussion of fee structure for owner reclaiming and animal.  There was discussion of the meaning of the exceptions clause and whether that requires that we neuter animals that are released to the owner.  Chris asked if we can do this since we don’t legally own the animal.  Connie recounted that we need to abide by the law.

i.          Zim recounted that we have a different fee structure for owners claiming animals vs adopting.  Connie asked, what do we have to do to a claimed animal?  Laura recounted that we provide the option of boarding fees etc. vs paying fees for normal adoption with neutering and many elect to neuter because cheaper. 

ii.          Proof of ownership: current tattoo or microchip.  Zim recommended vet records, but Denny suggested a veterinarian is not going to be able to identify animals.  There was discussion of need to insure that people would not start gaming the system.  They need to fill out lost report before we adopt a dog.  Zim suggested that we should give the staff discretion.  Tiffany suggested that if staff thinks they aren’t the owner that they be referred to SOM. 

iii.         Zim moved we rewrite our policy on acceptable proof of ownership as follows: John Howe second

(1)        Tatoo; microchip; registration papers; veterinary records; pictures; ID tags; collar; distinguishing features; other deemed acceptable to the supervisory staff or sufficient combination at the discretion of the SOM

(2)        John Lane suggested that we model it after other humane societies.

(3)        Motion passed unanimously. 

(4)        Connie recounted that complaints stem from inconsistent enforcement and the discretionary aspects leave room for personality conflicts and we will need to exercise caution and be consistent in our treatment of clients. 

(5)        There is currently no formal policy book.  Shannon will start a policy book.

iv.         Fee structure for return to owner

(1)        We vaccinate when we evaluate since we need to protect the dog.  That cost should be passed on to the customer $10. 

(2)        Heartworm test $10.

(3)        Boarding $15 if greater than one day. 

(4)        Recommend microchip.

(5)        Shannon suggested that we should have fee structure that promotes neutering

(6)        Chris suggested that we have a minimum fee for adopting.  Connie favored a set fee.  There was discussion of the difference between whether Animal Control or us collects fee.

(7)        Chris moved we have a minimum intake fee of $20 and charge any incurred cost: boarding per night, vaccinations, heartworm testing, medical treatment, and other incurred expenses. Further, that we highly recommend microchipping and sterilization. Zim second.  Motion passed.  

v.         Dr. Jerry Ebers supervisor of Animal Care Act enforcement reported on his office’s interpretation of the law regarding neutering animals returned to the owner.  He distributed licensing packet that includes law.  Their interpretation is that the owner retains property rights up until impoundment period ends.  Sterilization is addressed in 273.403.  Owner can reclaim hunting dog unaltered; adopter does not have that right.  His interpretation is that we can release intact dog to the owner. 

(1)        Jason asked if there is a list a traditional breeds considered hunting dogs since some people hunt mixed breed dogs.  Dr. Eber said he could provide a list.  Mixed breeds is more of a question that may need to go to court, but his take is that if the dog is used for that purpose then it should be considered a hunting dog. 

(2)        Chris suggested that we could interpret clause 273.405.3 either way and that we should have an interpretation that allows us to release dogs to their owner intact with verified ownership

(3)        Dr. Ebers agreed that if we’ve had a dog more than 5 days (must include a Saturday) then it becomes shelter property and can only be released through adoption. 

(4)        Chris moved that we release dogs to their owner intact with verified ownership; Zim second: approved unanimously. 

b.         Denny - Veterinarian recruitment - final interview tomorrow. 

c.         Tiffany- website redesign - tabled to September

11.       New business

a.         Tiffany - shelter operation manager position description and posting moved to closed

b.         Tiffany - current commitee structure tabled to September

c.         Tiffany - fundraising Cafepress Shop Tabled to September.

d.         John Howe - Open board member positions.  Dale and Rhonda have resigned and John Howe will be leaving after Sept meeting.  John Howe has been talking to Angie Kong and Laura Reiss.  Tiffany has another possible member she’s discussing with.  Shannon raised the point that she needs a board liaison. 

12.       Public comment

a.         Laura Reiss introduced herself and explained her interest in the CMHS.  Has worked at FNB and University.  Background in accounting. 

Adjourned at 8:28.