Nathan Kane rescued cats and kittens from several harsh places – trash cans, abandoned police cars, and, in some cases, the amp hushed space behind the water heater.
Sherman Oaks residents took action again last week after hearing that the Los Angeles Animal Services division was threatened by a $4.8 million cut.
Kehn and many other animal rescue advocates requested that the city council refuse to lay off employees, leave animal shelters open and save programs during castration.
“If we stop repairing the cat, the problem will be out of control within a few months,” Keene said.
Bass and her budget team say the concerns are rooted in misunderstanding.
The mayor’s spending plan spells out a $4.8 million cut in animal services. But it also puts aside the extra $5 million for the agency’s operations in a lesser-known section of the budget known as “inappropriate balances.” This serves as a holding tank for funds that have not yet been finalized.
The $5 million is enough to keep six animal shelters open, he said in a social media post Monday during a five-hour budget hearing where the fate of these facilities was repeatedly discussed.
“We understand the need to continue operating all urban shelters and work with the city council to ensure that animal care and its well-being priorities are reflected in the final budget,” she said.
The disruption over the city’s troubled animal shelters, which are suffering from rising rates of overcrowding and euthanasia, began with the mayor’s proposal to roll out the 2025-26 budget.
The Bass ‘$14 billion spending plan released last week proposed that it was heavily cut to the city’s workforce to fill the roughly $1 billion shortfall. Approximately 2,700 positions will be eliminated by more than half of the layoffs – at a wide range of agencies.
During the preparation of these budget documents, the mayor’s team initially did not believe there was enough money to prevent animal services layoffs, Deputy Mayor Matt Hale said. By the time they found $5 million, it was too late to incorporate the money into a portion of the budget listing the department’s salary and expenses, he said.
The $5 million was then settled in a disadvantaged balance, also known as UB, under “Animal Services Operations,” which appears on one of the mayor’s budget documents, on the 1,013 pages.
On the day the budget was announced, city officials issued a one-page explanatory officer on the proposed employment cuts. The document did not refer to $5 million.
A day later, Animal Services officials issued their own memo saying the $4.8 million cut would lead to the closure of three animal shelters. Harbor, West Los Angeles and West Valley. Residents living nearby will need to re-rout to the city’s other three animal shelters, wrote Annet Ramirez, interim general manager of the agency.
It will result in overcrowding and dramatic increases in euthanasia for dogs and cats, freeing up space, Ramirez said.
Ramirez’s memo granted a $5 million set aside for her agency. Nevertheless, the prospect of increasing euthanasia has warned against urban animal rescue volunteers and urban controller Kenneth Mezia, one of the champions who distinguished Corgis in his campaign literature when he took office in 2022.
On Sunday, Mejia posted about the potential reductions for X, not mentioning the $5 million listed on the budget inappropriate balance. The next day, animal rescue activists gathered outside city hall and then closed a five-hour Budget Committee hearing to express their frustration.
Meri Kopushyan said the $4.8 million cut while attending the hearing meant “death sentence” for animals in city shelters.
“These animals are already living in scary, abandoned, and terrifying circumstances, and no family will love them,” Kopshuyan told the committee, fighting back tears.
Another speaker, as she explained, vowed to send her fellow activists, “Cat and Dog Warriors,” to the city’s Petco store, to make the name of the councillor who will vote for reducing animal services.
Yet another speaker, Mid City resident Devin Bennett, warned council members that they remember holding “thousands of puppies and kitten blood” in their hands, unless they stop cutting.
“This will end your political career,” said Bennett, the founder of the nonprofit called here.
To prevent layoffs and closures, the city council must vote to move $5 million from an inappropriate balance to animal services.
On Tuesday, councillors Traci Park and John Lee, whose district contains two of the three shelters at risk of closure, sent a letter to the chairman of the Budget Committee, Katy Yaroslavsky Council, requesting the transfer. That same day, Jaroslavski and Tim Makosker, members of another budget committee, expressed support for the move.
“I would like to talk to the acting general manager of animal services and talk about some of the structural issues within the organization,” says McOsker. “But I would absolutely want to move $5 million and recover those positions.”
Council members must approve the budget by the end of May. Some supporters say they should go above $5 million and give new infusions of funds to departments they seriously consider to be underfunded.
Jennifer Naitaki, vice president of the Michelson Public Policy Center, who is affiliated with the Michelson Fund Animal Foundation, has admitted that saving animals’ lives is expensive. Still, she said additional funds will be rewarded with dividends by reducing unwanted animal births and alleviating tensions in urban shelters.
Naitaki said city leaders were able to avoid political headaches by providing clear information from the start about the funds set aside for the department. It would also bring relief to worrying animal advocates, she said.
“It wasn’t just that, as it was,” she said. “Obviously, it caused a big uproar, a lot of rage and a lot of defense. And I don’t think it’s bad, right? It’s always good to get to the front of the council members and the budget committee.
Source link
