The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutIR 7530 ,INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. 7 530 N'PTC RfO June 25, 1991 U 0i To the Mayor and Members of the City Council cis 6if Subject: ANIMAL CONTROL KENNEL OPT ,"NS During the May 28, 1991 , pre-council meeting, staff presented an informal report to Council which identified three options for the provision of kennel services as part of the City's Animal Control Program. The option recommended by staff was to contract with the Humane Society of North Texas. In the discussion that followed the presentation action, Council directed staff to provide additional information on the following: 1) projected savings to be experienced from contracting kennel services with the Humane Society of North Texas 2) allegations concerning the Humane Society listed in an anonymous letter 3) construction and alternates proposed for the Animal Control facility. These issues are addressed in this report. To provide Council members with a common point of reference on the Animal Control Program, a brief description of the current program is given, followed by an analysis of the Animal Control kennel service options. The final section of this report addresses the three issues identified in the May 28, 1991 , pre-council meeting, ending with the recommended option for providing kennel services. BASIS FOR ANIMAL CONTROL PROGRAM The Health and Safety Code of Texas, Chapter 826, Section 826.017 requires the governing body of a municipality to designate a local health authority to address a rabies control program. In responding to this requirement, the City of Fort Worth adopted Chapter 6 "Animals and Fowl" in the City Code to establish the procedures by which the Animal Control Program operates. CURRENT PROGRAM DESCRIPTION A brief description of the current service level of the Animal Control Program follows. In addition to the rabies control program, the staff performs the following activities: 1) Pick up of dogs/cats roaming at large in the City. 2) Provide adoption services for dogs/cats. 3) Pick up dead animals from the street and also from local veterinarians. 4) Conduct educational programs on responsible pet ownership. 5) Investigate bite incidents. 6) Euthanize unclaimed animals after the three day holding period has expired. 7) Provide traps to citizens for catching wild animals (skunks, raccoons, fox). -ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS ,INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. 7530 ",.,P Tint June 25, 1991 `ofso)??. To the Mayor and Members of the City Council Page 2 of 11 �rsX Subject: ANIMAL CONTROL KENNEL OPTIONS ra» These services are provided from four facilities : 1) A house built in 1946, approximately 896 square feet, offices the clerical staff and program administrator; 2) A single wide mobile trailer, 720 square feet, serves as office space for 16 field officers , 2 assistant supervisors and 4 kennel staff ; 3) A kennel built in 1951 houses the impounded animals in approximately 5,904 square feet ; and, 4) An observation ward , which previously served as a quarantine ward, houses small puppies and kittens in approximately 1,224 square feet. The budget for the FY 90-91 Animal Control Operation is $687,631. Kennel activities are funded at $158,841 ; field activities and administrative services are funded at $528,790. Should the City contract with the Humane Society for kennel services, funding of the field activity would continue to be carried out and funded by the City. Currently, we estimate 19,000 animals will be processed through the kennel in the fiscal year 90-91 as compared to 17 ,417 animals that were processed through the kennel in the fiscal year 89-90. ANALYSIS OF OPTIONS FOR ANIMAL CONTROL ]KENNEL SERVICES The current Animal Control Program is operating out of facilities that are at least 40 years old. These facilities lack adequate provisions for quarantined animals , adoptions, and basic veterinary care . The City Council has considered three approaches to resolve this problem. Responses were requested from the private/public sector on the following options: * A contract with a private or non-profit group to take all animals collected by the City and shelter them at their facility. * Construction of a facility to be leased and operated by the City. * Construction of a new animal control facility on City property in southeast Fort Worth to be operated by the Health Department. A description of these three options follows : Kennel Services Contract One proposal was received on the contracting of animal kenneling services. Even though only one proposal was received, the pre-established evaluation process was followed. The proposal was submitted by the Humane Society of North Texas. A five member panel was assembled to interview the Humane Society staff and visit the facility. Panel participants were Abe Tuggle, supervisor of the Animal Control Program in Garland, Texas ; Edwin A. Beckcom , D. V.M. , retired veterinarian from the Dallas Animal Control Program; Frances Pieters , Assistant City Attorney, City of Fort Worth; Letha Aycock, Assistant Director, Health Department, City of Fort Worth; and Pat Diffee, Senior Buyer, Purchasing Division, City of Fort Worth. ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS --- r .INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. 7530 µ�pT;Rf June 25, 1991 B�FORr, To the Mayor and Members of the City Council Page 3 of 11 rax . Subject: ANIMAL CONTROL KENNEL OPTIONS 1473 The panel interviewed Humane Society representatives, Mr. Art Brender, Dr. John Burns , and Mr. Paul Giles. Four of the five panel members made a site visit to the Humane Society of North Texas facility on East Lancaster. (Ms. Frances Pieters, Assistant City Attorney, did not visit the site) . All of the four panel members agreed on the following items after the site visit. Contracting kennel services to the Humane Society would have the following benefits: 1. Citizens would have one central location to call or visit. 2. The facility is open 7 days a week. 3. A spaying/neutering policy at the Humane Society facility would result in reduced numbers of stray animals in the future. 4. A Veterinarian would be on site. 5. The vendor is well insured. b. The September 1, 1991 proposed start up date as opposed to a projected move in date on a newly constructed facility of March 1992 is attractive. 7. The Humane Society has a good public image. The deficiencies noted by the panel are listed along with remedies proposed by the Humane Society in their June 7, 1991 letter: 1. The quarantine area had not been completed at the time of the site visit. 2. At the time of the site visit , the Humane Society did not possess an approval from the Texas Department of Health for the operation of either their quarantine or their kennel facilities as required in the Request for Proposal (RFP) . RESPONSE: Completion of 30 quarantine runs and obtaining a Texas Department of Health permit can be completed shortly after the contract is awarded. 3. The kennels for large dogs were not complete at the time of the site visit. RESPONSE: The large dog kennel is completed and in use now. ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS ---� INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. 7530 �,,RTfpF June 25, 1991 0ifORr0 A To the Mayor and Members of the City Council Page 4 of 11 U �S rexxl Subject: ANIMAL CONTROL KENNEL OPTIONS 4. Plans for providing adequate staff and equipment for making and receiving phone calls were not included in the proposal. RESPONSE : Staff for kennel and reception areas : Supervisor and one assistant in reception; at least four and probably five kennel persons to clean, feed and help unload animals as received from Animal Control Officers. The Humane Society currently has six lines coming into the Shelter -- two lines are not listed in the phone book and are not on rotary. Additional lines can be added exclusively for this operation if needed. There is to be an office for the public to enter for checking to see if their animal has been picked up . This will be equipped with a computer and cash register for receiving fines , tags, etc. 5. The unloading area in the back of the facility is reached by a dirt driveway, and the area provided for unloading animals is not covered. This would make operations difficult during inclement weather. RESPONSE: The Humane Society will construct a structure for vehicles to back into and close the doors while the animals are being unloaded. 6. A line item budget that included the number of positions by job titles did not show an increase in staff to handle the 40% increase in workload anticipated from the City Animal Control operations. RESPONSE : A line item budget has been submitted . Staff review concludes that it appropriately reflects anticipated workload. 7. In the RFP, all fees collected by the vendor were to be credited to the City. The Humane Society has proposed to keep all adoption and quarantine fees collected to underwrite the cost of adoptions and quarantining animals. They are silent on the collection of other fees. We have assumed in the fiscal analysis that the fees collected by the Humane Society will equal those generated by the City , except in the case of licensing where the Humane Society will be allowed to retain $2.00 of the $5.00 fee charged for a City tag. NO RESPONSE SUBMITTED: 8. There is no provision for a required washout area for the Animal Control trucks. At the time of the site visit , Humane Society staff indicated they were looking at an off-site location. RESPONSE: A facility for washing out Animal Control trucks can be built into the structure constructed for the unloading of animals. The proposed truck washout area would be located on the southeast portion of the building where the animals are to be unloaded and be brought into the back runs with the Society' s present shelter. It would be available for use as soon as it could be constructed, within 60-120 days. ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS ,INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. 7530 a►prrq June 25, 1991 `'Q44oe., To the Mayor and Members of the City Council Page 5 of 11 *rrX Subject: ANIMAL CONTROL KENNEL OPTIONS +OT3 9. The humane Society failed to submit a description of the type and method of training given to center attendants as requested in the RFP. RESPONSE: All staff members work closely with the Veterinarian. Some members have had Basic and Advanced Certification. As the Humane Society can schedule other kennel persons, they will be trained for Basic and Advanced Certification. All Euthanasia Techs have been trained and are observed regularly by the Manager and Veterinarian to assure proper administration of euthanasia fluid. 10. The automated system for tracking animals and for invoicing the City of Ft. Worth was not available at the time of the site visit. RESPONSE: The Humane Society has an IBM PC in place now. They will be adding a 20MB memory hard drive. There are a couple of programs available specifically for Animal Control operations which they are checking into, or they can have a programmer set up a program. Either way, the Humane Society states this can be in place within 30 days after the contract is signed. If the City Council authorizes a contract for the provision of kennel services, City staff will work closely with Humane Society personnel to address any remaining issues. In the evaluation criteria for proposals, price was the most significant factor. The Humane Society's proposal was compared to the City of Fort Worth Animal Control operating budget. Revenue estimates for each program were also projected. This comparison showed that an annual savings of $31,934 could be experienced if the contract were awarded to the Humane Society. Cost Comparison HUMANE SOCIETY CITY OF FORT WORTH PROPOSAL ANIMAL CONTROL Board/Quarantine $2F9,6531 $149,841 Dead Animal Removal 9,0002 9,000 Service Fee on Collections 3,190 $231,843 $158,841 Rental Costs for office space Animal Control Annual Admin. Field Staff 17,100 Debt Service 160,8563 Total $248,943 $319,697 1Based on 17 ,417 animals impounded for 3 days @ $3.00 per day and quarantine estimate based on 629 bites requiring 10 days @ $10.00 per day. Service is not provided by Humane Society, City continues to incur the cost. 3Debt Service Schedule assumes 20 -years at 7.25%; if this is funded from the capital projects reserve fund, then there would be no Debt Service, but the City would experience a lost opportunity cost and lost interest earnings. ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS —�� .INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No.. 7530 µ,PTrgf June 25, 1991 4QEi0RT�L} To the Mayor and Members of the City Council Page 6 of 11 m V�3 Subject: ANIMAL CONTROL KENNEL OPTIONS re71 Annual Revenues - Kennel Services CITY OF FORT WORTH HUMANE SOCIETY ANIMAL CONTROL Licensing $ 4,680 $ 15,600 Impoundment 50,010* 50,010 Board 13,790* 13,790 Quarantine 62,900 62,900 Adoptions ----_ 5,400 TCOM Contract ----_ 22,500 TOTAL $131,380 $170,200 *5% service fee charged on collection. Total Expenditures $248,943 $319,697 Total Revenues Collected -131,380 -170,200 Net Operational Costs $117,563 $149,497 Lease/Purchase For Animal Control Facility One proposal was received for the construction of an Animal Control Facility with a Lease/Purchase option. This proposal was submitted by Amelang/Hall . Failure to include the required bid bond resulted in the vendor Amelang/Hall being classified as non-responsive. Consideration could not be given to their proposal. Construction For Animal Control Facility Plans and specifications for construction of an Animal Control Facility were completed in February 1991. The project was advertised for bids on February 21 , and 28, 1991. Six responses were received from contractors. The responding contractors and the base bid submitted along with alternates 1, 2 and 3 are listed below. CONTRACTOR BASE BID ALT 1 ALT 2 ALT 3 Ed Parker & Assoc. $1,189,898 20,500 13,000 300,000 Tom Stephens, Inc. 1,275,000 46,000 10,000 344,000 Westland Const. 1,276,000 21,600 14,700 330,840 Harold N. Hall Const. 1,333,000 19,000 20,000 388,000 E. Horn Const. Co. 1,388,888 15,333 13,333 364,000 Ed A. Wilson A. Inc. 1,421,500 18,300 11,350 366,400 The base bid included the administration building , clinic , 100 kennel cages , parking and site work. Alternate #1 was for a covered walkway between the administration building and the kennel buildings. Alternate #2 was for a canopy for the truck wash area. Alternate #3 was for an additional 100 kennel cages. ISSUES? BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No.7,530 U 59 "'pTI f e 7 of 11 fl� To the Mayor and Members of the City Council Page k3x;, 1 r Subject'. ANIMAL. CONTROL KENNEL OPTIONS /!7S Staff of the City Manager's office, Transportation and Public Works Department and Health Department reviewed the plans and specifications and concluded that some cost savings could be achieved without changing the scope of the project or sacrificing desirable materials in the construction. Therefore , if this alternative is selected , staff recommends that the contract be awarded as bid and a change order be negotiated with the low bidder to reduce the contracted amount. This bid expires June 25, 1991. Total Budget for Base Bid and Alternates: Construction $1,523,398 AjE Fee 67,200 Testing & Utilities 47,127 Printing and Advertising 1,800 Administration & Inspection 64,490 Contingency 150,000 Land Survey & Soil Tests 157,985 Fixed Equipment 30,000 Movable Equipment 45,000 Sub Total $2,087,000 pW Original Appropriation (221,930) Budget Request $1,865,070 RESPONSE TO COUNCIL'S REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION In the May 28 pre-council meeting, the City Council members directed the staff to provide additional information on three issues. 1) Analysis of the proposed $31 ,934 annual savings to be experienced by contracting with the Humane Society and identification of long term savings experienced from reduced retiree costs, health insurance costs and workers ' compensation costs . Also the Humane Society was requested to demonstrate adequate staff were being provided for implementation of the Kennel Services contract. The $31,934 annual savings is determined by finding the difference between the net operational costs presented on p. 6. A part of the analysis to derive the projected annual savings took into consideration projected revenue collections by the Humane Society. The initial proposal for the animal control kenneling services provided by the Humane Society did not include a plan to retain certain fees collected. Under the current proposal dated March 14, 1991, the Humane Society has stipulated that the City will be charged the same charge made by the City to the owner for the quarantine service . (Currently that charge is $10 per day . ) The proposed practice would result in the City receiving no revenue from the ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS WORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. 7530 ►pTAF June 25, 1991 `�fcaar�i To the Mayor and Members of the City Council Page $ Of 11 v�z xt�y. Subject. ANIMAL CONTROL KENNEL OPTIONS I,7, quarantine fees . The Humane Society also anticipates that there will be no net revenue from adoptions to share with the City. In addition, the Humane Society proposes charging the City $3 for each dead animal brought to the Society for disposal. The impact of these proposed practices on revenue collections was taken into consideration in deriving the total annual cost for implementing the Humane Society proposal for kennel services. Long term savings that would be experienced by the City by contracting with the Humane Society projected over a five year period total $185, 301. These savings represent $25,631 in incremental increases projected for the City's health insurance program and annual salary increases and the operational savings of $159 ,670 over a five year period. Projected Long Term Incremental Savings FY FY FY FY FY Account Title 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 TOTAL Health Insurance $ 1, 182 $ 1,300 $ 1,430 $ 1 ,574 $ 1,731 $ 7,217 (.10 annual increase) Salaries 3,400 3,536 3,677 3,824 3,977 18,414 (.04 annual increase) TOTAL $ 4,582 $ 4,836 $ 5,107 $ 5,398 $ 5,708 $25,631 Estimated Annual Savings $31,934 $31 ,934 $31 ,934 $31,934 $31,934 $159,670 TOTAL SAVINGS $36,516 $36,770 $37,041 $37,332 $37,642 185 301 No incremental increase has been projected for retirement by the City Personnel Department. Workers' Compensation is based on actual claims filed for the past six years. Workers' Compensation costs have averaged $9,039. A comparison of the proposed Humane Society's kennel services budget to the City of Fort Worth' s proposed budget verifies level of staffing, supplies and contractual services. The Humane Society proposes to staff the Kennel Services contract with seven full-time employees, whereas the City of Ft . Worth would only have a staff of five full-time employees. 2) RESPONSE TO LETTER - Humane Society staff is available to respond to allegations. ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS ,INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. 7530 N,,p TIFf June 25, 1991 QX P lfORP't T o the Mayor and Members of the City Council Page 9 of 11 Subect: ANIMAL CONTROL KENNEL OPTIONS 3) CONSTRUCTION FOR ANIMAL CONTROL FACILITY The architect's rendering of the Animal Control Facility is attached for your information. (Alternate 3, 100 additional kennel cages is not shown on the rendering.) Currently, the Animal Control Program is housed in four buildings providing 8, 744 square feet . The new facility provides approximately 17,000 square feet and is projected to serve the community for twenty years. Suggested cost reductions that might be achieved by changing the design and materials specified have been reviewed by the Transportation and Public Works (T/PW) staff. Each of the suggested reductions are listed below with the staff's assessment for potential savings and recommendations. 1. Prefabricated steel structure in lieu of structure shown. Estimated savings $100,000 for both buildings. a) Not recommended because the structural change will limit Architect's legal liability. b) Change in structural system could negate building permit. 2. Eliminate waste receptor. Estimated savings $1,500. a) Would require personnel handling animal waste by hand. b) Not as sanitary nor convenient. c) Not recommended. 3. Interior hollow metal window frames. Estimated savings $400. a) Exterior windows are aluminum. Corrosion would occur when different metals contact. b) Not recommended. 4. Painted concrete masonry units at administration building. a) Continued re--painting would negate savings. b) Not recommended. 5. Eliminate cabinets used as desks & storage. Savings unknown. a) Furniture costs more than cabinets. b) Not recommended. 6. Eliminate lockers. Estimated savings $2,800. a) Loss of storage for personnel . Alternative secure storage would have to be provided. b) Not recommended. ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS ---- INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. 7530 �"R Tf Nfo June 25, 1991. oFtop"� To the Mayor and Members of the City Council Page 10 of 11 V �S xT�x�y. Subject: ANIMAL CONTROL KENNEL OPTIONS 7. Use single roll up doors. Estimated savings $4,004. a) Closing outside doors cuts off ventilation. b) Increased energy costs in electrical use for lights and exhaust system. c) Not recommended. 8. Eliminate skylights. Savings $35,000. a) Increased lighting and energy costs. b) Not recommended. 9. Use gas space heaters. Savings unknown. a) Increased energy costs negates savings. b) Uncomfortable working conditions. c) Not recommended. 10. Eliminate Alt. #1 - walkway canopy. Savings $20,500. a) Provides protection to citizens in inclement weather. b) Not recommended. 11. Eliminate Alt. #2 - wash area canopy. Savings $13,000. a) Negates cleaning vehicles in inclement weather. b) Not recommended. 12. Eliminate Alt. #3 - 100 additional kennels. Savings $300,000. a) Best use of today's money. b) Allows facility to be used beyond 10 year requirement. c) Not recommended. 13. Use zonolite insulation in lieu of foam insulation specified. Estimated Savings $4,000. a) Recommended if same insulating factor is attained. 14. Use engineered concrete mix in lieu of 5 and 1/2 sack concrete specified. Estimated Savings $3,000. a) Recommended if engineered mix attains 3,000 P.S.I. strength. 15. Use locally distributed fencing in lieu of manufacturer specified. Estimated savings $4,500. a) Recommended if equal in quality. ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. 7530 June 25, 1991 Page 11 of 11 LQgfORTy To the Mayor and Members of the City Council 9 v �z %r�xA40 Subject; ANIMAL CONTROL KENNEL OPTIONS rp 73 16. Use cylinder locks in lieu of mortised locks specified . Estimated savings $2,500. a) Recommended if equal in quality. 17. Use square vision panels in doors in lieu of round ones specified. Estimated savings $1,500. a) Recommended. 18. Substitution of various electrical and mechanical components for those specified. Estimated savings $20,000. a) Recommended if equal in quality. 19. Use structural concrete slab in clinic in lieu of slab on grade. This is an added cost item. Estimated cost +$12,000. a) Recommended because of soil conditions. Recommendation for Animal Control Kennel Services It is recommended that the Animal Control kenneling, euthanasia, and disposal services in the City of Fort Worth be provided by the Humane Society of North Texas . This recommendation is being made because contracting for kennel services with the Humane Society of North Texas allows the City to realize an annual savings of $31,934 as compared to the construction and operation of a new City facility. More importantly, it addresses the City Council's stated goal of working more cooperatively and effectively with local non—profit agencies , school districts and other governmental agencies in order to eliminate duplication. 4ai I r City Manager ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS