Cedar Rapids considers outsourcing or partnering for animal control

The heat and humidity were on the climb inside. The 40-plus kenneled dogs, barking and howling, told you so.

Two years after the June 2008 flood destroyed the city's animal shelter - a former sewage-treatment plant - along the Cedar River, the city's “temporary” operation shelters dogs and cats in an ill-equipped, light-industrial building in northeast Cedar Rapids.

It has been suggested, though, that the city get out of part or all of the animal control business.

Kris Gulick, a Cedar Rapids City Council member, and Brent Oleson, a Linn County supervisor, recently went to Omaha to see the animal control and shelter operation there. It serves Omaha and the county around it and is run by a non-profit agency, the Nebraska Humane Society, not by local government.

A non-profit organization like Omaha's is one option for Cedar Rapids to consider. Des Moines also has done this, though Polk County outside of Des Moines still provides public animal control.

Gulick and Oleson were impressed with the Omaha operation. Gulick said the animals liked it, too.

“The way they had designed it kept the stress down and reduced the amount of barking,” he said.

Linn County already has a non-profit entity, the Cedar Valley Humane Society, which has a shelter just east of Cedar Rapids and which provides service outside Cedar Rapids and Marion.

In the past, its board of directors has expressed no interest in merging with the Cedar Rapids operation. Bernie Lettington, president of the board, said nothing has changed in that regard.

Even so, Oleson, now a member of the Cedar Valley Humane Society's board, said he will push for a discussion among Cedar Rapids, Linn County, Iowa City, Johnson County and Jones County.

Gulick points out that there is another player in the mix - the Federal Emergency Management Agency. FEMA insists the city present options for a new or rebuilt animal shelter. To date, FEMA has obligated $1.115 million for such a facility, which could cost $3 million to build.

Greg Eyerly, the city's flood-recovery director, said FEMA wants to see three cost options: rebuilding the flooded site, building a new facility at Kirkwood Community College and a third option.

Eyerly hopes a community discussion among stakeholders can occur before mid-August, when Eyerly would like to have a site for a new facility selected.

Gulick said the Kirkwood option comes with the ability to collaborate with the college's veterinarian technician program, which shelter officials in Omaha called “a no-brainer” to take advantage of, he said.

Diane Webber, manager of the city's operation since October, said there will be “astronomical” benefits for a shelter and Kirkwood if they join forces.

As for outsourcing to a non-profit, Webber, a former Humane Society regional director, said in the past five years some non-profits have moved to get out of the animal control part of their contracts. Revenue, they find, doesn't cover costs, and they don't believe non-profits “should be subsidizing a government responsibility,” she said. Also, governments often come to think, incorrectly, that outsourcing to a non-profit won't cost them anything, she said.

For her, a move of the shelter's some 90 cats and 44 dogs can't come soon enough.

“You hear stressed animals,” Webber said of the racket in the temporary shelter, which has no air conditioning, poor drainage and a poor exchange of air. Even so, the temporary facility is clean and in good order.

“This is a very grave concern of mine,” Webber said. “People see that it's bright and clean and think it's OK.”