Corlin Performed a Useful Service, but He Left Out a Few Parts

I think that the Culver City Friends of the Animal group owes Alan Corlin a debt of gratitude for his Oct. 24 letter to the newspaper. Mr. Corlin stepped up and validated the fact that the research for this program was completed several years ago. Also, Mr. Corlin’s research was very accurate and complete in reference to cost of the program.

I would also agree with him on what these other agencies that he contacted said about their animal control programs. I found the same responses when I did the research three or four years ago.

There are some things, however, that Mr. Corlin failed to mention in his letter. One, despite the cost, none of the cities that he contacted are planning to cut their animal control programs and contract with the County for full service. He did mention that El Monte had cut their animal control program and contracted with the County, but he failed to mention that the County maintains a large animal shelter in neighboring Baldwin Park.

I do not know who Mr. Corlin talked to at the Police Dept., but the plan I worked on three years ago was one fulltime animal control officer, supervised and assisted by existing personnel. The new plan, two additional animal control officers and a supervisor with equipment, could cost $400,000. Mr. Corlin knows that a plan like this in years past would require the Police Dept. to hire one lieutenant, one sergeant, four police officers and three animal control officers at a cost of well over $1 million.

Mr. Corlin raises the idea of fiscal responsibility and the question of should we have our own animal control program or contract with the County for full animal control services. Mr. Corlin is right when he says it would be cheaper to contract with the County for fulltime animal control services.

But using the same fiscal responsibility idea, should we not be contracting with the County for police and fire services? After all, it would be a lot cheaper.

The citizens of Culver City pay some of the highest city taxes in the state. They know that contracting with the County for police, fire and animal control services is cheaper. But the citizens of Culver City have always been willing to pay the extra money for better service.

I agree with Mr. Corlin that the recent City Council decision to fund the two-year pilot program for an animal control officer was not based on fiscal responsibility. But I do believe that the community wants better animal control services than those supplied by the County. And they are willing to pay for it.

I do not know if the Council’s decision was based on campaign promises. But if it was, that group of animal-loving citizens of Culver City swung a municipal election, giving them a three-vote majority for the next two years. I think this group of Culver City residents is larger than the small, emotional, enthusiastic group of animal lovers on the other side.

The citizens of Culver City should have the best services for the taxes they pay. A lot of fiscal irresponsibility is going on in Culver City. After spending the past eight years on the City Council, Mr. Corlin knows where a lot of this waste is in the city. Wouldn’t it be something if he worked with this group and their three-vote majority to help fix the city’s financial problems before they get worse?