At the September 9th IACC board meeting, Amber Myers reports on field operations: "...impounds are up, and that is exactly what we want to see." "We want to see us issuing more citations to violators and we want to see that we are impounding more animals for being in violation." You can view the board meeting here. You may have to scroll down... Click on the Sept 9 "video." The time stamp is at 8 minutes.

For each dog impounded, accommodating cage space is needed. The hard and cold fact is that creating cage space is achieved in one of two ways: 1. Getting adoptable dogs out alive by front-door adoptions, fosters and rescue partners or. 2. Killing friendly, adoptable dogs. Removing dangerous dogs from the streets is the responsibility of IACC, but what need is there to impound friendly dogs "for being in violation" when a warning or citation would suffice for the owner and the dogs returned to their home? How many friendly, adoptable dogs are sacrificed per day to accommodate an unnecessarily impounded friendly dog? One? Two? Three? How many dogs are sacrificed for this reason for a month? Thirty?

What pride and/or motive is in a senseless logic to kill innocent, adoptable dogs to make room for an unnecessary impoundment of another innocent dog? Are not public officials, supposed trustees of the commonwealth, mature enough to exercise common sense? Is this another example where a misguided trustee misuses/abuses the power delegated to them in ways that advance some kind of confused agenda? You be the judge.

The plea from a local rescuer to the local rescue community:
...please remember that there are a lot of dogs there (at IACC) that have done nothing wrong and are available and need rescue, too. There is just not enough space for them all.

Add to this painful equation a tortuous administrative policy that an owner is not allowed to visit their impounded dog(s). If you don’t think this happens, consider Mallory, whose two dogs got loose and a patrolling ACO whistled to the dogs (who came right to her) and they were loaded in a city van bound for 30+ days of impoundment despite the tearful pleas of their owner, standing by with her baby. The full account can be viewed at the September 1, 2010 MtA blog posting. An isolated incident?

In March of 2009, Ms Jane Dietz was ticketed when an ACO (from her van) noticed Ms Dietz’dog tethered in her backyard without tags (the tags were inside) and no visible dog house. Although the dog was temporarily tethered outside to a pole (with her father present) that had 360 degree rotation, and had access to the garage via a utility door, administrator Kendrick felt such a tethering arrangement would not suffice to satisfy a "swivel" definition per ordinance. The account can be viewed in the August 2010 MtA newsletter, Inebriated with power. Ms Dietz paid her fines and had put this unpleasant ACC experience behind her, until recently....

Today 10/05/10 I received a notice from the City of Indianapolis stating a Judgment was placed against me on 07/26/10 and I had been turned into the City Collections for $196.80. I did not know what this was concerning, so I called the phone number. I was told it was for not paying my fine and Court costs from Animal Control. So I found my receipt from 04/26/10, the same day I went to court.

I called the number back and was put on a 3-way call with the cash office at 902 Virginia Ave. I gave them the numbers off the receipt they requested and was told they have no record of that receipt. I then had to take the receipt to 902 Virginia Ave to prove I paid.

I am amazed again over how poorly Animal Control and their proceedings are operated. I have to ask myself if Teri Kendrick pulled the payment to inconvenience the person who complained, or is there just an abundance of inept employees working for this system. If you recall, Teri Kendrick had attached a note on my file at Court to add a dog tag charge, which was blatant retaliation. Either way, its sad taxpayers are paying to be treated this way.

Certainly this judgment notice could be bureaucratic confusion and one can only hope this is not a spirit of retaliation from the city administration. However, perhaps Public Safety Director Frank Straub needs to review the performance of the IACC administration and not accept that all is well at IACC. The Division of Public Safety is not limited to Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department (IMPD) that lately has been under the public microscope. Do citizens like Jane Dietz and Mallory deserve this kind of treatment from the public servants whose salaries are paid by our tax dollar? IACC has many humane and caring professionals, but as in any division, it takes only a few to spoil the image of the entire division and generate distrust with the public they are commissioned to serve. If you, or anyone you know, has been at the receiving end of rude or unreasonable treatment from IACC - please contact MtA by phone at 317-641-9300 or email.

Last January Hillary and Michael Owino moved from Indianapolis to Lilongwe, Malawi in southern Africa. After setting up their home and adjusting to a new life style they felt there was still room for something extra. Hillary grew up around animals and had volunteered during her teen years at the Humane Society of Indianapolis. Hillary and Mike had reservations committing to an animal adoption but did decide to submit a foster application to the Lilongwe chapter of the SPCA. Read more...

"Compassion is not religious business, it is human business, it is not luxury, it is essential for our own peace and mental stability, it is essential for human survival."
Tenzin Gyatso
14th Dalai Lama of Tibet