I strongly oppose item #2 of the proposed S5.41 ordinance. It is cruel to the owners who can no longer care for their cats or dogs that have been members of their family and come to OAC as a last resort. It is also cruel to the cat or dog that often gets "set free" in a neighborhood or park in hopes someone will find it and take it in. This is not how as "shelter" cares for the animals or the people it serves. OAC has been a haven in the past and needs to return to that standard in order to serve ALL owners and their beloved pets, especially when the owners can no longer care for their pets themselves.

I strongly oppose this proposal. This is bringing us back to the days of packs of dogs roaming East Oakland. We are making people suffer more for their housing situations instead addressing the root causes of animal surrenders. Further, this allows animal services to hide from accountability by choosing animals that will make them look good

I strongly oppose this proposal. This is bringing us back to the days of packs of dogs roaming East Oakland. We are making people suffer more for their housing situations instead addressing the root causes of animal surrenders. Further, this allows animal services to hide from accountability by choosing animals that will make them look good

I strongly oppose item #2 of the proposed S5.41 ordinance, which would allow Oakland Animal Services to reject owner-surrendered pets. This is a harmful move that will lead to more animals suffering on our streets. OAS should be an open-admission shelter, a last-resort safety net for residents in crisis, not a place that turns them away. The city should be working with local animal welfare groups on real intake solutions, not cutting off access. Oakland deserves a shelter that meets community needs with compassion and transparency, not one that closes its doors.

I'm opposing item #2

Rejecting owner-surrendered pets from the shelter is unacceptable for our city.
With the OAS understaffing crisis and no full-time Executive Director, shelter management MUST work with a group of local animal welfare organizations to quickly develop a strategic solution for animal intake, NOT this cruel, irresponsible ordinance change.
Residents bring their pets to a shelter as a last resort, and animals will SUFFER when left on our streets or in parks, unable to fend for themselves.
A municipal "shelter" is supposed to be a safe landing for those animals requiring shelter, NOT a place where residents won’t get the basic service they're desperately in need of.
Our city shelter NEEDS to be "open admission", and reliable for pets owners with nowhere else to turn.
We need data on the number of residents and animals turned away from receiving shelter services to ensure the city is meeting the community's needs.
Oakland Animal Services has come so far and has been a real resource in our city. This is moving us back to the dark ages.

I oppose section 2 of this ordinance, regarding the acceptance of surrendered animals at OAS for the following reasons:
1) Oakland Animal Services is Oaklands ONLY open admissions animal shelter. Removing this community services will only harm the most vulnerable members (both animal and human) of our community.
2) It is already policy that only Oakland residents may surrender their pets to the shelter, therefore this portion of the revision is unnecessary
3) The data being used to justify:
a) Provides no data on surrender rates of rabbits or small animals is included, thereby ignoring Oaklands (and the nation's) third most popular companion animal.
B) Ignores the direct correlation between the spike in animal surrenders and the end of the eviction moratorium in Oakland. By ending the moratorium the city council is has played a role in contributing to this crisis. This revision shows a distinct lack of accountability on the part of our city's leaders as they pass the buck to the staff on the front lines, forcing them to make impossible decisions.

I am writing to express my opposition to item #2 on the proposed ordinance S5.41. This ordinance is not good policy for the city of Oakland and is especially cruel for Oakland's animals. In most cases people are surrendering their animals as a last resort, and without a shelter available will likely only have the option of abandoning these helpless animals in the streets. This is not only cruel to the animals, but poses a serious public health and safety concern for residents.

I'm asking only that point 2 of the proposed ordinance changes be removed. With OAS' understaffing crisis and no full-time Executive Director, management needs to immediately meet with local animal welfare organizations to develop a strategic, coordinated response to these intake issues. If #2 is not removed, residents with nowhere left to turn and pets *dependent* on human care for survival will be left on our streets. It's completely irresponsible and inhumane for the city to codify #2, allowing the rejection of owner-surrendered pets, without identifying solutions with local animal experts (there would be many to we have many from partner organizations).

In 2014, I served on the OAS Community Advisory Commission when the shelter was also without a director and in crisis, which could easily be reinstituted. Here is its description: https://oakland.granicus.com/boards/w/8552f8c4c0e15460/boards/12293

This Advisory body consisted of experienced animal experts who volunteered their time to help devise operational plans, improve transparency and oversight in the community, and identify untapped resources. OAS management needs to immediately utilize local animal welfare groups in navigating this crisis appropriately, rather than implementing this reactive ordinance change that guarantees suffering and no alternative resources for residents and animals in need.

As a longtime (33 years) resident of Oakland, a taxpayer, and a guardian of pets, I am writing to express my opposition to item #2 on the proposed ordinance S5.41. Removing the requirement for Oakland Animal Services to accept all surrendered animals will have absolute disastrous effects on the community of Oakland. Residents of this city have a right to surrender their pets without discretion to a safe place. That is the role of a municipal shelter. That is why it's called Oakland Animal Services. It is there to provide services to the community of people and animals who reside here. Without these services, people will be forced to abandon their animals on the streets, parks, or on shelter property. To put vulnerable animals, who've only ever known their homes, out on the streets is inhumane and irresponsible, and that will be on OAS. This will lead to pet overpopulation (already an insurmountable problem), injury to humans and other animals, and unnecessary suffering and/or animals being killed in horrible and violent ways. This is simply unacceptable.

I have been a volunteer at OAS for almost 14 years, and while I empathize with the staff and how overworked they are due to budget cuts, item #2 on the proposed ordinance is not the solution to the problem. Rather than push this item through for approval, problem-solving and strategizing in order to come up with acceptable solutions need to be considered.

I’m writing to express my strong opposition to Point #2 of the proposed Animal Control Ordinance S5.41, which would authorize Oakland Animal Services (OAS) to reject owner-surrendered pets. As a foster volunteer with OAS, I’ve witnessed firsthand that surrendering a pet is almost always a heart-wrenching decision. Pet owners resort to this only when they’ve exhausted all other options and have nowhere else to turn. Denying them access to this essential service only compounds their distress. A municipal shelter should be a safe and compassionate refuge—not an institution that turns away animals in need. Oakland deserves a facility that remains open-admission, responsive, and reliable for all residents, especially those facing crisis situations involving their beloved pets. I urge to reconsider and reject Point #2 of the proposed ordinance. OAS must continue to serve as a lifeline, not a locked door.

I strongly oppose section 2 which proposes changing Section 6.04.110 of the Oakland Ordinance to allow unknown persons at Oakland Animal Services ("OAS") to refuse the surrender of ANY animal from Oakland residents on the basis of the undefined term "shelter capacity" with no oversight at all. OAS has already been doing this with cats and young kittens with disastrous impact, not even keeping records of those they are turning away, and claiming that this does not violate the current ordinance, which begs the question of why they want to change the ordinance. OAS is not even following its own kitten and cat policy and will not answer questions from the public or volunteers about this policy. The shelter vet, Dr. Austin, told the Life Enrichment Committee that all cats in Oakland belong to the community and have people taking care of them and it would be unfair to take them away. This is not true. She told cat volunteers that the community of Oakland was just going to have to take care of the cats and kittens. Mr. DeVries claims OAS is the only Open Admission Shelter in the Bay Area (not true) and taking in animals from other jurisdictions (not true.) OAS management will not work with volunteers or the experts who have been doing animal welfare in Oakland for decades. OAS is trying to ram this change through before the public even knows about the proposed change and can properly comment upon it. Please do not let them.

There is a math error in this legislation. On the second page, it states that cat intake has increase by 62%, but this is overstating the situation. By the numbers, it is only 42% (2860-2009)/2009 = 0.42.

I oppose Section 2, which would allow OAS (Oakland’s only “open admission” shelter) to refuse surrendered pets.

Surrender is the last resort for Oaklanders whose efforts to rehome their pets have failed. Giving OAS blanket discretion turn animals away will lead to the policy being applied too broadly and leave many guardians who can’t keep their pets due to financial difficulties and other crises no other choice but to abandon them on the street. OAS requires proof of Oakland residency to surrender, and ownership can be verified by requiring adoption papers or vet bills.

OAS already turns away the vast majority of lost and abandoned animals—including friendly and highly adoptable ones—with claims that they are “thriving” outside. Many lack the survival skills required for outdoor life, struggle to find food, and suffer illness and injuries that shorten their lives.

Hoping that private rescues will accept stray and surrendered pets in lieu of OAS is disingenuous at best. No local rescue is required to do so, and even when willing are unable to take more than a fraction of Oakland animals needing shelter.

There is no question that OAS is in crisis due to severe underfunding and understaffing in vital animal care positions. The shelter is stretched to the breaking point, severely limiting its ability to fulfill its mission.

However, the solution is not to further decrease the services that Oakland animals depend on.

Please reject Section 2 of the revised ordinance.

I'm writing to you today with a heavy heart, but also with a strong voice, to say that we simply cannot accept point #2 of the proposed S5.41 Animal Control Ordinance changes. This part of the plan would let Oakland Animal Services (OAS) turn away pets that their owners need to surrender, and that's just not okay for our city. When people bring their beloved pets to the shelter, it's almost always a last resort. They've tried everything else. If we close that door, where do these animals go? They'll end up suffering on our streets, alone and unable to care for themselves. A city shelter is supposed to be a haven for animals who need it most and provide a crucial service to our community. Right now, OAS is facing a tough time, with staffing shortages and no full-time Executive Director. This isn't the moment to implement a cruel and irresponsible change like this. Instead, management should be working hand-in-hand with our incredible local animal welfare groups to figure out a real solution for animal intake – one that's compassionate and effective. Our shelter needs to be "open admission", a reliable lifeline for pet owners who have nowhere else to turn. We also need to see the numbers. How many people and animals are already being turned away from shelter services? We need that data to make sure our city is truly meeting the community's needs.

I have been a volunteer at Oakland Animal Services for years, and it is an everyday miracle how much they’ve done with so little. Yet, every year they have to make do with a little less. Stop taking from Oakland’s most vulnerable animals! Stop removing funding! Stop decreasing care! It is sad and appalling what is happening and you have an opportunity to stop it right now. We volunteers go in every week to try to make things better—the least you could do is not make it worse.

I oppose #2 of the S5.41 Proposed Animal Control Ordinance change, which would remove the requirement for Oakland Animal Control to take in owner surrendered pets.
I am an Oakland resident and pet owner. Owner typically surrender their pets as a last resort when they are desperate and life events have given them no other choices. Knowing that there is a safe place for their pets is an important service both for the owners and pets. If pets are left on streets or in park, without any other recourse, this will result in animals suffering. Injuries, malnutrition and disease are all potential results of pets being abandoned if Oakland Animal Services won’t take them in. Increases in free roaming abandoned pets is dangerous for the health of the animals, and has the potential to impact human life, as starving animals will attempt to beg for food, potentially interacting negatively with other pets and humans. This in turn will cause more work for Animals Services to apprehend and deal with these issues. Diseases in the population of these animals left to roam the streets without care could even spread to other pets.
I believe there should be an effort to collaborate with local animal welfare organization to find better alternatives to this cruel change. Oakland Animal Services has been a real resource to the city, this would be a major step backward. It should continue to be open admission and a reliable place for pet owners with no where else to turn.

I oppose the removal of the requirement for OAS to accept all surrendered animals. This ordinance is bad for the city of Oakland and especially bad for Oakland's animals. In most cases people are surrendering their animals as a last resort. They might have become unhoused or can no longer afford to keep the animal. When this last option is no longer available, we know what happens. They abandon their pet in the parking lot of the shelter, on the street or in a park. The animal, used to being cared for by humans, does not have the skills to survive on its own. It may starve, become diseased or get hit by a car. If the animal is unfixed it could produce multiple litters which may wind up at OAS. So instead of fixing a problem, this simply creates larger problems down the road. This city needs a shelter with an open admissions policy to serve as a safe haven for animals with no other place to go. OAS needs to work with local animal welfare groups to quickly develop a strategic solution to this problem, not this cruel and irresponsible change that will only yield additional problems in the future.

OAS’ current cat intake policy is cruel and inhumane and dumps the burden of caring for stray animals on our lowest income flatlands residents. OAS seeks to codify its existing “discretionary intake” policy, telling you it represents “best practices". This misguided policy renames all stray cats, whether tame or feral, “community cats,” and dictates they be left outside. We are told these cats are “enjoying their lives” and probably have owners. Both are profoundly untrue. Stray cats are not thriving on our streets and the vast majority do not have owners. They are hit by cars, sick, injured, malnourished, poisoned. White cats left outside get skin cancer. Their ears, noses, and eventually their entire faces, jaws, and skulls rot. They die horrific deaths.

People writing "leave them outside" policies do not live in our impacted neighborhoods, where reality is opposite of the picture they paint. When community members are turned away from OAS, tame, adoptable animals are left on the streets to suffer and die, or be dumped in parks. OAS cat policy expects our lowest-income community members to care for these animals ourselves, to shelter, feed, spay/neuter, find homes, pay for their medical care, to act as unfunded mini-shelters. This is outrageous to expect in neighborhoods where many residents can barely meet basic housing needs and feed their own families.

Oppose the "discretionary intake" clause in 25-0851 and work with us to turn things around at OAS.

Please oppose point #2 of the S5.41 proposed Animal Control Ordinance changes which would allow the shelter to reject owner-surrendered pets.
Rejecting owner-surrendered pets from the shelter is unacceptable for our city.
With the OAS understaffing crisis and no full-time Executive Director, shelter management MUST work with a group of local animal welfare organizations to quickly develop a strategic solution for animal intake, NOT this cruel, irresponsible ordinance change.

I OPPOSE Point 2 of this agenda item. The OAS not accepting owner-surrendered pets from the shelter is UNACCEPTABLE for our city. Please reject this as it will have a negative impact on animals.