| Recommend |
| Comment |
| Email this article |
| Print this article |
| Get news alerts |
| RSS Feeds |
Share
|
Already facing an uncertain future thanks to talk of privatization, the Southampton Town Animal Shelter has been left out of Supervisor Linda Kabot’s proposed 2010 budget, a move that could save the town about $1 million next year.
The proposed $78.8 million budget for next year includes 48 layoffs and proposes no funding for the animal shelter in 2010. The nine full-time shelter employees, who were informed of the situation last week, would be laid off effective January 1, 2010, if the budget is approved as is.
In the meantime, Town Councilwoman Anna Throne-Holst said the town has received bids from two parties, only one of which is interested in taking over the management and daily operations of the shelter. A request for such proposals was sent out on August 25 as a means of further exploring the option to privatize.
The first bidder, Riverhead Animal Shelter, offered to help the town raise funds for animal shelter activities, but did not offer to take over the operation and management of the site.
The second bidder was Susan Allen, a Southampton resident and philanthropist who donated more than $1.4 million to help build the shelter in 1999. Ms. Throne Holst said Ms. Allen requested a contract for $500,000 to manage and staff the shelter, an amount far beyond what the town is willing to pay, she said.
Ms. Allen could not immediately be reached for comment.
Ms. Throne-Holst said she has asked Animal Shelter Supervisor Donald Bambrick to prepare a “rescue plan” for the animal shelter’s transition into the new year.
Mr. Bambrick did not return calls for comment.
The councilwoman said she wants to work with both Ms. Allen and Riverhead Animal Shelter to improve their proposals. However, the shelter may need to close its doors and launch an adoption campaign for its hundreds of cats and dogs if the town cannot privatize the shelter soon.
“If we are forced to close the doors, we obviously need to find homes for the animals,” Ms. Throne-Holst said. “I certainly am not going to stand by and let them be euthanized.”



Share
Mixx
Linked In
Facebook
more



Add a comment
I don't think anyone wants to see the employees laid off and the animals euthanized. What a shame.
Total comments by North of Highway: 174
Total comments by INS: 524
Total comments by barnbabe: 42
Total comments by JJ: 4
Total comments by JJ: 4
Total comments by highhatsize: 303
Total comments by yearrounder: 148
Total comments by lifesaver: 9
When I started researching the STPD as pertains to its interactions with Supervisor Kabot, I was unaware of the, "twenty years and out", provision of STPD employment contracts, and that 27 cops were still on the payroll years after they were supposed to have retired.
Since the cops AGREED to retire after twenty years when they signed on, what ... more could be more equitable than to require that they honor their agreement.
The choice before the Town Council seems clear to me. Fire forty-eight employees; close the Animal Control Department - OR - retire all the cops unnecessarily continued on the payroll beyond their twenty year anniversary.
You characterize my observations about the STPD as, "complaining". I see them as a SOLUTION. Have you an alternative?
Total comments by highhatsize: 303
Total comments by highhatsize: 303
I'm 47 years old by the way.
Total comments by PrivateerMatt: 300
Total comments by darwin: 37
Total comments by dogtired: 2
Total comments by EastEnd68: 173
Total comments by foxnfowl: 17
Total comments by yearrounder: 148
My dog is not friendly to other dogs or cats or I would most definitely adopt one.
Total comments by golfbuddy: 180
Total comments by ridiculous: 103
Total comments by NYMare: 1
Add a comment