Council’s Transportation & Safety Committee on Monday continued its discussion about potential ways to handle wildlife in the city.
Wildlife issues have increasingly been before council in recent months. Council passed regulations prohibiting knowingly feeding deer and turkeys on June 17, and at their Aug. 5 meeting, two residents brought forward concerns about animals in their neighborhood, including skunks, raccoons, opossums and groundhogs, as well as rabid animals, with some wondering if the position of animal control officer should be reinstated.
At the committee’s Aug. 19 meeting, a number of citizens spoke up, discussing issues with animals including deer and coyotes.
At Monday’s meeting, Committee Chair Bill Herald wrote in part that the meeting “will continue (the committee’s) discussion of both the structure for fashioning potential solutions as well as discussion of the various options as related to the roles of the residents, the city government, and others in taking care of dangerous wildlife in neighborhoods.”
Herald has previously stated that the committee’s role was not to question the decision to not fill the animal control officer position in 2019.
At the Aug. 19 committee meeting, he stated that Mayor Mike Aspacher has let it be known that he is not in favor of hiring a full-time animal control officer but that, if council determined it as a strategic goal, the administration would study it.
Three invited experts spoke during Monday’s meeting.
Chris Copley, of the Lucas County Health Department, said that “the appointment of an animal control officer without first the appointment of a nuisance enforcement officer to try and prevent such incidents that lead to nuisance wildlife roaming our streets, seems to be a little unplanned, for lack of a better term.”
A nuisance officer receives reports of people performing “extravagant” acts of wildlife feeding and other such acts, he said, and they write letters of violation and ultimately issue citations when necessary. He also argued that the city’s recent animal feeding ordinance should be more expansive.
Jason Dunn, a licensed wildlife control operator, said that the main issue is the interaction between people and wildlife. He said he agreed that a position like a nuisance officer could be positive.
Justin Harrington, of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources Division of Wildlife, said that a broader feeding ordinance, focusing on a larger array of species, along with education, was recommended. He also advised giving the city’s current feeding ordinance a chance to work for a few seasons.
Residents also made their opinions heard.
Dick Schroeder said that if a person ripped up his garden, he could count on the help of the city to address the issue.
“I don’t really think it should be any different if it’s an animal,” he said. “It’s the same problem, the same incident.”
An animal control officer could assist with an easy-to-follow approach to address such problems, Schroeder said.
Laura Finch said that she takes care of her property, and nevertheless “we have so many skunks it’s ridiculous. It’s ruining the quality of life. … You make all these rules, but if nobody’s going to enforce them, there’s no point.
“We need an animal control officer,” she said later. “I’ve asked for one for several years now and I’m asking for one now. I need someone to call.”
Debbie Thompson argued that residents need to be educated on how to deal with wildlife issues.
“What I heard aligns with my experiences out in Colorado, where they’re very active about enforcing community standards in order to coexist with wildlife,” said committee member Joel O’Dorisio. “So I think we have a brand new ordinance restricting feeding. We have a solid educational program that’s just begun. Both of those things should show some results in the future. I think with all of the discussions, what we’re missing is an enforcement mechanism at this point.”
Member Jeff Dennis also argued that the new law needs to be given more time to work, and also that a focus on civil code enforcement seems to be a reasonable idea.
“I think we could do better in that regard,” he said. “I think we are taking some pretty good steps forward and it will be interesting over the next several months to see whether or how effective that is in addressing these concerns.”
“We should circle back up and if we feel or we are hearing it’s still an issue, we can consider some possible solutions at that time,” said Dennis later in the discussion.
The committee recommended to council that they want to allow the existing procedures to stay in place and monitor their results, and reassess the current legislation if there’s an improvement in the wildlife situation in the spring. They also wish to recommend that the administration put a greater emphasis on code enforcement.
City council met immediately after the committee meeting, and:
• Heard from Community Development Administrator Matt Snow who made a series of reports, among them that through American Rescue Plan Act funds, $700,000 was allocated to assist individuals with necessary health and safety repairs to their homes in the city over the last three years. He said that 62 households were assisted, with average projects costing $11,000 each.
• Approved the appointment of Benjamin Newlove and Nancy Spencer to the Bicycle Safety Commission.
• Heard from resident Jim Evans, who spoke in support of the city’s pending Climate Action and Resiliency Improvement Plan, which he said also relates to public safety. He termed a potential combination of a heat wave and a power failure the greatest public safety threat to the city.
• Heard from David Anderson and Tim Harris, who spoke in favor of the pending lease agreement between the city and the Bowling Green Country Club. Council subsequently voted unanimously to approve the lease agreement.
