[00:00:15] >> HAVRDA: WE HAVE SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO NEED TO LEAVE EARLY SO I'M GOING TO GET STARTED. GOOD MORNING AND WELCOME TO THE FIRE TRAINING ACADEMY. I LIKE TO HOLD MEETINGS HERE AT LEAST ONCE A TERM AND WE'LL DO POLICE HOPEFULLY NEXT MONTH JUST TO KIND OF BRING AWARENESS TO WHAT OUR FIREFIGHTERS THIS MONTH ARE DOING AND NEXT MONTH WE'LL TALK ABOUT POLICE. BUT THERE ARE SOME NEW MEMBERS ON BOARD, PUBLIC SAFETY, SO I THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD TIME TO GATHER AND EXPERIENCE TRAINING THAT OUR FIREFIGHTERS GO THROUGH. HOPE Y'ALL ARE READY TO LEARN AND BE CHALLENGED A BIT. BEFORE WE DIVE IN LET'S TAKE CARE OF SOME BUSINESS. I'LL CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER. AND MADAM CLERK CAN YOU PLEASE CALL ROLL? [Approval of Minutes  ] >> CHAIR, WE HAVE A QUORUM. >> HAVRDA: THANK YOU, MA'AM. WE'LL GO TO THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. >> SAY AYE. ALL RIGHT. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES AND MINUTES ARE APPROVED. ANY PUBLIC COMMENT TODAY? >> WE HAVE NO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC SIGNED UP TO SPEAK TODAY. [Consent  ] >> HAVRDA: OKAY. I'LL MOVE OVER TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. DO ANY COMMITTEE MEMBERS WANT TO PULL ITEMS FROM CONSENT? ALL RIGHT. I'LL ENTERTAIN ANY MOTIONS REGARDING CONSENT. >> >> [Briefing and Possible Action on  ] WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM 4, PLEASE. >> SO COUNCIL, ITEM 4 IS A RECOMMENDATION ON A CCR ON COMPREHENSIVE SAFETY MEASURES FOR LOOSE AND DANGEROUS DOGS. THIS CCR WAS SUBMITTED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ALDERETE GAVITO. THIS ITEM IS FOR ACTION. >> THANK YOU, MARIA. HI MIKE. >> HELLO, MADAM CHAIR AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS. I'M MIKE SHANNON, INTERIM ANIMAL CARE SERVICES DIRECTOR AND I'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT SOME PROPOSALS WE HAVE BASED ON THE CCR FROM DISTRICT 7 REGARDING SAFETY MEASURES FOR LOOSE AND DANGEROUS DOGS DOGS. SO AS MENTIONED THIS WAS A CCR BACK IN MAY, SUBMITTED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ALDERETE GAVITO AND REALLY THE CONCERN THAT WAS IDENTIFIED, I THINK WE ALL KNOW, IS IN SAN ANTONIO LIKE A LOT OF LARGE CITIES, WE JUST HAVE TOO MANY ROAMING AND STRAY ANIMALS, MOSTLY DOGS, OF COURSE, BUT WE HAVE IRRESPONSIBLE PET OWNERS AND WE JUST HAVE WAY TOO MANY THAT ARE CAUSING DANGEROUS SITUATIONS IN OUR CITY. SO THE REQUEST WAS TO HAVE US LOOK AT THREE DISTINCT ITEMS, POSSIBLY INCREASING FINES, HOW CAN WE DO MORE STERILIZATION OF ANIMALS, ESPECIALLY DOGS THAT WE FIND AND PICK UP THROUGH OUR ANIMAL CARE OFFICERS. AND POSSIBLY IMPLEMENT THE PSEUDONYM PROGRAM TO HELP PEOPLE FEEL SAFE ABOUT INITIATING A DANGEROUS DOG MAYBE DESIGNATION PROCESS. SO THIS WENT TO GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE BACK IN JUNE, AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON IT SINCE SO WE HAVE A FEW PROPOSALS FOR YOU TO GO OVER TODAY. SO LET'S TALK ABOUT OUR CURRENT CODE AND OUR CURRENT PROCESS. SO CITY CODE CHAPTER 5 IS BASICALLY THE CODE THAT DEALS WITH ANIMALS, MOSTLY WITH ANIMAL CARE SERVICES USE OUT IN THE FIELD DURING OUR PROCESSES OUT AT THE SHELTER AND FACILITY. BUT WE CURRENTLY USE A FINE PROCESS, GENERAL FINES, IF THERE ARE VIOLATIONS. AND THERE ARE A LOT OF RULES, BUT THE GENERAL FINE STRUCTURE IS LISTED UP THERE ON THE SLIDE, WHICH IS $100 MINIMUM FOR FIRST OFFENSE, ALL THE WAY UP TO $1,000. BUT $200 SECOND OFFENSE, $300 FOR THIRD OR MORE. SO THAT'S A BASIC FINE STRUCTURE THAT'S COD FIGHT IN SECTION 521 THERE. WE DO HAVE GENERAL DOG -- DANGEROUS DOG PROCESSES. THEY MIRROR STATE LAW AND THAT'S WHAT STATE LAW GIVES YOU US AND THE STATE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE GIVES US IN THE RULES. WE MIRROR THAT FOR DANGEROUS DOGS. WE HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL RULES FOR WHAT WE CALL AGGRESSIVE DOGS. WE CAN DESIGNATE THEM AGGRESSIVE, BUT WE ACTUALLY RECEIVE ABOUT 300 SWORN AFFIDAVITS FROM THE PUBLIC TO INVESTIGATE A POTENTIAL DANGEROUS OR AGGRESSIVE DOG EACH YEAR. AND OF THOSE 300 WE00 [00:05:03] INVESTIGATE THOSE BASED ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE, BASED ON THOSE AFFIDAVITS THAT WE RECEIVE. WE THEN CAN DESIGNATE THE DOG DANGEROUS, WHICH KICKS IN A BUNCH OF FUELS THE HOMEOWNER OR THE PET OWNER TO COMPLY WITH IF THEY WANT TO KEEP THAT ANIMAL. WE PROVIDE OUTREACH AND EDUCATION AND THAT DOES REQUIRE CURRENTLY THE PERSON WHO IS FILLING OUT THAT AFFIDAVIT TO GIVE US THEIR LEGAL NAME. FIRST AND FOREMOST WE RECOMMEND THAT WE START INCREASING FINES FOR REPEAT OFFENDERS. NOW, WE KNOW THAT CITATIONS, WOMEN NOT CITE OUR WAY OUT OF THIS PROBLEM, BUT IT IS IMPORTANT TO HOLD REPEAT VIOLATORS AND PET OWNERS THAT CAUSE THE MOST SERIOUS CONCERNS IN OUR COMMUNITY, THEY NEED TO BE HELD MORE ACCOUNTABLE THROUGH FINES. SO WE ARE GOING TO PROPOSE THAT WE CHANGE THE CODE TO INCREASE FINES FOR THE SECOND AND THIRD OFFENSE FOR OUR GENERAL ANIMAL VIOLATIONS. SO MANY OF OUR VIOLATIONS OUR ANIMAL OWNERS THAT LET THEIR DOGS ROAM FREE, THAT CREATES DANGEROUS SITUATIONS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THAT'S WHERE A LOT OF OUR DOG BITE CASES COME FROM. SO WE DO PROPOSE TO ON THE REPEAT OFFENSES INCREASE THE MINIMUM FINES TO THE 500 AND 750 LISTED THERE. THERE'S ALSO AN ADDITIONAL ELEMENT THAT WE'RE GOING TO PROPOSE, WHICH IS TO FURTHER INCREASE FINES FOR IRRESPONSIBLE PET OWNERS THAT THEIR DOGS ACTUALLY BITE SOMEONE. SO FOR FAILURE TO PREVENT BITES IS A SPECIFIC SECTION IN OUR CODE. WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT WE CHANGE THE CODE TO ADD AN ADDITIONAL FINE STRUCTURE THAT STARTS OFF AT A THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR THAT OFFENSE, 1500 FOR SECOND AND THIRD OFFENSE AND BEYOND ARE 2,000. SO WE THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT ELEMENT. WE NEED TO REMIND PEOPLE THAT IT IS THEIR JOB TO KEEP THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD SAFE, TO BE RESPONSIBLE PET OWNERS, KEEP THEIR DOGS WITHIN THEIR YARDS ON LEASHES AND NOT FREE OF RESTATEMENT RESTRAINT AND THS REQUIRE CITY CODE CHANGE. A THIRD COMPONENT OF THE CCR AND WHAT WE HAVE HEARD OVER THE YEARS AND I THINK IT'S BEEN DISCUSSED IS WHILE MANY PEOPLE MAY KNOW OF AN AGGRESSIVE OR DANGEROUS DOG IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAS HAPPENED OR MIGHT HAPPEN, THEY'RE A LITTLE BIT FEARFUL OF RETALIATION FROM THEIR NEIGHBORS ABOUT GIVING THEIR NAME ON THE SWORN AFFIDAVIT. SO WE'VE LOOKED AT THIS AND WORKING WITH THE CITY ATTORNEYS WE CAN IMPLEMENT A PSEUDONYM PROCESS FOR OUR -- TO BEGIN THOSE DANGEROUS DOG INVESTIGATIONS. WE'RE GOING TO RECOMMEND WE DO THAT. NOW, THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE A CITY CODE CHANGE. WE CAN START THE PROCESS THERE AND GO THROUGH THAT TO DESIGNATE A DOG DANGEROUS OR AGGRESSIVE IF NEEDED. THE ONE THING THAT WE WILL HAVE TO REMIND ANY RESIDENT THAT STARTS THAT PROCESS THAT WANTS TO USE A PSEUDONYM LIKE JANE DOE OR SOMETHING ELSE, IF THAT DOES GET TO COURT, IF THAT DOG IS DEEMED DANGEROUS, DESIGNATED DANGEROUS BY THE DEPARTMENT, AND IT GOES TO COURT IN TERMS OF AN APPEAL, ONCE IT GOES TO COURT THEN WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO USE THE PSEUDONYM AT THAT POINT. NOW, OF THOSE 300 AFFIDAVITS THAT WE HAD LAST YEAR, ONLY ABOUT EIGHT OF THEM WERE CHALLENGED IN COURT. I THINK MANY OF OUR OWNERS KNOW AFTER A BITE INCIDENT THAT THEIR DOGS ARE DEEMED DANGEROUS BECAUSE OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE PRETTY OBVIOUS. IT'S A VERY SMALL NUMBER THAT DO GO TO COURT CAN ON TO APPEAL BUT THAT IS SOMETHING WE WILL DEAL WITH MOVING FORWARD IF WE MAKE THAT CHANGE, WHICH WE PROPOSE TO DO. THE THIRD BIG ELEMENT OF THE CCR ASKED US TO LOOK AT OUR CURRENT PROCESS AND THE LAWS AROUND CAN WE AS A DEPARTMENT, WHEN WE PICK UP A ROAMING DOG OR ROAMING ANIMAL, CAN WE STERILIZE -- CAN OR SHOULD WE STERILIZE THAT ANIMAL BEFORE WE GIVE IT BACK? WE KNOW THAT STERILIZATION, MORE AND MORE STERILIZATIONS, SPAY AND NEUTER SURGERIES IN OUR COMMUNITY IS NEEDED TO FIX THE OVERPOPULATION OF DOGS AND CATS. THAT WAS A BIG PART OF OUR BUDGET ASK THIS YEAR AND WE WERE GOING TO BE OPENING UP TWO CLINICS TO INCREASE THOSE NUMBERS. IF YOU LOOK AT OUR CURRENT PROCESS, PET OWNERS, IF WE PICK UP THEIR DOG OR DOG OR CAT BEFORE THEY GET IT BACK WE ISSUE THEM SOMETHING CALLED AN STERILIZATION ORDER, A STERILIZATION AGREEMENT. THAT IS AN ORDER THAT SAYS THEY HAVE 30 DAYS PER CODE TO GET THEIR ANIMAL STERILIZED, BUT WE TYPICALLY DO NOT REQUIRE THEM TO STERILIZE IT AT OUR FACILITY OR BEFORE WE GIVE THE DOG BACK. NOW, WE CERTAINLY OFFER THAT SERVICE FOR ANY OF THOSE PETS THAT MAKE IT BACK TO OUR FACILITY AND ARE RECLAIMED BY OWNERS, BUT NOT EVERYBODY TAKES US UP ON THAT, BUT THEY DO HAVE 30 DAYS TO DO THAT BY LAW. NOW, IF THEY DO NOT STERILIZE IT WE WILL ISSUE A CIVIL OR CRIMINAL CITATIONS, HOWEVER, WHAT YOU'LL SEE ON THE NEXT SLIDE IS WE HAVE NOT BEEN CONSISTENT BECAUSE OF OTHER PRIORITIES FOLLOWING UP ON THOSE. SO THE STERILIZATION RATE THAT WE HAVE SEEN ON THOSE [00:10:02] RECLAIMED OR RETURN TO OWNER ANIMALS HAS BEEN PRETTY LOW. SO WE WANT TO CHANGE THAT. SO I JUST WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT CHAPTER 5. THE CCR WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT IT, IT DOES ALLOW -- STATE LAW DOES ALLOW ACS VETS TO STERILIZE THE ANIMAL, THE DOG, BEFORE WE GIVE IT BACK IF IT MAKES IT TO OUR FACILITY. HOWEVER, WE HAVE TWO SECTIONS OF OUR CITY CODE THAT WE WOULD NEED TO CHANGE IN ORDER TO DO THAT. SO THEY'RE LISTED HERE, SECTION 5150, SECTION 5-SECTION 156. I'VE HIGHLIGHTED THE SECTIONS THAT SAY DOGS FOUND FREE OF RESTRAINTS SHOULD BE SUBJECT TO MANDATORY STERILIZATION WITHIN 30 DAYS. SO I HAVE TO GIVE THEM 30 DAYS RIGHT NOW, THE PET OWNER, TO DO THAT. I CAN'T MAKE IT IMMEDIATE. AND THEN THE ACS CAN CONDITIONALLY RELEASE THE ANIMAL BACK TO THE OWNER, THEY'LL HAVE 30 DAYS. SO RIGHT NOW THE WAY THE CODE IS WRITTEN WE HAVE TO GIVE IT BACK TO THE OWNER IF THEY WANT IT BEFORE THE STERILIZATION. OUR PROPOSAL WILL BE TO CHANGE THIS SO THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO NOT GIVE IT BACK TO THE OWNER BEFORE WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO STERILIZE IT. AND I'LL WALK THROUGH THE DETAILS HERE IN A SECOND. SO AS I MENTIONED, HERE IS JUST A LITTLE BIT OF DATA ON OUR STERILIZATION ORDERS OVER THE PAST THREE YEARS. AND WHAT YOU'LL SEE IS THE NUMBERS OF STERILIZATION ORDERS ISSUED, 1400, 1900, 1800, SO QUITE A FEW. WE HAVE NOT NECESSARILY FOLLOWED UP ON THEM AS WE SHOULD HAVE. IF YOU LOOK A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO AND I THINK MR. MCCAREY MENTIONED THIS AT THE GOVERNANCE MEETING, IT WAS A PRIORITY THERE. BUT OF ALL THE PRIORITIZATIONS WE HAD WAS THE STERILIZATION FOLLOW UP, 42%, 36%, PRETTY LOW. IT RESULTED IN VERY LOW STERILIZATION OF THOSE ANIMALS IF YOU LOOK AT THE 11 PERCENT, FIVE PERCENT. NOW, THIS YEAR, THIS PAST YEAR I SHOULD SAY, FY24, WE HAVE DONE A BETTER JOB INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF FOLLOW-UPS THAT WE'VE DONE. WE'RE AT 69%. YOU'LL ALSO SEE THAT BECAUSE MANY PEOPLE STILL DID NOT GET THE STERILIZATION DONE, WE'VE ISSUED ALMOST 700 CITATIONS LAST YEAR BECAUSE OF THIS. HOWEVER, IT'S STILL NOT GETTING THE NUMBER OF STERILIZATIONS THAT WE WANT AT 12% OF THE ANIMALS THAT WE BELIEVE SHOULD BE STERILIZED BY THE OWNERS. SO ONE, WE NEED TO DO A BETTER JOB OF ACTUALLY ISSUING THEM ALL OUT, FOLLOWING UP ON THEM TO INCREASE THAT NUMBER OF STERILIZED DOGS AS THEY GO BACK TO THE OWNERS. NOW, JUST A QUICK NUMBER OF HOW MANY DOGS -- HOW MANY ANIMALS DO WE ACTUALLY PICK UP AND RETURN TO OWNER? THERE'S ABOUT 7,000 LAST YEAR. WE'LL TAKE AWAY THE 10% THAT ARE CATS BECAUSE WE'RE NOT REALLY TALKING ABOUT CATS TODAY. THERE ARE MANY THAT ARE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR SURGERY SO THAT'S THE 2400. SO SOME OF THAT IS THEY WEREN'T FREE OF RESTRAINT. SO WE DO PICK UP A LOT OF ANIMALS, SO MAYBE WE GO HELP OUT SAPD IF THEY'RE PICKING UP SOMEONE THAT HAS AN ANIMAL WITH THEM, IT MAY BE AN EVICTION GOING ON THAT HAS ANIMALS AND WE HAVE TO PICK THEM. THOSE ARE IMPOUNDED BY ACS, BUT WE'RE NOT LEGALLY REQUIRED TO ALLOW STERILIZATION BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T FREE OF RESTRAINT. WE'RE JUST ASSISTING BECAUSE THE OWNER CANNOT TAKE THEM RIGHT AT THAT POINT. AND SOME OF THOSE ARE MEDICAL REASONS. THEY'RE TOO OLD, TOO YOUNG. MAYBE THEY'RE INJURED, THEY CAN'T BE STERILIZED SO THERE'S A MEDICAL REASON FOR THAT. SOME OF THEM ARE ALREADY STERILIZED. WHAT THAT LEAVES US IS 2400 ANIMALS THAT ARE UNSTERILIZED THAT WE RETURN TO OWNER. NOW, THAT'S FURTHER BROKEN DOWN TO IN THE FIELD, SO OUR OFFICERS IN THE FIELD WILL PICK UP A DOG. WE KNOW WHO THE OWNER IS BY TALKING TO NEIGHBORS OR MICROCHIPPING. WE WILL ACTUALLY BRING IT BACK TO THAT ADDRESS, KNOCK ON THE DOOR, GIVE IT BACK TO THAT OWNER WITH A CITATION FOR FREE OF RESTRAINT OR ROAMING ANIMAL, WITH THAT STERILIZATION ORDER. AND THEY HAVE 30 DAYS TO DO THAT. AND ABOUT 569 OF THOSE ACTUALLY MADE IT BACK TO CAMPUS BECAUSE WE WEREN'T SURE. WE COULDN'T FIND THE OWNER, WE BROUGHT IT BACK TO OUR CAMPUS. THAT'S AN IMPORTANT NUMBER AS I TALK ABOUT THE NEXT SLIDE AS TO HOW WE PROPOSE TO CHANGE OUR PRO-CHOICE ONCE WE CHANGE THE TODAY. SO WHAT WE PROPOSE TO DO, AS I MENTIONED WE NEED TO CHANGE OUR CITY CODE VERY QUICKLY TO DO THIS, TO HAVE THE ABILITY, BUT THOSE ON CAMPUS RECLAIMS, THE 560, ALMOST 600 ANIMALS THAT END UP BACK TO OUR FACILITY AND WE GIVE BACK TO THE OWNER, WE PROPOSE TO CHANGE SO THAT WE STERILIZE THEM BEFORE WE GIVE THEM BACK TO THE OWNER. ONCE WE MAKE THE CODE CHANGE, WE WORK WITH OUR CHIEF VET AND OUR FACILITY MANAGERS, WE CAN ABSORB THAT AMOUNT OF WORKLOAD WITHOUT ANY INCREASE TO STAFFING. WE BELIEVE WE CAN ABSORB THAT WITHOUT ANY ADDITIONAL EFFORTS. THE RETURN TO TO THOSE OWNERS IN THE FIELD, THAT 1800 PLUS, WE ACTUALLY DON'T RECOMMEND THAT WE BRING THEM BACK TO OUR CAMPUS AND WHAT THAT WOULD DO IS CAUSE A LOT OF CHALLENGES FOR OUR OFFICERS OUT IN THE FIELD. THEY WOULD BE GOING BACK AND FORTH TO OUR CAMPUS A LOT [00:15:01] MORE. WE WOULD NOT GET TO THOSE CRITICAL CALLS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO. REMEMBER, WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO THAT 100% CRITICAL CALLS. SO WE WOULD NOT CHANGE THAT, BUT WE HAVE TO INCREASE OUR WE THINK THAT WILL MOVE THE NEEDLE TO INCREASE THE STERILIZATION OF THOSE ANIMALS THAT NEED TO. NOW, THAT DOES REQUIRE AGAIN CHAPTER 5 TO BE CHANGE AND AND AGAIN, JUST TO MENTION, WE'VE HAD SOME QUESTIONS ALREADY JUST INTERNALLY, WHY CAN'T THE OFFICERS JUST COME AND BACK AND FORTH OR WITH THE TWO NEW CLINICS THAT OPEN UP IN FEBRUARY, WHY CAN'T WE JUST DROP THEM OFF THERE? THERE'S A LOT OF PARTICULARS ABOUT THE SURGERY, RIGHT? IF WE PICK THEM UP VERY EARLY IN THE MORNING, MAYBE WE CAN DROP IT OFF AT OUR FACILITY OR MAYBE AT ONE OF THOSE CLINICS IF IT'S CLOSE, BUT THINK OF A PICKUP OF A DOG AT 2:00 P.M., 3:00 P.M., WE'RE NOT SURE IF THAT DOG HAS EATEN YET, WE'RE NOT SURE IF IT'S PREPPED UP, IT'S PROBABLY NOT PREPPED UP FOR SURGERY THAT DAY AND THOSE CLINICS WOULD NOT BE FOR OVERNIGHT CARE. SO THERE'S A LOT OF SCHEDULING AND LOGISTICS THAT WE WOULD NEED TO DO TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN AND SO WE DON'T THINK THAT'S THE RIGHT WAY TO DO IT. THOSE TWO NEW CLINICS WHEN WE OPEN THEM UP, THEY WILL HAVE THOSE STAFF DEDICATED TO MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE ABLE TO GET THOSE SCHEDULED FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ISSUING -- ISSUED THE STERILIZATION ORDERS. WE'RE ALWAYS CHALLENGED WITH SHELTER CAPACITY AND DISEASE CONTROL WITH MORE AND MORE ANIMALS BACK TO OUR FACILITY. SO THOSE WERE THE THREE ELEMENTS IDENTIFIED IN THE CCR. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT TWO NEW ELEMENTS WE HAVE TO WORK ON. THIS IS ONE WE ALREADY STARTED AND ONE I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT HERE IS I'VE BEEN ON THE JOB ABOUT THREE MONTHS NOW IN THIS PARTICULAR ROLE AND IN TALKING WITH OUR TEAM, LOOKING AT THE DATA, AND JUST IN THE LAST THREE MONTHS WE'VE HAD TOO MANY BITE INCIDENTS THAT I'VE NOTICED. AND WE TOOK A SEVERAL OF THEM. SEVERAL OF THEM ARE REPEAT INSTANCES, REPEAT OWNERS, REPEAT ADDRESSES. THEY'RE IN OUR SYSTEM, THEY'VE HAD A BITE BEFORE, AND NOW THERE'S A BITE AGAIN. WHAT'S GOING ON. THIS IS A REPEAT, IRRESPONSIBLE PET OWNER OR SOME CONDITIONS GOING. WE HAVE ALREADY STARTED THIS AND I'M GOING TO RECOMMEND THAT WE CONTINUE THIS MOVING FORWARD. WE ALREADY STARTED PROACTIVE INSPECTIONS OF REPEAT OFFENDERS. SO WE LOOKED AT THE DATA. THERE'S ABOUT 378 OR SO. IF I GO BACK THREE YEARS, THE 378 ADDRESSES THAT HAVE HAD MORE THAN ONE BITE, SO TWO BITES ARE MORE, TWO INSTANCES, RIGHT, OR THEY'VE HAD A BITE INCIDENT AND LATER ON THEY GOT MORE CITATIONS FROM ACC. MAYBE THE -- FROM ACS. MAYBE THE DOG HAS BEEN OUT AGAIN. ONE OF THE THINGS WE NEED TO DO AND WE STARTED IS THIS MONTH ALREADY IS WE NEED TO KNOCK ON THE DOORS BEFORE WE GET THE NEXT 31 CALL AND THERE'S AN INCIDENT. SO WE'VE ALREADY STARTED. WE'VE BEEN TO ABOUT 85 PROPERTIES THIS MONTH. WE STARTED OCTOBER 1, GOT THE TEAM TOGETHER. WE'VE STARTED KNOCKING ON THOSE DOORS AND TALKING TO THOSE RESIDENTS, HEY, YOU'RE ON OUR LIST, YOU'VE HAD MULTIPLE INSTANCES THE LAST THREE YEARS. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU'RE IN CURRENT COMPLIANCE. IS THERE ANYTHING YOU NEED TO STAY IN COMPLIANCE? BUT THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS THAT THEY KNOW WE'RE WATCHING THEM BECAUSE WE CAN'T HAVE THIS HABITUAL INSTANCES OF DANGEROUS CONDITIONS. SO THIS IS JUST ONE ELEMENT THAT WE'RE PROPOSING THAT WE STARTED IT, BUT WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE IT. WE DID USE SOME OF OUR EXISTING CASA TEAM THAT'S ALREADY OUT IN THE COMMUNITY KIND OF DOING SOME OF THIS. WE'VE REPRIORITIZED SOME OF THEIR DUTIES TO THESE 378 ADDRESSES, BUT I THINK THIS IS AN IMPORTANT PART MOVING FORWARD FOR US. AND THEN LASTLY -- I'LL JUST SUMMARIZE THE PROPOSED CITY CODE CHAPTER 5 CHANGES AGAIN. I THINK I MENTIONED THIS. SO INCREASED FINES AS NOTED FOR REPEAT OFFENDERS. CHANGE THE CODE SECTION THAT WILL ALLOW ACS TO STERILIZE OWNED ANIMALS SO WE'D BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW. WE NEED TO GET OUR CITY CODE THERE. NOW, I PUT SOMETHING THERE POSSIBLE FUTURE CODE CONSIDERATIONS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH THIS INSPECTION PROGRAM FOR THE REPEAT OFFENDERS. I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED TO CHANGE THE LAW OR CREATE A PROGRAM. WE DON'T NEED TO TO GET STARTED, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE GOING TO WATCH AND MAYBE BRING BACK TO THIS COMMITTEE? SIX OR NINE MONTHS IN HOW THAT'S WORK ALONG WITH SOME OF THIS OTHER STUFF. BUT MAYBE THERE'S A CODE CHANGE OR A PROGRAM WE NEED TO CODIFY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID WITH OUR PROACTIVE DEPARTMENT INSPECTION PROGRAM A FEW YEARS AGO, THAT WAS REPEAT APARTMENT OWNERS THAT HAD A LOT OF VIOLATIONS WE CAME UP WITH A PROGRAM. I'M NOT SAYING THIS IS EXACTLY LIKE IT, BUT IT'S IN THAT REALM THAT WE NEED TO KEEP AN EYE ON THOSE THAT ARE DOING IT OVER AND OVER AGAIN. AND THEN LASTLY THIS WAS MENTIONED A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO AT THE B SESSION, WE HAVE TO KEEP LOOKING AT OUR STATE LAW AND WHAT CHANGES WE CAN MAKE TO STRENGTHEN THOSE RULES AGAINST DANGEROUS DOG OWNERS. SO WE'RE GOING TO WORK WITH SALLY AND HER TEAM AGAIN. SALLY IS HERE, HAVING CONVERSATIONS, WORKING WITH OUR DELEGATES, BUT POSSIBLY AN INCREASE OUR ABILITY TO [00:20:03] ENFORCE AND LOOKING AT THE AFFIDAVIT BY THE ANIMAL CARE OFFICER, RATHER THAN A RESIDENT, POSSIBLY LOOKING AT INCREASED PENALTIES LIKE WE DID A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. WE WERE UNSUCCESSFUL, BUT WE THINK THERE'S SOME OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THAT AGAIN. AND THEN LASTLY, I'LL JUST THROW THIS ONE OUT THERE, IS WE NEED TO MAYBE LOOK AT HOW DO WE PROHIBIT DANGEROUS DOG REPEAT OFFENDERS TO EVEN OWN AN ANIMAL HERE IN SAN ANTONIO? THE REASON WE LOOK AT THAT IS AGAIN THESE REPEAT OFFENSES WHERE PEOPLE WITH JUST NOT LEARNING IS THERE A WAY THAT WE CAN PROHIBIT THEM FROM OWNING AN ANIMAL IN SAN ANTONIO? I'M NOT SURE. THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE LOOKING AT. LAST LEGISLATIVE CYCLE THERE WAS A NEW LAW FOR CRUELTY CASES, SO PEOPLE THAT WERE CONVICTED OF CRUELTY CASES AGAINST ANIMALS, THERE WAS INSTITUTED A FIVE-YEAR BAN FROM THEM OWNING ANIMALS. THAT WAS A STATE LAW THAT'S RECENTLY CHANGED. SO SOMETHING IN THAT REALM OF LOOKING AT. WE NEED TO BE SURE WE'RE AS TOUGH AS WE CAN TO LIMIT THESE DANGEROUS CONDITIONS HERE IN SAN ANTONIO. SO I'LL JUST AGAIN SUMMARIZE EVERYTHING. WE GOT TO CHANGE CITY CODE AS NOTED. WE THINK WE CAN DO THIS QUICKLY BY DECEMBER. MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE IF WE GET, YOU KNOW, CONSIDERATION TODAY, IF YOU AGREE, I WOULD GO IN FRONT OF OUR ANIMAL CARE ADVISORY BOARD WITH THOSE SPECIFIC CHANGES THAT I TALKED ABOUT, VERY QUICK, IMPORTANT CHANGE. WE WOULD DISCUSS IT AT THE ANIMAL CARE ADVISORY BOARD NEXT MONTH AND BRING IT BACK TO CITY COUNCIL FOR FULL ADOPTION IN DECEMBER. WE WOULD BEGIN STERILIZATION OF THOSE RECLAIMED, ON CAMPUS ANIMALS, AS SOON AS THAT CODE CHANGE IS DONE. WE WOULD -- WE CAN START USING THE PSEUDONYM PROCESS AS SOON AS WE LEAVE HERE TODAY WORKING WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. WE'LL DEVELOP THAT. WE ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO ENSURE 100% ISSUANCE AND FOLLOW-UP OF THE STERILIZATION ORDERS NOW AND IN THE FUTURE. WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE WITH THOSE PROACTIVE INSPECTIONS AND WE'RE GOING TO PURSUE STATE LAW CHANGES. SO THAT'S OUR PROPOSAL BASED ON THE CCR WITH A FEW EXTRAS IN THERE, AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE. >> HAVRDA: THANK YOU, MIKE. THE CCR WAS BROUGHT BY COUNCILWOMAN ALDERETE GAVITO, SO I'LL KICK IT OVER TO YOU. >> GAVITO: THANK YOU, CHAIR. THANK YOU SO MUCH TO DAVID, MIKE, ANDY AND JOE, AND EACH OF YOUR TEAMS FOR WORKING SO CLOSELY WITH MY TEAM AND I ON THIS CCR AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS. THIS CCR CAME ABOUT AS A RESPONSE TO THE ONGOING PUBLIC SAFETY CONCERNS THAT ARISE AS A RESULT OF IRRESPONSIBLE PET OWNERSHIP. ALL OF THIS ABSOLUTELY MADDENING BECAUSE THIS IS A PEOPLE PROBLEM, IT'S NOT A DOG PROBLEM, THIS IS A PEOPLE PROBLEM THAT WE'VE LET PERSIST IN OUR CITY FOR FAR TOO LONG. YOU KNOW, WE HEAR -- MY TEAM AND I HEAR FROM RESIDENTS CONSTANTLY. I CAN'T EVEN WALK AROUND -- THAT THEY CAN'T EVEN WALK AROUND THEIR BLOCK AFTER DINNER OR ARE SCARED ABOUT THEIR KIDS WALKING TO SCHOOL BECAUSE OF THE PACK OF DOGS THAT THEY SEE IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS. ACTUALLY, WE JUST GOT A CALL LAST WEEK, THERE WAS A WOMAN ON PALM STREET AND GOT ATTACKED TWICE IN ONE WEEK AND CHASED BY A PACK OF DOGS. SO WE'RE HEARING THESE STORIES CONSISTENTLY AND IT IS A PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE WHERE PEOPLE CANNOT FEEL SAFE IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS, WHETHER IT'S BECAUSE OF GUNSHOTS, WHETHER IT'S BECAUSE OF SPEEDING OR BECAUSE OF LOOSE DOGS. THIS BECOMES A PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE AND OUR RESIDENTS SHOULD NOT BE LIVING IN FEAR IN THE COMMUNITY. WE CANNOT BE SOFT ON THIS ISSUE. THIS CCR DOES AIM TO HOLD THE RESPONSIBLE OWNERS ACCOUNTABLE BY INCREASING THE FINES FOR REPEAT OFFENDERS, CREATING A PSEUDONYM PROGRAM TO HELP PEOPLE FEEL SAFER WHEN REPORTING THIS THEIR NEIGHBOS HAVE IRRESPONSIBLE OWNERSHIP OF DOGS. AND TO SPAY AND NEUTER THE DOGS THAT COME INTO AC CARE. I APPRECIATE THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND I FEEL THAT THEY ARE IN LINE WITH WHAT WE ENVISIONED FOR THE CCR WHEN IT WAS FILED. MIKE, I ALSO WANT TO GIVE KUDOS TO YOU AND YOUR TEAM FOR THE PROACTIVE INSPECTION PROGRAM FOR REPEAT OFFENDERS. I APPRECIATE YOU AND YOUR TEAM TAKING ON THIS INITIATIVE AND I THINK IT'S A FANTASTIC IDEA. FOR TOO LONG PEOPLE HAVE NOT FELT THE SEQUENCE CONSEQUENCES FOR THEIR ACTIONS AND THOSE ACTIONS HAVE NEGATIVELY IMPACTED THEIR NEIGHBORS AND WE SEE THIS IN HEADLINES AGAIN AND AGAIN. SO THIS NEW PROTOCOL WILL HOPEFULLY ADDRESS ISSUES BEFORE THEY CAUSE ANY MORE INJURIES. REFERRING TO SLIDE 13, I AM SUPPORTIVE OF PURSUING DANGEROUS DOG -- TO BAN REPEAT OFFENDERS FROM OWNING PETS. YOU KNOW, UNFORTUNATELY RIGHT NOW IN SAN ANTONIO THIS IS A LIFE OR DEATH SITUATION. SO WE DO NEED TO SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES AT ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT IN ORDER TO TACKLE THE PROBLEM. I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING EACH OF THESE IDEAS BEING PUT INTO PLACE. THE TIME IS NOW FOR US TO [00:25:02] CURB THIS ISSUE. THE SAFETY OF OUR RESIDENTS IS ALL OF OUR TOP PRIORITY AND THIS IS A PRESSING PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED IMMEDIATELY. THANKS SO MUCH FOR THE PRESENTATION AND THANKS TO MY COLLEAGUES FOR YOUR SUPPORT ON THIS. WITH THAT I MOVE THAT WE SEND THE CODE CHANGES TO THE ACS ADVISORY BOARD NEXT MONTH AND THEN TO A SESSION FOR A FULL VOTE IN DECEMBER. THANK YOU. >> SECOND. >> HAVRDA: OKAY. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS AND THEN WE'LL GO ON TO OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBER QUESTIONS. I THINK THAT THE ALL OF IT IS A BIG STEP FORWARD IN PUBLIC SAFETY. I COMPLETELY AGREE THIS IS A PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE. I THINK THAT COMING INTO THIS TERM NOT EVERYBODY THOUGHT THAT ACS WAS NECESSARILY A PUBLIC SAFETY AGENCY, BUT I BELIEVE WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE NOW ABOUT THAT. AND BY THE WAY, MIKE, I THINK YOU'RE DOING A FANTASTIC JOB OVER THERE. MY CONCERN IS ABOUT ENFORCEMENT. WHEN WE MAKE ALL OF THESE CHANGES, I MEAN, YOU MENTIONED THAT IT'S ENFORCEMENT ON WHAT WE HAVE HAS BEEN INCONSISTENT. SO WHAT IS THE PLAN MOVING FORWARD TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE AS CONSISTENT AS POSSIBLE? >> YEAH. I MEAN, WE REALLY JUST HAVE TO RATCHET UP THE CONSISTENT ENFORCEMENT AS OPPOSED TO ISSUING WARNINGS, HOPING PEOPLE WILL COME INTO COMPLIANCE. YOU KNOW, JUST LOOKING AT THE STERILIZATION ORDERS AS ONE COMPONENT, YOU LOOK AT THE DATA AND YOU KNOW, AS BUSY AS WE HAVE BEEN, AND WE'RE GETTING MORE RESOURCES TO THE LAST COUPLE OF BUDGETS, JUST TO GET OUR RESPONSE RATE UP TO THAT 100% OF OUR CRITICAL CALLS, BUT AT THE SAME TIME WHEN WE DO GET OUT THERE AND WE DO TALK TO THE PET OWNERS THAT ARE BEING IRRESPONSIBLE, WE CAN'T GIVE THEM THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT ANYMORE. SO WE'VE ALREADY HAD -- BRAD IS HERE AND MY ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, THE FIELD TEAM. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS, WE'VE MODIFIED SOME OF OUR INTERNAL PRACTICES AND SOPS. THE NORM IS TO ISSUE A CITATION AND WE NEED TO CHANGE THE BEHAVIOR. IT DEFINITELY NEEDS TO BE MORE CONSISTENT LIKE YOU SAID. WE DEFINITELY NEED TO BE STRONG BECAUSE IT'S A PUBLIC SAFETY. NOW, WE WILL STILL RUN INTO PEOPLE THAT REALLY NEED MORE HELP THAN THEY NEED LIKE A CITATION, SO THOSE ARE THE THE FEW CASES. BUT I THINK HISTORY HAS BEEN A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A, WELL, LET'S USE WARNING AND EDUCATION AND TRY TO GET COMPLIANCE, BUT SOME OF THE STUFF WE'RE SEEING JUST ISN'T WORKING. WE NEED HIGHER FINES FOR THE REPEAT OFFENDERS AND ESPECIALLY THOSE IF YOU CAN'T PREVENT BITES, IF YOU CAN'T CONTROL YOUR ANIMAL, ESPECIALLY YOUR DOGS AND CAN'T PREVENT BITES, WE NEED TO MAKE USE OF THOSE HIGHER PENALTIES. BUT WE UNDERSTAND YOUR COMMENT. THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE WORKING ON INTERNALLY. AND WE'RE COMMITTED TO EXECUTING MOVING FORWARD. >> AND I KNOW YOU'VE REALLY FOCUSED IN OUR BUDGET, THIS COUNCIL HAS FOCUSED ON MAKING SURE THAT ACS IS WELL FUNDED, WE HAVE ENOUGH OFFICERS. I THINK WE'VE HAD HISTORICALLY A PROBLEM STAFFING. I WAS OUT THERE I GUESS A MONTH AGO OR SO, AND YOU HAD THE BIGGEST ACS OFFICER CLASS EVER, EVER, RIGHT? SO THAT'S GREAT. I THINK THE PLAN TO FOLLOW-UP IS REALLY -- IS KEY AT THIS POINT. AND SO THE -- THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE ABOUT YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT SEVEN CITATIONS -- 700. HOW MANY HAVE BEEN PAID? AND WHAT'S THE CONSEQUENCE IF THEY DON'T? WHAT'S THE CONSEQUENCE IF THEY DON'T STERILIZATION AFTER THE 30 DAYS? WHAT HAPPENS THERE? >> WE GET THAT QUESTION A LOT. SO I'LL GET TO THE FINAL-FINAL ANSWER IS WE DO NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO SEIZE THE ANIMAL, RIGHT? SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO -- WE'RE USING TO USE THESE INCREASED FINES. IT'S A TWO-PRONGED APPROACH. THE INCREASED FINES I THINK WILL BE A DETERRENT AS WELL AS AS I MENTIONED, SO WE NEED TO HELP THAT PERSON UNDERSTAND THAT RIGHT NOW IT'S ONLY 12% OF THEM ARE GETTING THEM STERILIZED. BUT RATHER THAN GETTING A 500 OR THOUSAND DOLLAR TICKET, WE CAN HELP SCHEDULE YOU AT ONE OF OUR FREE OR LOW COST SPAY AND NEUTER SURGERIES, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO BE OPENING UP TWO NEW CLINICS THAT ARE PRETTY CLOSE TO A LOT OF THESE AREAS ON THE EASTSIDE-WESTSIDE. WE CAN STILL USE THE BRACK AND THE BROOKS FACILITY, BUT WE'RE OPENING UP MORE STERILIZATION STUDENTS IN OUR OPPORTUNITY THAT ARE GOING TO BE FREE OR LOW COST. SO FREE IS BETTER THAN A 500-DOLLAR TICKET. MAYBE 100-DOLLAR SPAY OR NEUTER SURGERY IF YOU'RE NOT IN ONE OF THOSE ZIP CODES. THAT'S BETTER THAN A 500-DOLLAR TICKET. WE'LL HAVE STAFF, WHAT WE'LL DO IS WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THIS, IS THOSE STERILIZATION ORDERS THAT WE GET, LIKE EACH WEEK, WE'RE JUST GOING TO GIVE THOSE TO THE SCHEDULING PEOPLE AT THOSE CLINICS AND SAY THESE ARE THE PEOPLE YOU NEED TO REACH OUT TO AND MAKE SURE THEY GET AN APPOINTMENT. SO WE WANT TO HELP THEM, BUT WE ALSO WANT TO REMIND THEM THAT IT MAKES NO SENSE TO PAY $500 ON A THOUSAND DOLLARS AND TO KEEP ON GOING [00:30:01] WHEN YOU CAN JUST COME GET A FREE SURGERY AND BE DONE WITH IT. SO THAT'S KIND OF THE PROCESS THAT WE'RE ENVISIONING AND WE NEED TO DO A GOOD JOB OF THAT, BUT I'M SURE THAT THERE WILL BE SOME PEOPLE THAT WILL STILL RACK UP THE FINES AND WE'LL BE IN COURT WITH JOE AND HIS TEAM AND DEMANDING THE JUDGE HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE. >> HAVRDA: THAT IS AN INCENTIVE. THAT MAKES SENSE TO ME. I APPRECIATE THAT CLARIFICATION. IN REGARD TO MOVING TOWARDS MAYBE NOT ALLOWING SOME FOLKS TO OWN DOGS, MAYBE THIS IS A QUESTION FOR YOU, RUDY. I KNOW THE STATE OF TEXAS SEES DOGS AS CHAT TELL, CORRECT? SO HOW DO WE STOP SOMEBODY FROM OWNING LEGAL PROPERTY? >> I'LL TAKE A STAB AT IT. RIGHT NOW IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO -- THE LAW THAT WAS CHANGED FOR CRUELTY CASES, FOR EXAMPLE. IF YOU'RE SO DANGEROUS OR CRUEL TO AN ANIMAL THROUGH A CONVICTION, A NEW LAW WAS JUST PASSED THAT YOU CAN GET A FIVE-YEAR BAN. I THINK IT WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED AS FOREVER, BUT IT LANDED ON A FIVE-YEAR BAN AND THAT LAW IS ON THE BOOKS OF THE STATE. SO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS HAVING CONVERSATIONS, AND WE KNOW THEY'RE CONSIDERED PROPERTY, BUT WHAT WE BELIEVE IS IF YOU KEEP CREATING THESE DANGEROUS EITHER BITE CASES OR INSTANCES OF DANGEROUS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, THEN THAT'S TOO DANGEROUS FOR YOU TO EVEN OWN AN ANIMAL. SO WE STILL HAVE TO WORK WITH JOE AND SALLY AND MAYBE SOME OF OUR DELEGATION TO DO THAT, BUT THAT'S WHERE WE THINK WE WOULD GET INTO STATE LAW. JOE, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S SOMETHING YOU WANT TO ADD. >> NO, THAT'S PERFECT. >> HAVRDA: I WONDER IF THERE'S ALREADY AN EXISTING LAW UNDER CRUELTY. MAYBE IT COULD BE SEEN AS CRUELTY TO THE ANIMAL BECAUSE THEY KEEP -- >> I THINK THAT'S IT. WE WANT TO TAKE ALMOST THAT ONE SECTION AND JUST OPEN IT UP A LITTLE BIT MORE TO IF YOU CREATE THE DANGEROUS SITUATION THROUGH DOG BITES OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT, MAYBE IT CAN JUST BE ENHANCED AS OPPOSED TO CREATING A NEW LAW. BUT WE'RE GOING TO WORK ON THAT TO SEE WHAT WE THINK, YOU KNOW, WE CAN GET FILED AND THEN ACTUALLY GO UP AND HOPEFULLY GET INTO LAW. BUT IT'S TOO IMPORTANT FOR US NOT TO GIVE A TRY. >> HAVRDA: AGREED. ALSO MAYBE NOTIFYING LIKE THE HUMANE SOCIETY, ADL, ALL OF THOSE AGENCIES THAT ADOPT OUT SO THEY'RE NOT ADOPTING OUT UNKNOWINGLY TO SOMEBODY WHO CAN'T OWN. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> HAVRDA: MY LAST QUESTION. THE STUDENT AND PROGRAM. IS THAT DOVE TELLING ON WHAT THE REPRESENTATIVES ARE WORKING ON AT THE STATE? >> IT IS. I THINK WHAT WE'RE GOING TO PROPOSE TO DO IS DO WHAT WE CAN LOCALLY RIGHT NOW IS WE WILL LOCALLY JUST CHANGE OUR PROCESSES TO AT LEAST START IT. AND WE KNOW MOST OF THOSE CASES DON'T END UP APPEALED IN COURT. LIKE LITERALLY LESS THAN A COUPLE OF PERCENT. HOWEVER, THE CHALLENGE WE WOULD HAVE IS IT THROUGH THE CURRENT STATE LAW AND COURT PROCESSES EVENTUALLY IF IT GOES TO COURT THAT PERSON WILL WOULD HAVE TO GIVE THEIR REAL NAME OR WE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO DROP THE CASE, WHICHEVER THEY FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE WITH. I THINK THE ONE WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO WORK ON WITH SENATOR MENÉNDEZ AND REPRESENTATIVE CAMPOS, WOULD BE JUST LETTING THE ACO, THE LICENSED ANIMAL CARE OFFICER, TAKE ALL THE EVIDENCE AND PRODUCE THE AFFIDAVIT BASED ON THAT TO HAVE THAT DANGEROUS DOG DESIGNATION STICK. THAT'S WHAT WE BELIEVE WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE, BUT WE'RE WORKING WITH SALLY AND PROBABLY THOSE REPRESENTATIVES TO CRAFT SOMETHING THAT MAYBE MIGHT WORK THIS TIME. >> HAVRDA: OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH, MIKE. >> HOPEFULLY, SALLY, DOES THAT SOUND ABOUT RIGHT? OKAY. >> HAVRDA: KNOCKED IS OUT OF THE PARK TODAY, RIGHT. COUNCILMAN MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN. THIS IS A REALLY EXCITING DAY I THINK IN ADDRESSING OUR ABILITY TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE IN A WAY THAT'S GOING TO BE MEANINGFUL FOR OUR CONSTITUENTS. I GUESS SOMETHING I WANT TO START OFF WITH IS CAN YOU DEFINE DANGEROUS DOG FOR THE PUBLIC? >> WELL, THERE'S THE OBVIOUS DANGEROUS DOG THAT BITES SOMEONE AND IT'S MODERATE-SEVERE, SOME SORT OF PRETTY SIGNIFICANT BODILY INJURY. WE ALSO HAVE DANGEROUS DOGS THAT ARE DESIGNATED. THEY JUST GO AND ATTACK SOMEONE, MAYBE THEY DON'T BITE, BUT THEY'RE AGGRESSIVE ENOUGH THAT THEY WOULD HAVE ATTACKED ORBIT SOMEONE. SO THERE'S CRITERIA IN THE LAW. SO IT DOESN'T JUST HAVE TO BE BITE WITH LET'S SAY CEASE BODILY INJURY, SO THERE ARE DIFFERENT LEVELS. SO WE'VE USED THAT AND WE'VE HAD CASES THAT HAVE HAD AN ALMOST BITE, BUT DEFINITELY IF SOMETHING DIDN'T HAPPEN OR INTERVENE, THOSE CAN BE DEEMED DANGEROUS. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: THANK YOU, YOU ANSWERED THE QUESTION. THE REASON I ASKED THAT IS BECAUSE I WAS ASKED BY A REPORTER IS WHY DON'T YOU JUST BAN DANGEROUS DOGS BY BREED? AND THE REASON IS THERE IS NO EVIDENCE BEHIND THAT. WE ARE USING A VERY CLEAR AND LEAN DEFINITION OF DANGEROUS DOG. [00:35:02] MY SISTER-IN-LAW HAS A PIT BULL MIX AND SHE IS THE SWEETEST, MOST SHY DOG THAT I'VE EVER MET AND THE ISSUE THAT WE HAVE HERE IS IRRESPONSIBLE PET OWNERS. TO GIVE SOME GRACE, WE HAVE SOME PET OWNERS WHO MAY BE IGNORANT TO THE LAW AND ARE JUST DOING WHAT THEY'VE ALWAYS SEEN IN THEIR COMMUNITY. AND SO I WANTED TO ADDRESS THAT REALLY QUICKLY PUBLICLY AND PERHAPS INFORM THOSE WHO DON'T KNOW WHAT DANGEROUS DOG MEANS IN THIS CONTEXT. ON THE ISSUES, I'M GENERALLY NOT A FAN OF FINES. FINES GENERALLY PRESENT AN OPTION FOR PEOPLE WHO CAN AFFORD THE FINE TO DO WHATEVER THEY WANT TO DO. I DON'T THINK SOFTNESS IS NECESSARILY THE ISSUE. THE ISSUE IS THAT WE DON'T HAVE EVIDENCE THAT INCREASING FINES REDUCES VIOLATIONS. I HAVEN'T SEEN THAT YET PRESENTED IN THE CONTEXT OF CITY FINES. SO I WOULD CONSIDER THAT DURING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THESE INCREASED FINES THAT WE MONITOR AND COMPARE COMPLIANCE RATES TO WHAT WE'VE DONE, IF THERE IS EVEN --O THAT CONSIDERING ALL OF THE OTHER, YOU KNOW, PROCESS CHANGES WE'RE MAKING RELATED TO AUTOMATIC STERILIZATION AND ALL OF THAT. BUT IF THAT'S POSSIBLE I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT DONE. OH MY GOD, THE LACK OF FOLLOW-UP ON THE STERILIZATION ORDER LIKE HISTORICALLY IS CRAZY. I UNDERSTAND IN 2024 THERE'S A SIZEABLE IMPROVEMENT AND SHOWS WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO FOLLOW UP. AND I'M WONDERING WHY IS THAT? >> THE MAIN REASON IS NOT ENOUGH STAFF. IF YOU REMEMBER JUST TWO YEARS AGO, A YEAR AND A HALF AGO WE WERE TALKING ABOUT HAVING ENOUGH FIELD STAFF TO GET OUT TO 44% OF THE CRITICAL CALLS THAT CAME IN. AND OUR MAIN TARGET OF ALL OF ACS RIGHT NOW BECAUSE OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT IS SO THAT WE CAN RAMP UP TO GET TO THAT 100% CRITICAL CALL. SO REALLY THAT WAS THE LASER FOCUS, HAS BEEN FOR LET'S SAY THE PAST YEAR AND A HALF. SO WE HAVE JUST DEPRIORITIZED THE FOLLOWING UP ON THE STERILIZATION ORDERS. BY LOOKING AT THIS AND LOOKING AT WHAT WE'RE DOING, AND YOU LOOK AT THE RESULTS OF 11 PERCENT OR FIVE PERCENT OR 12 PERCENT STERILIZATION, SO CERTAINLY THAT'S NOT WORKING SO I THINK WHAT WE CAN DO NOT ONLY WITH THE ADDITIONAL STAFF WE GOT LAST SUMMER AND THIS SUMMER AS THEY'RE GETTING INTO THE FIELD, ONE, DOING -- GETTING OUT TO THOSE CRITICAL CALLS, BUT ACTUALLY MAKING SURE THAT WE PRIORITIZE THIS AS THAT STERILIZATION ORDER IS AN ELEMENT OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAVE AS ACS AS A WHOLE. SO MORE STAFF AND BETTER PRIORITIES IS REALLY THE ANSWER. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: THERE'S A LARGER ISSUE I'LL GET TO IN A MINUTE, BUT I DID WANT TO BRING ATTENTION TO THAT. I AM WONDERING -- SO I SAW ONE OF THE SLIDES SPECULATED THAT ADDITIONAL FOCUS ON THIS AUTOMATIC STERILIZATION THAT THAT WILL HURT OUR ABILITY TO RESPOND TO 100% CRITICAL CALLS. WHAT IS THAT? >> WHAT I WAS TRYING TO REPRESENT THERE, IF I ASKED MY ANIMAL CARE OFFICERS TO DISCONTINUE RETURNING THOSE 1800 ANIMALS TO THEIR OWNER IN THE FIELD BEFORE COMING BACK TO THE ACS CAMPUS RIGHT DOWN THE STREET HERE, THEY WOULD BE GOING BACK AND FORTH THROUGHOUT THEIR SHIFT MORE OFTEN. SO THAT WOULD JUST -- THAT WOULD REDUCE THEIR ABILITY TO GET TO THE CRITICAL CALLS THAT ARE IN THEIR QUEUE BECAUSE THERE WOULD BE MORE DRIVE TIME GOING BACK AND FORTH TO THE ACS CAMPUS. THAT WAS THE POINT I WAS TRYING TO MAKE THERE. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: I DON'T KNOW THAT IT DOES. >> LET ME PUT IT THIS WAY. IF MY ANIMAL CARE OFFICERS, RIGHT NOW IF THEY PICK UP A ROAMING ANIMAL AND WE HAVE EVIDENCE THAT IT'S MIKE SHANNON'S DOWN THE STREET, WE GO KNOCK ON MIKE SHANNON'S DOOR AND SAY HERE'S YOUR ANIMAL BACK. IT'S PRETTY EFFICIENT BECAUSE IT'S ROUTE DOWN THE STREET. WE GIVE HIM A CITATION AND WE GIVE HIM THE ORDER. BUT IF I HAD TO COME BACK BECAUSE I WAS ON THE EASTSIDE OF TOWN AND I HAD TO COME BACK TO BRING IT TO ACS, IT WOULD BE MORE DRIVE TIME BACK AND FORTH, BACK AND FORTH ALL DAY. THEY WOULD HAVE LESS TIME TO RESPOND TO THE CALLS AS THEY'RE COMING IN. WE GET ABOUT 160 CRITICAL CALLS A DAY. IT WOULD JUST REALLY REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF CRITICAL CALLS WE COULD GET TO AND IT WOULD TAKE US LONGER TO REACH THAT 100% CRITICAL CALL RATE. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: MAYBE COULD YOU STATE PLAINLY WHAT IT IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING WITH -- BY ABSORBING THE STERILIZATION CLINIC OPERATIONS? I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING -- MY CONCLUSION WAS NOT THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE DOING THAT. >> I'M GOING TO GO MAYBE TO A SLIDE BACK MAYBE. THERE WE GO. SO THERE'S 569, WE CALL THEM ON CAMPUS RECLAIMS. SO THOSE ARE ALREADY COMING BACK TO THE CAMPUS. SO WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO DO THOSE. SO THERE'S A QUARTER OF THEM THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO. ONCE WE CHANGE THE CODE WE'RE GOING TO ABSORB THAT IN OUR -- MAKE CHANGES, WE'LL DO THOSE 569 OR SO. THE 1800 IN THE FIELD, WE'RE STILL GOING TO RETURN IT TO THE OWNER, BUT WE'RE GOING [00:40:03] TO 100% OF THE TIME ISSUE THE ORDER AND 100% OF THE TIME FOLLOW UP AND REMIND YOU AS I HAD MENTIONED TO THE CHAIR, WE'RE GOING TO REMIND YOU THAT IT MAKES NO SENSE FOR YOU TO NOT GET THE STERILIZATION BECAUSE WE ARE FREE TO LOW COST. OTHERWISE WE'LL BE BACK WITH THE $500 AND THE 1,000-DOLLAR TICKET OVER TIME. SO IT'S GOING TO BE THAT DETERRENT OF HIGHER FINES, BUT ALSO HELPING YOU GET TO ONE OF THE FREE OR LOW COST SURGERIES. SO WE THINK THAT WE CAN ABSORB AND THAT WILL ACTUALLY INCREASE THE STERILIZATION RATE OF THOSE ANIMALS SIGNIFICANTLY WITHOUT STOPPING US FROM REACHING OUR 100% CRITICAL CALL GOAL. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: I HEAR YOU. THE WORRY THAT PERSISTS IS THAT'S STILL A HIGH NUMBER OF ANIMALS. LOOKING AT THE SLIDE YOU GAVE US, WE'RE NOT GETTING A VERY HIGH -- WE'RE NOT GETTING A VERY HIGH STERILIZATION RATE WITH THE FOLLOW-UP, FOLLOWING THE CITATIONS. SO THAT TO ME REMAINS A CONCERN. >> AND IT IS A CHALLENGE, COUNCILMAN. I'LL JUST OFFER THIS: THAT 12% THAT YOU SEE THERE ON THE BOTTOM RIGHT THERE, WHEN WE COME BACK TO THIS COMMITTEE, IF IT'S RIGHT BEFORE SUMMERTIME, THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION, IS IMPLEMENT SOME OF THESE AND JUST USE SOME OF THESE CHANGES OVER A SIX-MONTH SPAN AND SEE IF THEY'RE INCREASING THE NUMBERS IN A POSITIVE WAY FOR US, INCREASING STERILIZATION OF THESE NUMBERS, MAYBE DECREASING BITE NUMBERS, ET CETERA. BUT THAT I THINK WILL SHOW US ARE WE MAKING A CHANGE BASED ON MY PROPOSAL. IF IT'S NOT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME UP WITH ANOTHER PLAN, BUT BASED ON DOING THIS FOR SIX MONTHS WE'LL HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION AS TO REALLY WHAT'S NOT WORKING AND WHAT IS, BUT THAT WILL BE RIGHT AROUND SUMMERTIME FOR THIS COMMITTEE. I THINK THAT'S OUR PROPOSAL RIGHT NOW. >> MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ: THANK YOU. AND I APPRECIATE THAT. I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT SENDING THIS TO A SESSION. I HOPE IT'S SOMETHING WE CAN APPROVE EXPEDITIOUSLY. SOMETHING THAT I THINK REMAINS A CONCERN WITH ACS AND I THINK MAYBE A FEW OTHER DEPARTMENTS, BUT THIS IS ONE THAT I THINK IS PROBABLY MOST PERTINENT IS I'M INTERESTED IN THE SCIENCE AND MATH, THE DATA THAT INFORMED THE THINGS THAT WE DO, IF ANY. AND I FEEL LIKE WE COULD HAVE PREVENTED THIS PROBLEM A LONG TIME AGO IF WE DID THE KIND OF NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND THE KINDS OF STAFFING ANALYSIS AND DEPARTMENTAL ASSESSMENTS THAT WE'RE DOING FOR DEPARTMENTS LIKE FIRE AND POLICE. AND THIS IS VERY MUCH A PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE, WHY WE'RE HEARING IT HERE TODAY. SO I'M WONDERING, YOU KNOW, IF WE WERE TO STERILIZE -- WHAT I WOULD EXPECT THAT WE WOULD HAVE ANSWERS TO, RIGHT, IS IF WE WERE TO STERILIZE ALL OF THESE ANIMALS, AT WHAT WHAT POINT WOULD WE SEE A REDUCTION AND A REDUCTION OF HOW MUCH IN THE NUMBER OF STRAY ANIMALS ROAMING -- STRAY OR ROAMING ANIMALS, AT WHAT POINT WOULD WE SEE A REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF DANGEROUS DOGS? HOW DO WE GET TO A POINT WHERE ACS IS NOT DROWNING OR DREADING WATER? HOW DO WE GET TO THE POINT THAT ACS OFFICERS ARE WORKING ON COMMUNITY BUILDING AND BEING PROACTIVE AND EDUCATING PET OWNERS? HAVE WE DONE ANY KIND OF ANALYSIS OR ANY SORT OF ASSESSMENT THAT OFFERS ANY SORT OF GUIDANCE THERE NUMERICALLY? >> I THINK WE HAVE. SO JUST THIS SUMMER WE PUT TOGETHER PLAN THAT INCLUDED THREE MAJOR COMPONENTS. ONE WAS ADDING ADDITIONAL STAFF TO GET TO THE NUMBER OF CALLS THAT WE'RE RECEIVING. OF THE 90,000 CALLS THAT WE GET FROM 311 EACH YEAR, ABOUT 55 TO 60,000 OF THEM ARE WHAT WE CALL PRIORITY OR CRITICAL CALLS. WE PUT A PLAN TOGETHER. YOU ALL APPROVED AS THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL THAT BUDGET PLAN TO ADD 14 ADDITIONAL OFFICERS. JUST TO REACT TO THOSE CALLS COMING IN. AND A LOT OF THOSE ARE THE AGGRESSIVE, ROAMING, INJURED CALLS, CRUELTY CASES, ET CETERA. THE OTHER PLAN WAS $2 MILLION ADDED TO OCCUPY THE TWO NEW STERILIZATION CLINICS, RIGHT? SO WE WANT TO GET TO THAT PLAN OF OVER 40,000 SPAY AND NEUTER SURGERIES THIS YEAR, ABOUT 13,500 OF THOSE ARE IN-HOUSE ON OUR CURRENT CAMPUS, BUT ADDING THOSE TWO NEW CLINICS IS GOING TO ADD THOUSANDS OF SURGERIES AVAILABLE AT FREE OR LOW COST TO OUR COMMUNITY. SO THOSE ARE THE -- AND THE THIRD ONE WAS THE EDUCATION OUTREACH COMPONENT. THERE WAS $280,000 TO EDUCATE PEOPLE, WORK MORE ON EDUCATING PEOPLE TO BE A RESPONSIBLE PET OWNER AND ALSO WHERE TO ADOPT, HOW TO ADOPT, HOW TO RESCUE, ET CETERA. SO THAT WAS THE MAIN PLAN. WE PRODUCED A LOT OF DATA FOR THAT, BUT CERTAINLY EVERYTHING THAT YOU JUST DESCRIBED IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE MONITORING TO SEE IF WE'RE HAVING SUCCESS WITH THESE MEASURES, MORE STAFF, MORE STERILIZATIONS, MORE EDUCATION OUTREACH, HIGHER FINES, SEE IF THOSE ARE GOING TO MAKE AN IMPACT. THOSE ARE EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE MONITORING AND WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO THIS COMMITTEE AS WELL AS I'M SURE THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS NEXT SUMMER. THANK YOU. [00:45:05] >> HAVRDA: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN. COUNCILWOMAN DR. KAUR. >> KAUR: THANK YOU, CHAIR. FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD. THIS IS SUCH AN IMPORTANT ISSUE AND I AGREE. BOTH OF US USED TO TALK ABOUT HOW WHEN WE WERE ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL WE WOULD LITERALLY ALWAYS GET CHASED DOWN BY DOGS. AND I KNOW MY LITTLE PUP GOT BIT ONCE WHEN WE WERE WALKING SO I DO UNDERSTAND THE CHALLENGE OF -- AND HAVE FACED THE CHALLENGE THAT A LOT OF OUR COMMUNITY MEMBERS FACE, WHICH IS WHY THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT. SO YOU ALSO MADE A COMMENT THAT WE CAN'T STERILIZE OUR WAY OUT OF THIS. SO I WANT TO REEMPHASIZE THAT TOO, THAT THIS IS A REALLY IMPORTANT STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION, BUT IT CAN'T BE THE ONLY STEP. SO I'D LIKE FOR US TO CONTINUE TO EXPLORE WHAT WE'RE DOING. TO WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER MCKEE RODRY GUESSES WAS SAYING IS THE EDUCATION COMPONENT. I THINK THERE'S A LOT TO DO IN THAT, AS YOU'RE IN YOUR NEW ROLE AND EXPLORING I WOULD LIKE TO SEE HOW WE CAN RAMP UP AND INCREASE THE EDUCATION COMPONENT IF OUR COMMUNITY MEMBERS BECAUSE THAT'S JUST AS IMPORTANT AS CITATIONS AND FINING. YOU NEED TO HAVE A BOOK END STRATEGY, RIGHT? I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. OBVIOUSLY I THINK WE ALSO GET FOLKS THAT CALL IN ABOUT THE PSEUDONYM REQUEST BECAUSE OF THE FEAR OF RETALIATION. FROM THE OTHER HAND, WE ALSO HAVE HAD SITUATIONS WHERE THERE ARE NEIGHBORS WHO ARE NOT NECESSARILY THE BEST OF FRIENDS AND SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE ARE SOME KIND OF GUARDRAILS THAT WOULD PREVENT SOMEONE FROM JUST SUBMITTING AN AFFIDAVIT WITHOUT ANY CAUSE. IS THAT POSSIBLE? >> WELL, I WOULD SAY THIS: ANYONE CAN FILL OUT AN AFFIDAVIT, BUT THERE HAS TO BE EVIDENCE. SO OF THOSE 300, I THINK I MENTIONED ABOUT 300 A YEAR, THERE ARE SEVERAL THAT ARE UNFOUNDED. IF THERE'S NO EVIDENCE AND WE LOOK AT -- WE TALK TO BOTH PARTIES, WE REVIEW ANY DAMAGE, ANY OTHER WITNESSES, WE ASK AROUND. THE REST OF THEM THAT ARE UNFOUNDED IN THE CASES JUST CLOSED AS SUCH. SO YOU'RE RIGHT, WE DO HAVE SOME NEIGHBOR DISPUTES THAT END UP AT ACS. IT WAS SIMILAR TO MY ROLE OVER IN CODE ENFORCEMENT. WE HAD SOME OF THOSE AS WELL. BUT IT'S IMPORTANT, WE TRAIN OUR ACS OFFICERS AND INVESTIGATORS ON THE DANGEROUS DOG TEAM. THEY SIFT THROUGH ANY AND ALL EVIDENCE. BUT THERE HAS TO BE EVIDENCE. I CAN'T JUST DESIGNATE A DOG DANGEROUS AS THE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR, WITHOUT EVIDENCE THAT SUPPORTS THE CASE. BUT I DON'T THINK I CAN PREVENT ANYBODY FROM COMING DOWN AND FILLING OUT THE FORM. >> KAUR: YEAH. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT WASTING UNDUE TIME FOR OFFICERS THAT ARE LOOKING INTO CASES THAT AREN'T CREDIBLE. SO JUST EXPLORING MAYBE AS WE DO THIS, EXPLORING WHAT FOR THE NEXT SIX MONTHS AS YOU SAID ARE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF CASES THAT ARE JUST A WASTE OF TIME FOR OFFICERS I THINK IT WOULD BE IMPORTANT TO KNOW. AND THEN THIS IS JUST A QUESTION FOR US. IS THERE A CERTAIN NUMBER OF BITES THAT A DOG CAN HAVE BEFORE THERE IS A EUTHANIZIZATION ORDER? >> I DON'T BELIEVE SO. I DON'T BELIEVE SO. THERE IS LEVELS OF HIGHEST LEVEL IS SEVERE BODILY INJURY, SBI. IT'S A DIFFERENT SECTION OF STATE LAW AND LOCAL LAW THAT WE ACTUALLY DON'T EVEN GO THROUGH THE DESIGNATION PROCESS, WE GO STRAIGHT TO A JUDGE. AND ONCE THE JUDGE DECLARES THAT SBI, THE JUDGE WILL USE THE EUTHANASIA DECLARATION RIGHT THERE. BUT I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE CONCERNING ELEMENT OF OUR REPEAT BITE OFFENDER PROGRAM OR PROACTIVE INSPECTIONS IS THERE'S NO MINIMUM NUMBER THAT IF THEY BITE SO MANY TIMES, AND THE RESULT IS X, RIGHT? BUT I THINK, LIKE I SAID, THE SEVERITY OF THAT TYPICALLY DICTATES IT. AS A DANGEROUS DOG OWNER, YOU ARE REQUIRED TO -- IF I DESIGNATE IT, YOU ARE REQUIRED -- THERE'S 10 ELEMENTS THAT YOU HAVE TO COMPLY WITH, INCLUDING ADDITIONAL INSURANCE, ADDITIONAL LIKE FENCING, SIGNAGE, ET CETERA. THERE ARE SOME OWNERS THAT ARE DON'T WANT TO DEAL WITH THAT AND THEY ACTUALLY JUST GIVE IT UP TO ACS AT THAT POINT AND IT'S EUTHANIZED. >> KAUR: I APPRECIATE THAT. AS COUNCIL MEMBER MCKEE-RODRIGUEZ WAS ASKING SOME OF HIS QUESTIONS, I THOUGHT ABOUT THE STRATEGIC PLAN THAT YOU GUYS HAVE DEVELOPED AND BUILT. I WAS WONDERING IF MAYBE IN AN UPCOMING PUBLIC SAFETY MEETING WE COULD GET AN UPDATE ON THAT PLAN. BECAUSE WHAT I HEARD YOU JUST DESCRIBE FROM WHAT YOU'RE DOING THIS SUMMER WAS A PLAN FOR HOW TO INCREASE X, BUT NOT NECESSARILY TRACKING BACK TOWARDS THE GOALS THAT WE SET. SO MAYBE WE COULD GET AN UPDATE BECAUSE I'M SURE YOU ALL HAVE DONE THAT, BUT IT WOULD BE GOOD TO -- >> I'D BE HAPPY TO. I WILL SHARE THAT YES, EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS IN THE ELEMENT. THERE WERE FIVE MAIN ELEMENTS OF THAT STRATEGIC PLAN WITH 100 DIFFERENT LITTLE SUBELEMENTS. THIS IS ALL IN LINE WITH THE STRATEGIC PLAN. PUBLIC SAFETY, ABSOLUTELY. SAFETY OF OUR COMMUNITY, THE NUMBER ONE ELEMENT OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN, BUT WE CAN DEFINITELY WORK TO MAYBE [00:50:03] GIVE A PRESENTATION OR MAYBE WHEN WE FOLLOW UP IN A FEW MONTHS TO SEE HOW THIS IS GOING, WE CAN TIE IT MORE CLOSELY TO THE STRATEGIC PLAN ELEMENTS. >> KAUR: THAT WOULD BE GREAT BECAUSE WHAT YEAR ARE WE IN THAT PLAN? ARE WE YEAR TWO OR THREE? >> THIS IS YEAR TWO. IT WAS APPROVED IN THE SUMMER OF '23. RIGHT? '23. I'M LOOKING AT BRAD. YEAH '26, THANK YOU. >> KAUR: SO IT WOULD BE GREAT TO SEE LIKE WHAT -- WHAT PROGRESS WE'VE MADE TOWARDS THE GOALS THAT WE SET. AND AGAIN, I KNOW YOU ARE PROBABLY DIVING DEEP IN THIS AND MAYBE SOMEBODY ELSE WILL BE GIVING THAT PRESENTATION, BUT JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE STILL LOOKING AT OUR END GOAL OF WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO FOR THAT STRATEGIC PLAN. >> SURE. >> KAUR: THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU, CHAIR. >> HAVRDA: THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN WHITE. >> WHYTE: THANK YOU, CHAIR. A COUPLE OF THINGS. AGAIN, COUNCILWOMAN ALDERETE GAVITO, THIS IS A BIG DAY, CONGRATULATIONS ON GETTING US HERE, THIS IS IMPORTANT WORK IN PUBLIC SAFETY AND AS YOU SAID, IT'S OUR TOP PRIORITY AND THAT INCLUDES DEALING WITH THIS ISSUE HERE WITH ACS. FIRST QUESTION, THE PROPOSED CHANGES, HOW ARE WE GOING TO GET THIS INFORMATION EFFECTIVELY INTO THE HANDS OF THE PUBLIC? BECAUSE WE'VE GOT THESE NEW DETERRENTS THAT WE'LL PUT IN PLACE IN TERMS OF THE FINES AND EVERYTHING ELSE. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE KNOWS IF THEY ACT UP OR IF THEY'RE NOT PROPERLY TAKING CARE OF THEIR PETS AND THEY HAVE DANGEROUS DOGS RUNNING AROUND, THAT THERE WILL BE THESE PENALTIES. >> YEAH. SO ONE OF THE ELEMENTS THAT I MENTIONED EARLIER FOR THE BUDGET, WE GET SOME MONEY FOR KIND OF EXTRA OUTREACH AND MARKETING DOLLARS IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET, SO WE'RE ALREADY WORKING INTERNALLY AND WITH ALANNA AND HER TEAMS AND WE'LL BE IMPLEMENTING SOME COMMUNITY-WIDE EFFORTS -- AGAIN, ONE OF THE MAIN MESSAGES IS RESPONSIBLE PET OWNERSHIP. THAT IS THE NUMBER ONE MESSAGE THAT I WANT TO GET OUT THERE. YOU'VE GOT TO KNOW THE LAW, KNOW HOW TO COMPLY WITH LAW. AND IF YOU DON'T YOU'VE GOT TO KNOW THE PENALTIES. NOW, IF WE INCREASE THE FINES AS WE'RE PROPOSING WE'RE JUST GOING TO -- THAT'S WHY I WANT TO DO IT QUICKLY IS ABSORB THOSE INCREASED FINES AS WE CHANGED THE CODE AS TO THAT ELEMENT. SO THAT MARKETING STRATEGY, EDUCATION OUTREACH, IS GOING TO BE BIG BILLBOARDS OR TV CAMPAIGNS OR MOST IMPORTANTLY GRASSROOTS, WHICH IS OUT IN THE COMMUNITY, COULD BE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS WHICH OUR OFFICERS GO TO, OR HAVING COMMUNITY-WIDE EVENTS TO GET THIS INFORMATION OUT. SO IT'S A WIDE VARIETY OF STUFF. BUT YOU'RE RIGHT, WE HAVE TO LET PEOPLE KNOW WHAT THE RULES ARE AND ESPECIALLY IF WE CHANGE THEM TO BE HARSHER. >> WHYTE: YEAH. I HAVE SOME CONCERN WITH HOW WE'RE GOING TO GO ABOUT THAT BECAUSE THIS IS ALL FINE AND WELL TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO DO IT, BUT IF THE PUBLIC DOESN'T KNOW THAT THERE WILL BE REAL PENALTIES FOR THIS STUFF, NOTHING -- NOTHING IS GOING TO CHANGE. SPEAKING OF THE FINES, HOW DID WE DECIDE ON THE AMOUNTS OF THE FINES AND DO THEY -- DO THEY RUN PARALLEL WITH OTHER CITIES? >> DO YOU KNOW WHAT? I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE THAT DATA IN TERMS OF OTHER CITIES. I DIDN'T. WHAT WE USED IS THERE'S ANOTHER SECTION OF OUR CITY CODE THAT FOR CERTAIN SECTIONS LIKE CRUELTY THAT HAVE -- THAT HAVE AN ELEMENT OF 500, 1,000, 2,000, THERE'S A HIGHER PENALTY THERE SO WE USE THAT SECTION OF THE CODE TO HELP GUIDE US, AS WELL AS BECAUSE I THINK THE NUMBER ONE PROBLEM WE HAVE RIGHT NOW IS BITES. I'M PROPOSING EVEN A LITTLE BIT HIGHER FOR THE BITE CASES THAN 1,000, 1500 AND 2,000. >> WHYTE: OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO BE IN COURT MORE, WOULD YOU SAY, DEALING WITH SOME OF THESE ISSUES? >> POSSIBLY. >> WHYTE: YEP. AND WE USE OUR IN-HOUSE ATTORNEYS ON THIS STUFF? I'M ASSUMING, RIGHT? >> THESE ARE TYPICALLY MUNICIPAL COURT CASES, CRIMINAL OR CIVIL. I SUSPECT MOST OF THEM WILL BE CRIMINAL CLASS E MISDEMEANORS. >> WHYTE: WE DON'T HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT THE INCREASED TIME IN COURT FOR OUR STAFF? WE'VE GOT PLENTY OF -- GOT TO DO IT, GREAT. FINAL QUESTION RELATED TO SOMETHING DR. KAUR SAID. IT'S POSSIBLE THAT WE GET PEOPLE FILING THESE AFFIDAVITS SIMPLY TO, YOU KNOW, ADVANCE THEIR DISPUTE WITH A NEIGHBOR OR WHATEVER IT MAY BE. I GUESS WE'LL SEE HOW THIS GOES AT FIRST, BUT POTENTIALLY DOWN THE ROAD WE MAY NEED TO LOOK AT PENALTIES FOR PEOPLE FILING FRAUDULENT AFFIDAVITS IN THIS REGARD, RIGHT? >> YES, ABSOLUTELY. I THINK -- I TOOK SOME NOTES WHEN DR. KAUR WAS SPEAKING. TRACKING THE AFFIDAVITS THAT [00:55:02] WERE RECEIVED, CERTAINLY ANY MORE UNFOUNDED THAT ARE MAYBE NEIGHBOR DISPUTES, NOT ONLY PSEUDONYMS OR OTHERS, WE'LL HAVE TO TRACK THAT. AND I THINK I'LL PROBABLY MAKE SURE THAT WE GIVE THAT INFORMATION BACK WHEN WE COME BACK TO YOU GUYS BECAUSE NOW IT'S TWO OF YOU THAT TALKED ABOUT IT SO WE HAVE A BIG STAR NEXT TO IT. >> WHYTE: THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR WORK. >> HAVRDA: THANK YOU, MIKE. I HAVE A COUPLE MORE QUICK QUESTIONS. THE AFFIDAVITS FOR BITES OR EVEN -- LET ME JUST ASK IT. THE AFFIDAVITS FOR BITES, DOES IT SPECIFY IF IT'S FOR HUMANS OR IF IT'S LIKE A DOG ATTACKING ANOTHER PERSON'S DOG? >> YES, THEY GIVE US ALL THAT INFORMATION. SO IT'S ACTUALLY -- IT'S AN AFFIDAVIT FOR A DANGEROUS ARREST AGGRESSIVE BECAUSE AGGRESSIVE IS A TERM WE USE. AGGRESSIVE IS IF WE USE IF IT'S A DOG BITING ANOTHER DOG OR ANOTHER ANIMAL. THAT WILL TYPICALLY FALL IN THE AGGRESSIVE. WE STILL TRACK THOSE. THERE IS REQUIREMENTS FOR THAT. THERE IS INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS, THERE'S INSPECTIONS THAT WE DO ON THOSE. BUT THAT DETAILED INFORMATION IS A PART OF THE FORM THAT THEY FILL OUT, AND THE EVIDENCE THAT WE TAKE IN. >> HAVRDA: OKAY. SO IT WILL BE DANGER TO YOUR ANIMAL. BECAUSE SOMETIMES WE OUT HERE, YOU KNOW, A BROKEN FENCE OR M THE DOG GETS OUT, AND ATTACKS YOUR DOG OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. SO THAT'S INCLUDED. >> YEAH. WE NEED PEOPLE TO BE SAFE WALKING DOWN THE STREET NOT ONLY THEMSELVES AND THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS, BUT THEY'RE OWN PETS SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING. >> HAVRDA: AND LASTLY, YOU SAID IT'S A CLASS C. HAVE WE CONSIDERED FILING BY CASES IN DISTRICT COURT? >> WELL, WE DO TO SOME EXTENT NOW. SOME OF THE SEVERE CASES THAT I MENTIONED, THEY DO GET I HIGHER COURTS WITH HIGHER PENALTIES, SO SOME OF THAT IS ALREADY IN STATE LAW BASED ON THE SEVERITY. WE HAVE A COUPLE OF RECENT ONES THAT WE KNOW WILL END UP IN THE HIGHER COURT CASES CASES. SO WE DO HAVE SOME OF THAT. SEND A BREAKDOWN OF WHAT THOSE ARE. >> HAVRDA: I AM CURIOUS THE LEVEL OF SEVERITY THAT WOULD TAKE IT TO A HIGHER LEVEL OF OFFENSE. >> SOME OF THE SBI, SEVERE BODILY INJURY, THOSE ARE MORE OF THE ONES THAT WILL END UP IN THE HIGHER COURTS OR MISDEMEANOR CASES OR FELONY CASES. SO SIGNIFICANT TEARING OF THE FLESH OR SIGNIFICANT INJURIES. >> HAVRDA: ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER -- ANOTHER ROUND? ANYBODY, ANYBODY? ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND ON THE FLOOR. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ALL RIGHT. MOTION CARRIES. THANKS, MIKE. >> HAVRDA: WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM 5. >> MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE, ITEM NUMBER 5 IS OVERVIEW OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT'S STATISTICS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024 AND ALSO AN OVERVIEW OF THE RESPONSES THAT ARE MADE BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, INCLUDING THE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT THAT IS UTILIZED DEPENDING ON INCIDENT. SO WITH THAT OUR INTERIM FIRE CHIEF CHRIS MONESTIER, IS GOING TO WALK US THROUGH THE PRESENTATION. CHRIS. >> MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, GOOD MORNING AND WELCOME TO THE SAN ANTONIO FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE TRAINING ACADEMY. BEFORE WE GET STARTED, I KNOW THAT CHIEF HINOJOSA, PROBABLY JUST STEPPED OUT, HE'S GOING TO GIVE EVERYONE A TOUR. WE'RE GOING TO GO OVER SOME -- LOOK AT SOME APPARATUS AND MAYBE HAVE A FEW FUN ACTIVITIES OUT THERE FOR EVERYBODY. BUT THE WORK THAT WE DO OUT HERE IS SERIOUS BUSINESS AND WE'RE TRAINING IT FOR A VERY DANGEROUS PROFESSION. SO I WOULD LIKE TO TALK JUST VERY BRIEFLY BEFORE WE GO INTO THE PRESENTATION, FIVE YEARS AGO TODAY, OCTOBER 15TH, 2019, WE SUFFERED A TRAGIC LINE OF DUTY DEATH OF FIREFIGHTER GREG GARZA. SO GREAT FIREFIGHTER, GREAT FRIEND. IT'S HARD TO BELIEVE IT'S BEEN FIVE YEARS. BUT IF I COULD, IF WE COULD ALL OBSERVE A MOMENT OF SILENCE IN HONOR OF GREG GARZA, THE SACRIFICE THAT HE MADE. A MOMENT OF SILENCE FOR HIS FAMILY AND THE SAFD FAMILY AS WELL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, EVERYBODY. AS MARIA MENTIONED, WE'RE GOING TO GO OVER OUR FINAL STATS FOR 2024. HERE WE GO. SO OUR OVERALL INCIDENTS, WE ROSE A LITTLE BIT, 1.6%, AND OUR RESPONSES WERE DOWN 3.6%. AND JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, WE'RE GOING TO GO OVER REAL QUICK THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN INCIDENT AND A RESPONSE. SO AN INCIDENT IS ANY CALL FOR SERVICE. YOU COULD HAVE MULTIPLE UNIT RESPONSES, SO IF YOU HAVE A [01:00:05] STRUCTURE FIRE YOU MIGHT HAVE FOUR, FIVE, SIX TO 20 DEPENDING ON THE ALARM OF HOW MANY UNIT RESPONSES. AND SO THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A UNIT RESPONSE AND AN INCIDENT. SO YOU COULD SEE OUR UNIT RESPONSES WERE ACTUALLY DOWN A LITTLE BIT. WE'LL GO OVER THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE WHEN WE -- IN FUTURE SLIDES, BUT INCIDENTS DID RISE 1.6%. IN PREVIOUS PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETINGS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE SAPD -- SAPD INCIDENTS, AND THOSE DID RISE A LITTLE BIT 6.7% FOR US. RESPONSE TIME, 1 SECOND OVERALL TO 8:44 COMPARED TO LAST YEAR AND OUR 90TH PERCENTILE RESPONSE TIME WAS DOWN SEVEN SECONDS. INCIDENTS. AGAIN, THESE ARE ANY CALL FOR SERVICE, NOT UNIT RESPONSES. MEDICAL INCIDENTS WERE UP 16%. AND NONMEDICAL INCIDENTS WERE UP 34%. SO THAT IS SINCE 2020 YOU CAN SEE THAT SLOPE THERE, SO THIS IS OUR WORKLOAD IS CONSTANTLY INCREASING AND IT'S A GENERAL INCREASE THERE FOR OUR TOTAL INCIDENTS. THE NEXT SLIDE IS OUR UNIT RESPONSES. AND SO AGAIN, YOU COULD HAVE MULTIPLE UNIT RESPONSES PER INCIDENT. OUR FIRE UNIT RESPONSES, SINCE 2020 WERE UP 11% AND OUR NONMEDICAL INCIDENTS. SO THAT'S FIRES, FIRE ALARM CALLS, THOSE WERE UP THREE PERCENT. AS YOU CAN SEE, OUR MEDICAL UNIT RESPONSES HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN ON THE DECLINE. SO THE REASON THAT THAT IS IS BECAUSE WE'VE BECOME MORE EFFICIENT WITH THE TYPE OF UNITS THAT WE'RE SENDING ON CALLS. SO LIKE AN EXAMPLE WOULD BE A MOTOR VEHICLE COLLISION. SO BEFORE WE WOULD AUTOMATICALLY SEND A MEDIC UNIT, AN AMBULANCE FOR THOSE TYPE OF CALLS, AND WE CHANGED OUR RESPONSE PLAN TO WHERE IF THERE'S A REPORT THAT THERE ARE NO YOURS INJURIES, WE'LL STILL GO WITH THE FIRE APPARATUS TO INVESTIGATE, BUT WE DON'T NECESSARILY SEND A MEDIC UNIT RIGHT AWAY. AND WHAT THAT DOES IS THAT FREES UP THOSE MEDIC UNITS TO HANDLE OTHER CALLS THAT ARE EMERGENT. WE HAVE OUR TOP 10 MEDICAL CALL TYPES. SO SIX PERSON IS STILL OUR NUMBER ONE FOR 2024. AND THIS COULD BE FOR ANY REASON. A PATIENT CALLS, HAS ALL DIFFERENT TYPES OF SYMPTOMS. IT'S A SICK PERSON CALL. NUMBER 2, MOTOR VEHICLE COLLISION, WE STILL MAKE PLENTY OF THOSE IN SAN ANTONIO. AND AS YOU CAN SEE, FALLS, BREATHING PROBLEMS, ALL THE WAY DOWN TO ABDOMINAL PAIN. THAT WRAPS UP THE TOP 10. A WORKING STRUCTURE FIRES, THESE HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN ON THE DECLINE SINCE 2022. WE HAD A SPIKE IN 2022, WENT UP FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR, BUT IT'S BEEN ON A STEADY DECLINE THERE SINCE THEN. THIS SLIDE SHOWS OUR WORKING STRUCTURE FIRES BY COUNCIL DISTRICT. YOU CAN SEE SOME HAD A DECREASE, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON THE YEAR, THAT SHOWS THREE YEARS' WORTH. SOME INCREASES. AND THIS IS FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS. VACANT STRUCTURES, MORE OLDER TYPE OF STRUCTURES, OLDER RESIDENTIAL HOMES IN CERTAIN COUNCIL DISTRICTS. AND THAT SHOWS -- LIKE I SAY, THAT SHOWS ALL 10 DISTRICTS. WE'RE GOING TO GO IN A LITTLE BIT ABOUT OUR APPARATUS. THAT'S A PRETTY GOOD PICTURE THERE AND SHOWS PRETTY MUCH THE ENTIRE FLEET, EVERY DIFFERENT TYPE OF APPARATUS WE HAVE, FROM OUR MEDIC OFFICER AND MOBILE INTEGRATED HEALTH CARE ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE SQUADS, WHICH WE WERE LUCKY ENOUGH TO HAVE THAT FOR COUNCIL TO APPROVE IN THE BUDGET TO INCREASE OUR SQUAD FLEET. YOU CAN SEE THERE IN THE MIDDLE THE BUS, AERIAL UNITS, ENGINES, THE FULL COMPLEMENT THERE. WE HAVE A FEW OF THEM OUTSIDE THAT YOU WILL GET TO ACTUALLY TOUR AND TAKE A RIDE ON. AND DRIVE IF YOU'D LIKE, SURE. [LAUGHTER]. WE'LL JUST CHECK LICENSES BEFORE. [LAUGHTER]. OUR MAJOR HEAVY APPARATUS, WE HAVE OUR ENGINES. WE HAVE 54 FIRE STATIONS, SO 54 FRONTLINE. LADDER TRUCKS AND PLATFORM TRUCKS. SO YOU'LL HEAR ENGINES AND TRUCKS ORIGINS AND LADDERS. SO OUR PLATFORM TRUCKS ON THE FAR RIGHT THERE YOU SEE HAS A BUCKET ON THE END. YOU'LL GET TO TAKE A RIDE IN THAT. AND OUR LADDER TRUCKS DON'T HAVE THE BUCKETS, IT'S JUST A STRAIGHT LADDER, BUT IT ALSO HAS A NOZZLE ON THE END SO YOU CAN USE AN ELEVATED MASTER FIRE STREAM FOR [01:05:03] THOSE. WE HAVE 11 LADDERS, 11 PLATFORMS IN THE FRONTLINE. MEDIC UNITS, 36 FULL TIME, UP TO EIGHT PEAKS AT ANY GIVEN TIME AND THEN OUR THREE JOINT BASE SAN ANTONIO THAT ARE MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, THREE OF THOSE. OUR H UNITS, OUR MED CAT AND THAT'S OUR RESPONSE UNIT FOR SERIOUS TYPE OF INCIDENTS THAT MIGHT INVOLVE SOMEBODY USING FIRE AS A WEAPON, WE'RE ABLE TO GET CLOSE, WE WILL DEPLOY A LINE OFF OF THAT UNIT. AND THE AMBUS THAT'S BEEN ON DEPLOYMENT SEVERAL TIMES FOR DEPLOYMENT IN NORTH CAROLINA, FLORIDA AND ALL PARTS OF TEXAS. IT'S A REGIONAL ASSET THAT SOMETIMES GETS CALLED TO DEPLOY. OUR INCIDENT COMMAND CONGRUENT, HAZMAT VEHICLES, HEAVY RESCUE, TWO RESCUE FIRE STATIONS HERE IN SAN ANTONIO, RESCUE IS GOING TO BE OUT LATER ON FOR SOME RAPPELING. YOU'LL GET TO SEE FIRE STATION 51 AND OUR ARF UNITS OUT THERE AT THE AIRPORT. THE ENHANCED SQUAD PROGRAM, AGAIN THIS WAS HIGHLIGHTED AND APPROVED IN THE 2025 BUDGET FOR THOSE ADDITIONAL STATIONS. FAIR STATION FOUR, FIRE STATION 19. AND SQUAD 44 WILL ACTUALLY BE OUT HERE, YOU CAN GET TO SEE THAT UNIT. AND THOSE WILL COME ONLINE JULY 1ST SO WE'RE REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THOSE. THOSE HAVE A GREAT BENEFIT TO PROVIDING SERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY. THIS CHART SHOWS THE IMPACT OF WHAT A SQUAD CAN DO TO A SINGLE COMPANY STATION. I SAY SINGLE COMPANY BECAUSE FIRE STATION 24 JUST HAD AN ENGINE AND AMBULANCE THERE, DIDN'T HAVE AN ENGINE AND A LADDER TRUCK. AND MOST OF OUR DOUBLE COMPANIES THAT HAVE ENGINE AND LADDER TRUCK WILL HAVE A SQUAD THERE, BUT WHAT WE'VE DONE EFFICIENCYWISE IS TO ADD THOSE SQUAD UNITS TO FIRE STATIONS THAT DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE A LADDER TRUCK, SO WE'VE ADDED THE APPARATUS, THE SQUAD UNIT ITSELF, AND THE PERSON FELL COMPLEMENT TO THEY'RE ABLE TO RESPOND TO CALLS. AND YOU CAN SEE HOW BUSY FIRE STATION 24 WAS. THAT'S IN THE RED THERE. AND THEN ONCE THE SQUAD CAME ONLINE, THAT SQUAD BECAME ONE OF THE BUSIEST IN THE CITY. AND SO THE ENGINE MADE A LOT LESS -- A LOT LESS DEMAND FOR SERVICE, I GUESS. THE AREA STILL HAS A HUGE DEMAND FOR ALL TYPE OF CALLS, INCLUDING MEDICAL, BUT WHAT THAT DID WAS IT FREES UP EITHER ONE OF THOSE UNITS IF THEY'RE IN THE HOUSE, IF THERE'S A CALL IN AN ADJACENT RESPONSE DISTRICT, THEY'RE ABLE TO MAKE THAT CALL. OR IF NECESSARY, MAKE THAT RESPONSE WITHIN FIRE STATION 24'S RESPONSE DISTRICT AS WELL. OUR STANDARDS OF COVER. AND SO THIS KIND OF SHOWS HOW MANY APPARATUS, WHAT TYPE OF APPARATUS WE SEND ON CERTAIN TYPES OF CALLS. THESE ARE FIRES HERE, HOUSE FIRE. YOU CAN SEE THREE ENGINES, ONE LADDER TRUCK, THE INCIDENT COMMANDER. IT'S USUALLY 15, 18 FIRE PERSONNEL. FOR COMMERCIAL FIRE WE BEEF THAT UP BECAUSE THERE'S MORE TO DO, USUALLY A LARGER STRUCTURE. FOUR ENGINES, LADDER TRUCKS, TWO CREW CHIEFS AND UP TO 28. AND HI-RISE FIRE, A SINGLE ALARM, SO OF COURSE THESE CAN GET BIG IF WE HAVE TO INCREASE THE COMPLEMENT TO THOSE TYPE OF CALLS. BUT INITIALLY YOU COULD SEE THAT FIVE ENGINES, THREE LADDER TRUCKS, ALL THE WAY DOWN TO ADDING AN EMS UNIT AND EMS SUPERVISOR TO BE THERE JUST IN CASE, THE SAFETY OFFICER AND IT COULD HAVE ON THAT INITIAL CALL UP TO 44 PERSONNEL OR EVEN MORE. AND THEN THAT'S KIND OF THE PLACEMENT YOU CAN SEE, KEY PUMPERRER IS SOMEBODY AT THE HYDRANT PUMPING THE WATER TO THE APPARATUS THERE THAT ARE FIGHTING THAT FIRE. COMMAND VEHICLES KIND OF IN THE BACKGROUND TRYING TO GET A GOOD VANTAGE POINT SO THEY CAN SEE WHAT'S GOING ON SO THEY CAN COMMAND THAT INCIDENT. ENGINES PLACE SO THEY CAN STRETCH THE HOSE LINE TO PUT OUT THAT FIRE AND THEN OTHER UNITS IN A LEVEL ONE TYPE STAGING AND THOSE CREWS ARE BASICALLY READY TO GO IN CASE THE INCIDENT COMMANDER CALLS THEM IN TO ASSIST WITH THAT STRUCTURE FIRE. FOR MEDICAL CALLS, SO A CARDIAC ARREST, ONE ENGINE OR LADDER AND TWO MEDIC UNITS, THAT COULD HAVE UP TO EIGHT PERSONNEL. FOR CARDIAC ARREST, THERE'S A LOT TO DO, WORKING ON THAT PATIENT, WITH THE MONITORS AND RESUSCITATION EFFORTS, MEDICATIONS, AND THEN LOADING THE PATIENT. SO THAT'S A VERY INTENSIVE, LABOR INTENSIVE TYPE OF INCIDENT FOR US, MEDICAL [01:10:04] TYPE OF INCIDENT. AND THEN A CAR ACCIDENT, DEPENDING LIKE I MENTIONED BEFORE, ENGINE, COUPLE OF LADDER TRUCKS, POTENTIALLY THE RESCUE TEAM, AN EMS UNIT IF THERE'S REPORTS THAT THERE'S INJURIES AND WE COULD HAVE UP TO 20 PERSONNEL AT A CAR ACCIDENT THAT HAS A RESCUE TYPE SITUATION. THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO GO OUT. I KNOW THERE'S A LOT TO GO LOOK AT AND FUN STUFF TO DO, BUT IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M HERE TO ANSWER. >> HAVRDA: THANK YOU, CHIEF. I CAN'T WAIT TO GO OUT THERE SO I'M JUST GOING TO ASK A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION FIRST OF ALL AND THANK YOU FOR MENTIONING FIREFIGHTER GARZA. I RECALL GOING TO HIS SERVICES AND HOW SOLEMN THAT OCCASION WAS. AND A REMINDER ABOUT THE IMPORTANT WORK THAT YOU DO AND HOW DANGEROUS IT IS. SO OF COURSE WE THANK YOU.,. >> HAVRDA: SO I REALLY WANTED TO LEARN ABOUT THE EQUIPMENT BECAUSE WE GET A LOT OF QUESTIONS -- I GET A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT CONSTITUENTS ABOUT WHAT TRUCK DOES WHAT AND WHERE THEY'RE SITUATED THROUGHOUT THE CITY. AND RESPONSE TIMES AND ALL OF THAT. I THINK THIS IS VERY, VERY INFORMATIVE. I FEEL LIKE I NEED TO STUDY ON IT A LITTLE BIT MORE. WE DO GET A LOT OF QUESTIONS. THERE'S A LOT OF INTEREST IN THE WORK THAT YOU GUYS DO. YOU'RE VERY MUCH SEEN AS THE GOOD GUYS AND GIRLS OUT THERE, RIGHT? SO I THINK THERE'S JUST A LOT OF EXCITEMENT ABOUT WHAT YOU DO, FROM CHILDREN ALL THE WAY TO OUR ELDER SENIORS, THERE'S A LOT OF QUESTIONS. SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THE CLARIFICATION. ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE? NO. OKAY. LET'S GO -- LET ME DRIVE A FIRE TRUCK, RIGHT? THANK YOU SO MUCH, CHIEF. >> YOU'RE WELCOME. >> HAVRDA: OKAY. ANY OTHER -- YES, GO AHEAD. >> WHYTE: IF I COULD JUST HAVE A MOMENT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE HERE, IF I CAN, IF YOU'LL ALLOW ME. >> HAVRDA: OKAY. >> WHYTE: THIS IS OUR FIRST PUBLIC SAFETY MEETING SINCE THE ARREST OF THE FOUR GANG MEMBERS WITH TRENDE ARAWUA, SO I WANTED TO EXPRESS MY GRATITUDE TO THE TEXAS ANTIGANG UNIT, THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, THE FBI, U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION. >> HAVRDA: I'M SORRY. IT'S NOT POSTED. >> WHYTE: THIS ACTUALLY RELATES TO ITEM TWO ON THE CONSENT AGENDA WHERE WE JUST RECEIVED A $600,000 AWARD FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, SPECIFICALLY FOR HUMAN TRAFFICKING. AND SO THIS -- THIS GANG FROM VENEZUELA WAS HEAVILY INVOLVED IN HUMAN COUNCILMAN. >> YES, COUNCILMAN, I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GREAT TIME FOR US TO BE ABLE TO DISCUSS IT AT A SESSION. IT WILL FOLLOW TOWARDS A SESSION FOR APPROVAL AND THAT WAY IT'S MORE APPROPRIATELY DISCUSSED AT THAT POINT. IT WAS ON CONCEPT, AND AS A RESULT, HAS ALREADY BEEN VOTED ON, SO WE CAN. >> WHYTE: SURE. I JUST, AGAIN, WANTED TO EXPRESS MY GRATITUDE TO OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES INVOLVED. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SIR. >> HAVRDA: OKAY. MEETING'S * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.