My congratulations to the new animal control officer !
Wow ! The old animal control officer retired some time ago, and to date we have seen not one feral cat, or water buffalo, or vicious elephant roaming the streets of Crestwood attempting to wreak havoc with the citizenry !
Oh wait, The new animal control officer has not yet started and yet were not being inundated with any feline or canine, or fowl problems, How can that be ? Were we not told that without the animal control officer we were one step away from appearing on wild kingdom ? Was it not the case that our Police Department would be shooting the animals as someone said Webster and Kirkwood did ?
Is it possible that we really do not need to spend the money we so sorely need elsewhere for a service that doesn't seem to matter (other than to special interest groups ?) Let's examine the facts here, your Vet. gives you the rabies tags, St. Louis County send you notification of the need for the vaccination, and they have an entire division devoted to animal control. No matter what the special interests say this is a duplication we can ill afford !
I believe it's time we revisited this position and if we have in fact hired someone to fill it look at other possible uses for that employee and save the vehicle insurance, gasoline costs, and costly maintenance.
Now what to do with that little house in White Cliff park that is not anywhere near meeting the BOCA 2010 code known as the animal shelter ? Again I would look to St. Louis County to take it over as a south county shelter and possibly man it with the volunteers we have in Crestwood.
Time to think about cutting spending and improving Crestwood's bottom line folks while we still have the chance. Unless you missed it there is a financial train wreck coming, and we must be ready to survive which translated to leaner and meaner.
Tom Ford
NO. 876
posted by Crestwood Independent at 16:17
51 Comments:
the shelter, I believe, is only a very small portion of that house. public works uses the rest. are they worthless too?
11:08 AM Blogger: The place I am speaking of is a two room shack with some chain link fence around it and three kennels inside.
No, public works is not useless by a long shot, we NEED them, we DO NOT NEED our own animal control, period !
Tom Ford
the place you are speaking of the is old house just down from the community center, correct?
12:16 PM Blogger: Yes the OLD house, why would I suggest giving County any of the new facility ?
Tom Ford
my, snippy, aren't we? and it is a house, not a "two room shack". I have been there and there are way more than 2 rooms.
and new facility are you talking about?
5;14 PM Blogger: No it's a shack that is so far out of CODE that it would cost up-wards of $75,000.00 to bring it up to the 2010 BOCA code.
That place has NO ventilation for the people or the animals, the wiring is a joke, and I believe it's more of a hazard to the animals trapped in the cages than if the were loose.
The "new facility" you got the free roof for, remember ?
Tom Ford
was unaware of that very high price. Please post paperwork of the bid that shows tha amount. Or tell where it can be seen.
That information is available as part of memo received from the former Director of Public Works.
If you are interested file a FOIA form requesting the information and I am sure you the city will provide it.
6:46 PM Blogger: If you wold like to see it, stop by the City Clerks office fill out a F.O.I.A. form, and you will have your answer within 72 hours.
I have seen it and I believe you will find that the actual cost as expressed by the Public Works Director was north of $125,000.00 when all was said and done !
Tom Ford
In another post, you were completely shut down by people's replies calling you out on your lies and misinformation regarding this subject, so you start another post where we have to do it all over again? Mr. Ford, you tire me. Just because *YOU* did not have any animal control issues during the whole TWO WEEKS that we did not have an animal control office, does not mean that there weren't any issues. However, if you care to volunteer your services with animal control you can help answer the ringing phone of other citizen's animal issues and see for yourself. But I know, you much prefer to rant here with no basis of information than to actually educate yourself before speaking. It's amusing that you claim to know of everything that has happened in every corner of Crestwood at all times, yet you don't seem to know that there is a new animal control officer hired, and working right now in your little city. I sincerely hope that you never need the services of animal control, county or private, considering that even throughout this debate you can't seem to be bothered to pick up the telephone and call either entity to check your facts, much less report an animal issue. You sir are nothing but a grumpy old man who's too lazy to spread correct information, or offer any useful service to your readers. If you wish to quote a bid that is listed in public record then it is YOUR responsibility to file the FOIA request and quote it correctly, not ours. Be a journalist, and do it properly, or shut up and quit making a fool of yourself.
3:23 PM Blogger: Ms. "angel" (and you sound like anything but) just because you and your group of animal adoption lovers think we should spend money for that doesn't mean we all do.
If your so Hell bent to save the planet, get YOUR check book out and do so, just leave my tax money out of it !
As far as lies and distortions are concerned, hog wash ! Were spending hard earned tax money foolishly foe a special interest group and Even you know it !
My suggestion, get used to it because I will not stop pointing out wasted money whenever I see it !
Tom Ford
Tom you don't care about saving the "taxpayers" money; you use your blog to make yourself feel like a big man!!!! You need a shrink Tom. Gee I wonder who will be next on your list of people. My guess is that Jim Eikridge is coming soon. I agree with the previous blogger - let the new mayor do his job and keep your horn mouth and big shot nose out of it.
5:21 PM Blogger: I care about a lot of things, and it's my Blog !
May I suggest you save whats left of your sanity and demeanor and don't read it !
You can't do that can you, no you can't because you like to tell the group you run with how tough you were on me, right ?
Only one problem, it doesn't work, and your the one getting upset, not me. In fact I believe it's better to give than to receive, so I am going to give the heart attacks, not get them.
Whose next, stay tuned "hero" you may well be surprised, it could be YOU !
Tom Ford
actually, the fact of the matter is, what you decide is "waste" is not necessarily what others term as waste. You don't get to be the determining voice in a city-run public service that is there to serve every citizen of Crestwood. And, as Angel pointed out, just because you haven't used it, doesn't mean no one else has. Again, do your homework before you make sweeping proclamations.
6:00 Tom you just threatened me! How diplomatic for a man who only has the taxpayers best interest at heart. Bull!
So I guess I should be looking over my shoulder. Sounds like a threat to me. Don't you have enough personal business of your own to take care of. Yet you just keep running at the mouth about the city like you really care.
Sure, that's why I see you at all the meetings.
I guess it is OK for you to say anything you want, since it's your blog. But the rest of us better dance to your music or else right?
What gets me is that the title of this post is all about congratulations to the new animal control officer when your words say just the opposite. Why is that? Tongue in Cheek?
Personally, if the new mayor decides to get rid of this position, that is his choice. But it offends me once again to know that the person hired hasn't even started the new job yet, and you are ready to show this new applicant how much you hate what he has been hired to do. Must make the guy or gal feel real welcomed.
Don't you understand that a person -- yes a real person wanted a job and applied for this one? Then you "congratulate him or her" by your own words. First you set the trap by being nice and say "CONGRATULATION", then when you got them where you want them, the trap door goes down. You are so hell bent on saying such negative things, you don't realize how this could makes an new employee feel; what's more you don't give a tinker's dam about the individual.
People right now are out of jobs. If this new employee reads or hears about your blog, I am sure he or she feels real good about the things you have written. And again, we are not allowed by your standard to refute your words or call you down on what you say. If anyone says anything, you remind them that they don't have to read your blog. Rather than get somebody else's view, you "dismiss them". The coward that you really are.
You just got done with the old mayor so now you embark on a new project. Bringing a new employee down with his job's agenda. And just like always, you claim it's because you care about the taxpayer's money.
Further, don't threaten me or anyone Tom on your wonderful blog, a threat is a threat. And remember Freedom of Speech.
Take care of your own business, and let the new mayor take care of the city. We can only give homage to one mayor at a time. And you are definitely not the mayor, or a general, or in the war in Iraq or Afganistan or in Lybia; nor are you an aristocrat by any means. You are just a man who needs to condemn people and things to make himself look good.
Mr. Ford will most certainly remove his last post, because he doesn't allow foul language or threats on here.
What is this - attack Tom Ford night?
It's HIS blog people. We are guests here...guests. He pays the bill for us to post. You don't like it, don't read it and don't post. Simple as that.
You can easily start your own blog if you wish.
6:56 PM Blogger: If you call that a threat you had best look up the meaning of the word. That was no where near a threat. If I were to threaten you, believe me you will know it !
Tom Ford
I agree with 6:41. Plus don't congratulate a new employee as your blog states when you only intend to demean the job (for whatever reasons) that the employee is hired to do. This person is walking into a quagmire of people who will dislike her just because she needed a job. She will hear about all the animosity surrounding the position and it isn't fair.
Reference 6:00 PM by Tom... No Tom, it was an indirect threat "saying you are the one who will give out heart attacks and the next one could be to me. Well that ain't going to happen. I would never allow myself to give your forum or any forum the satisfaction. Opinions are just that and nothing more - your's, mine or anybody's. And if only sactioning your words is a prerequisite for your blog, you should say so.
This blog of your's was I thought suppose to be used as a forum for all opinions. However, you are so hell bent on making your's the only ones that matters, you will be the one who will give yourself a heart attack trying to dodge and juggle the opinions of all bloggers.
12;26 PM Blogger: Well there now, you have been given the band width to state your case, and you did, right ?
I believe you have the right to your opinion just as I do, the difference is I don't go to name calling when I run out of facts, your side seems to do just that.
At any rate, happy Blogging friend.
Tom Ford
12:12 PM Blogger: The "new dog catcher" has yet to start so I am told. Can you say satire ?
Tom Ford
she started a while ago, mr informed.
4:30 PM Blogger: Not what I was told by City Hall when I wrote this thread. Ms. ?
Tom Ford
Geez who cares if the "dog catcher" started yesterday, the day before or is still going to start; she is still a new employee. Stop splitting hairs over when she starts, or did not start - she is still fairly new - I am sure she hasn't even had her 6 month evaluation yet. I am sure she is just tickled if and when she hears how many of Tom's Troop and others are ready to see her go to save the "taxpayers money". Yeah that and 50 cents is going to get us out of our money problems.
I believe in our mayor so let him handle it! And don't assume that everybody that wants an animal control officer is not concerned about spending taxpayers money or are animal lovers. And don't assume that those who support keeping an animal control officer is a "Roy" person. Cause I know how you guys think. Tom loves to label everyone either a Roy supporter or supporter of the new mayor. Or if you supported Roy, you are a liberal and if you supported the new mayor, you are a conservative. Will someone please build him a soap box?
"I sincerely hope that you never need the services of animal control,"
Now, that second quote sounds like a threat! For a person (or group) that posts so often, and so much on this blog for free is a strange comment. You are stating that you are going to deny animal control services to Tom.
This service is supported by TAXES from all Crestwood residents.
It is OUTRAGEOUS to deny service to a citizen because YOU say so!
Hopefully, the City will investigate this!
Please disregard the word "second" from my last post.
4:41 AM Blogger: Fear not John, I will call a pest control service and PAY FOR IT MYSELF if needed.
Failing that, I can always fall back on the 7mm WSM.
Tom Ford
yes, because shooting an animal is SO preferable to having it humanely removed. Good Lord.
8:15 PM Blogger: Indeed it is under certain circumstances such a s rabid animals, animals attacking children, or animals that willfully attack humans !
I have no intention of letting any of the above happen to any member of my family, so if I ever see one can I call you to take the brunt of attack ?
"Good Lord !"
Tom Ford
well, luckily you will never have to worry about it since there is never,ever a need for animal control services in your yard. Only your yard, but the protective shield around your property must be something to behold!
10:12 PM Blogger: I have NEVER asked for, never used, and will never support a program that is a duplicate of services now provided here or anywhere else.
You might want to do what I do and calla private firm to control pests,and not rely on the Government for help.
By the way "animal adoption club member" My yard has been granted the status of WILDLIFE HABITAT. # 18437 (look it up) by the National Audubon Society. There are stringent requirements such as feeding and shelter that must be made (and proven) before the certificate is awarded.
I don't want or need a so called shield as the 40 plus years I have lived here I have always welcomed wildlife into my yard, and will continue to do so.
Please tell ALL of us that you are least on a par with that, you are aren't you ?
Tom Ford
I am and always will be for animal control in Crestwood. However, those who agree or disagree will have to wait to hear what the new mayor states his policy is.
I guess I really want it to stay for my own selfish reasons. I keep my dog under constant surveilance and he has his dog tags; but if he ever got out and I could not find him, I would go crazy waiting for the County to come to Crestwood. My dog is one of the family and he means a lot to us. Without him, there would be a big hole to fill.
By the time the County got to Crestwood, my dog would be long gone.
The response time for our animal control person is much faster and that is what I would want if my dog went missing.
I understand what you are saying Tom about duplication of efforts; but I disagree. I am all for having our own people do this job.
But I could be in the minority on this one. Anyhow, I will let it up to our new mayor.
5;19 PM Blogger: I understand how you feel about our own people on the job and I agree, however....
There are 168 hours in the week, "our" officer works 40 of those hours leaving the other 128 hours to the County officers.
We can't afford to place four officers in that department which would be the minimun needed for a 24 / 7 service minus any vacations or sick time.
We now have "trained" volunteers that portend to be qualified to handle any and all animal calls having been trained by the former officer, right ?
Now my plan is simple, the volunteers should step up and do what they say they are trained to do, patrol Crestwood and respond to any and all animal calls as needed. This allows us to cut the budget until we can once again afford to pay an animal control officer.
All that said, I agree with you that this budgetary item should be handled by Mayor Schlink and the new ways and means committee, minus emotion and special interest groups.
Tom Ford
Plus if our volunteers do get bit, the city would not be responsible for their doctor bills, etc.
Well, I can see volunteers wanting to assist with many domestic animals issues; but speaking for myself, some of the more dangerous issues; i.e. - snakes, raccoons and possums, to name a few (especially in our park areas) that would have to be done by someone with expertise. Unless some volunteers have a background with these kinds of animals, I really don't think that many of us animal lovers would be willing to go that far.
6:28 PM Blogger: I live on a Crestwood Park and have for over 40 years.
I have had 2 possums, and at least one raccoon in the house over that time frame, and I ushered all of them out the door without calling anyone.
The animals I have seen here in Crestwood have all been more frightened of humans than we are of them and just needed a clear path out of the house minus "helping hands !"
To date no snakes or bat's have invaded, but Lord willing there is still time for them to "arrive."
Common sense, and a willingness to understand the animals plight is about all you will ever need with animals (minus the occasional rabid whatever.) In that case nothing beats a Smith & Wesson, trust me.
I think "our" people can do it, the question is will they ?
Tom Ford
if you were to find an injured animal, not sick, just say, a broken leg that could be set and then the animal re-released, would your gun be your answer, or would you allow yourself to call the trained animal control officer to come and remove the animal for medical treatment?
9:41 PM, May 02, 2011 poster:
You are obviously trying to bait someone into an argument so you can push your personal agenda. I am not going to do that. But I will comment on some of your points.
"....or would you allow yourself to call the trained animal control officer to come and remove the animal for medical treatment?"
Please tell me that our tax money has/is NOT being spent for medical treatment of wild animals! It sure sounds like it!
"if you were to find an injured animal,"
If a wild animal, I would leave it alone.
If an obvious pet, I would contain it, give any care possible, try to contact the owner using the TAGS, all pet owners in Crestwood, and the County are required to have tags on their pets, and if that fails, call County Animal Control.
"...call the trained animal control officer..."
St Louis County Animal Control.
(Paid for by our taxes)
"Crestwood Animal Control" if it exists at all, should operate at NO COST TO THE CITY, OR CITY TAXPAYERS!
If a group chooses to operate it, with volunteers, and donations,or fund raisers, that is fine.
This is from the Missouri Department of Conservation:
"Neither Lakeside nor the Conservation Department encourages people to attempt to save injured or seemingly orphaned animals they encounter. In most cases, in fact, nature should be left to take its course, however cruel it might seem.
The Conservation Department encourages people to leave wild animals in the wild. This is especially true with young animals that may appear to have been abandoned."
I just find it unimaginable that, if finding an animal, someone's pet if you will, and if there were no tags to tell you whose pet that is, that you would call county and have the animal shipped up to North County. This would be just to spite the Crestwood animal control officer and for no other reason. The records here are required, but many do not follow the rules, so there may not be any tags on the pet. This is about the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard of. The Crestwood position has been around for 30 years or more...
that you would deliberately ship someone's family pet that far away just to make some sort of statement to the city, or to the officer, or whoever you think would receive your blistering message of rebuke, is mean spirited and hateful, pure and simple. When that pet could simply go to Whitecliff park and wait for its owners to be found, and you would put someone's pet through being shipped that far away to further your own agenda...that in inexcusable.
I agree with you but unfortunately there are many people who hate animals, domestic and wild Period! There are people in Crestwood that set traps for wild rabbits, squirrls, etc. because they eat their flowers.
I have no idea what they do with them after they are caught and I don't want to know. But it happens because I see it when I walk the neighborhood.
I also know that years ago before I had a dog, we talked about dogs running loose to our neighbors. They told me if a dog ever came in their yard, it would have a "rake" in it's back. She and her family hate dogs and that was that. So, you see, there are people who just do not like animals.
My wish and hope is if we don't have animal control in our city any more, stray domestic animals do not become a problem because waiting for the County to get here, means that people will not wait and do something drastic on their own just to get rid of them.
When we lived in a rural community, there was a stray dog who was always in our neighborhood. She wasn't mean but nobody really owned her. She was cute and did no harm but was found dead after being around the neighborhood orphan for 2 or 3 years. Well, someone shot her! She would sleep underneath the house down the street and people fed her all the time.If she saw you sitting in your front yard, she would come and sit next to you. But she was not trained - she was a stray! Not being a full-time resident, I didn't feel I could keep her but she was very cute and sweet.
It made me sick but that's what they do in rural areas without blinking an eye. They have no animal control and these farmers have enough problems with their own livestock and cultivating land for growing corn and soybeans, etc.
I hope to God it doesn't come to be a problem in Crestwood because I dearly love animals especially domestic animals.
there are many animal haters in the world, yes. The people here who hate animal control claim to like animals just fine, they just refuse to entertain the idea that there are others in the city who like the service and who use it. There are many who feel the services are great and for every single resident and since the city has had it for 30 years, it is certainly sustainable. They have, so far, refused to call County and compare the services they offer, because, I have to assume, they know full well the services are terrible compared to ours and then they would be...wrong. Of course, other people's are meaningless to some.
5:26 PM Blogger: I can't understand why you and others here can't understand simple economics.
Yes we have had animal control for quite some time, but during most of that time we had a major shopping center and other retail locations that helped pay for it.
Times have changed, the "plaza" is a ghost town, retailers are closing for the lack of customers (for many reasons,) and we do not have the funds to continue duplicate services, period.
You love to vilify those who see the real light by saying they "hate animal control." Pray tell, how do you hate a service ?
If you could be honest with yourself and us, you would see that your angry because your animal adoption team is threatened with a shut down because we need the funds elsewhere.
I have said all along that if you want animal control to continue it's simple, just get your volunteers to man the shelter, and answer the calls, and your good to go !
You say that we don't want to know about County services and that's a blatantly ridiculous remark on many levels. First WE ALL use them 128 hours a week, remember ? Second if you have to drive to Clayton to get your pet that you weren't watching properly why is it our fault ?
Please remember that your Public Works director recommended it be abandoned as did the City Administrator (one in the same now,) as did four sitting alderman. We need to start thinking along the lines of saving the City for HUMANS for a change and stop this duplicate expense as were broke, and we need the funds elsewhere !
Now let's hear from you minus the emotion and hate comments which gets you nowhere, your turn.
Tom Ford
Tom, I think we all understand the economics. But is it alright with you if I just say that I would have no problem picking up my dog from the County, ( as you so state) - IF my dog could stay alive long enough for them to pick him up in the first place. But as the scenario goes, while we wait for County, if my dog would stumble into a neighbor's yard who hates dogs, I am afraid that I would have to pray he doesn't get "shot". In my neighborhood, some who do not know me and my dog, ain't going to bother calling County, believe me.
Fortunately for me, my dog will never get out because I take care of him like he is my child. And he is always on a leach. But I am just saying Tom.....you know what I mean?
My first dog was found in my neighborhood. Nobody called anybody - this was before animal control. He walked up to my husband at around 10 PM while my husband was putting the key in the door. He pawed my husband's leg, and scared him because he couldn't see who or what it was. After discovering that it was a stray dog, he didn't know what to do. The dog was shaking and he was hungry and cold. No tags and no collar. We had no animal control people and we were in a dilemma.
We called Crestwood Police who were nice enough to pick him up and put him in their big conference room until the next morning when Parks or PW picked him up and took him to the city garage. They were going to hold him their until County came.
Fortunately for me, I was able to talk my husband in to keeping him if nobody claimed him. He was taken from the City Garage to the humane society where he was quaranteened for 24 hours, after which we could adopt him which we did.
My neighbors from two blocks and three blocks away said, "oh I saw that dog but I thought he was mean (because he had a real dark coat and was so big), so we just left him alone. I found out he had been outside for two days straight and nobody even bothered to do anything.
Conversely, had I also been afraid of dogs, what would have happened to him? I would in no way contain him until the County came. A strange dog who might carry disease or might "charge" and "bite"???.
I do understand however about the economics Tom. I guess I just think about what Crestwood use to be and wish it could be that way again.
The economics are exactly what bothers me in this argument because it doesn't hold water. Let's not get overly dramatic, please. Saving the city for humans? There is a surplus again, animal control did not need to be sacrificed, and everyone still has a job. This is not a scene out of "I am Legend". You keep saying county is available 24/7 and that we are being ripped off by our services. That's simply untrue. They are only open from 8 to 5, which you know full well. And as for the staggering cost of running it, well, if there are 11,000 people in Crestwood, that goes to $4.50 per person per year. YEAR. If you're too tight fisted to part with $4.50 per year for a service everyone can use, then, well, there may be no reasoning to make you see that many really like the service and use it often, and you're not a very good neighbor to those around you. Call the animal control officer and ask her how many animals are currently being housed. I did.
All of these people from the LARGE family named Anonymous seem to cut and paste the same things over, and over.
"...$4.50 per year for a service everyone can use..."
Really?
Does that include Police salary, and overtime? And fuel, and wear, and tear on the police vehicles?
Some people on the blog want to cut down on the number of Police, and Police vehicles.
And the $100,000 plus to bring the animal control facilities up to code? Or pay any fines for not doing so?
And worst of all, the tax money we are already paying to the county?
still waiting for the $100,000 proof. Sometimes it's $70,000. Sometimes it's $75,000. Seems to vary greatly. And, as someone pointed out at some public meeting somewhere, we also pay taxes on county police, but I don't hear you yelling to shut down our force, and shouting that we don't need our own police force since we are taxed for County's police!! It's a freaking duplicat eservice, and we're paying for county's already!! The logic simply doesn't hold. This is way more than economics. this is personal preference. But fine. I am officially in the don't want to hear any more about it category. I am done with this nonsensical thread.I leave you to your foot stomping and arguing.
9:19 Great Comment. I agree with you 100%. However Tom wants the word to get out that he is Crestwood's warrior and savior. I say he is pinching pennies and wants a pat on the back from his tribe members. Maybe he will be picked by the mayor for Ward 2 alderman.
9:19 PM Blogger: Call Ms. Flowers and ask for it, or go on line to the City Web site and look it up sunshine.
Your leaving this thread ? Without further eloquence, BY !
Tom Ford
9:49 PM Blogger:
Tom doesn't need to do anything to put the word out, I can count on you to do it for me.
Alderman, no, not on your life would I take that position, and I wouldn't be asked as Jeff really Doesn't need any "lightning rods" in his administration, now or ever.
Tom Ford
"still waiting for the $100,000 proof"
As has been said on here several times, all you have to do is ask the right person for it.
"as someone pointed out at some public meeting somewhere, we also pay taxes on county police"
You will find that we pay the County taxes, and they do what they want with it.
"we don't need our own police force since we are taxed for County's police!"
Yes we do, and no we aren't.
If we CONTRACTED for County Police service, we would pay a lot for it. And I'll bet that they would not do sixteen hours a day animal control service.
"you yelling" "shouting that we don't need" "freaking duplicat eservice" "to your foot stomping and arguing."
Actually, I don't do those things. I explain things, calmly, and usually can quote sources. Perhaps you might try that method to be more effective.
Tom could never be alderman because he would have to attend aldermanic meetings and might be appointed to a special task force which means he would have to be on the same platform as others. Thus he couldn't control the situation. His blog gives him control; that's much more fun. He's a legend in his own mind. Now prey tell, how can he know so much when he never goes to meetings? Beats me.
Post a Comment
<< Home