State Senator Janet Nguyen’s SB 1459 is bad policy and must be fought.
After working for 17 years to reduce pet overpopulation and shelter overcrowding through legislation, two things are clear to me. First, good laws will force most people to do the right thing when it comes to animals. Second, bad actors, with little regard for the voiceless, will exploit every legal loophole they can.
SB 1459, which was scheduled for a committee hearing on May 16, is a prime example of poorly written legislation that can be used to harm rather than help animals. Willfully abandoning an animal in California is a misdemeanor. SB 1459 contains a provision that would amend that specific section of the Penal Code to declare that the release of “community cats” through trap, neuter, and return (TNR) programs does not constitute animal abandonment. However, the bill does not establish strict parameters for implementing TNR programs. Operators are not required to hold specific licenses. Nor do they need to coordinate with local animal control agencies or meet minimum standards of care. In essence, anyone would be able to round up and sterilize as many adoptable cats as they wanted and legally throw them out on the street as long as they called it a TNR program. SB 1459 would also provide legal coverage to individuals who relinquish their cats and claim it was part of such a program. It would be virtually impossible for a prosecutor to prove that these individuals were lying, due to the lack of specific language in the bill.
As a general rule, those of us who work on the front lines of the battle for animal protection oppose TNR programs that are not closely managed. We know they are not good for wildlife and especially “community cats,” many of which suffer greatly from untreated medical conditions, starvation, dehydration, exposure to extreme weather, predators or cruel humans.
The last thing California needs is a law that sends more of our feline friends back onto dangerous streets, condemning them to an early death.
The keys to ending pet overpopulation are spay and neuter programs for owned and shelter animals, vaccinations, licensing, microchipping, and keeping animals indoors. By creating a new legal path for people to abandon their cats, SB 1459 moves us further away from that goal. Join me in opposition by contacting Senator Nguyen at (916) 651-4036 and the Senate Appropriations Committee at (916) 651-4014.
Judie Mancuso
lagoon beach
District elections would harm HB
It’s super ironic that I agree with City Atty. Michael Gates and even more ironic that conservatives moved the “districting” issue to Huntington Beach (Lawsuit alleges Huntington Beach general election disenfranchised Latino residents, Daily Pilot, May 10). In the March 2004 primary election, Measure E, championed by conservative Scott Baugh and his Republican ilk, was defeated 63.2% to 36.8%. The fear in the community was that “districting” was a thinly disguised “divide and conquer” strategy that would allow special partisan interests to flood each district with oceans of money to support their own candidates and thus completely control the City Council. It would also bump into candidates from across the city who reside in the same district and essentially force relocations, clashes or withdrawals. Given the new overly generous “caps” on campaign contributions, special interests can now govern municipal elections regardless of districts.
Proponents of the process fail to realize that whoever sets the district boundaries controls the process, and minority areas could end up even less represented than they already are. This would have occurred with Southeast Huntington Beach in 2004, for example, being grouped with a more dominant downtown voting population, which would almost always have guaranteed a downtown council member for that district. The district will not work in Surf City unless you increase the City Council and have “micro-districts”. Even so, “micro-districts” could easily be defeated in policy-making by a majority on the City Council. The best strategy for minorities of all types is to support candidates across the city who listen to them and represent them fairly. Fortunately, the 2024 elections in November offer this type of result with support for council incumbents.
Tim Geddes
Huntington Beach
HB will not send library outsourcing to voters
Our majority on the Huntington Beach council says they must look at any budget savings measure, which is why they are issuing an RFP to privatize/outsource the library. If the majority honestly believes that “outsourcing” our library system is what the public wants, why do they refuse to let us vote on this? This council had no problem holding a special election in March, which cost the city nearly half a million dollars, but now refuses to allow the library issue to be placed on the November ballot at a fraction of the cost. Is it because they know that the majority of residents do not want this to happen? The board may claim that it’s just about saving money, but I think most of us already know that it’s really about controlling what reading materials are made available to the public and what library programs are offered. It is also a way to get rid of our experienced and educated librarians who have maintained a collection of books that reflect all community views, not just those of far-right Christian MAGA extremists. If our board truly believed in the democratic process, it would let residents decide the fate of their library.
Barbara Richardson
Huntington Beach
Crucial transparency in settlement
Re: California State Auditor to Examine $7 Million Huntington Beach Air Show Deal, Daily Pilot, May 15): In 2014, when Michael Gates first ran for city attorney against a 12-year incumbent, he criticized her for solving cases and argued that he would fight for the city. Now, not only has he reached a $7 million deal with air show operator Code Four, but he also refuses to discuss the terms of the deal.
These are city taxpayer funds, and taxpayers have a right to know the details of this agreement. When Gates ran for reelection, he campaigned with the four conservative candidates running for City Council, and now this majority, which gave Gates a pay raise, has agreed to this deal. Therefore, it is crucial that the details of this agreement are revealed. If there is nothing to hide, why the hesitation?
Richard C. Armendáriz
Huntington Beach
Shake Shack looks tempting
There is a place on 17th Street in Costa Mesa called Baycrest Caps N Corks Bottle Shop and Market where I often spend time buying and scratching lottery tickets along with several others who share the same passion or gambling characteristics as me. I’ve been going to this place for a while now and I’ve really made some new friends. The store sells drinks, food, snacks of all types and two lottery ticket machines, which is atypical as most places that sell lottery tickets only have one machine.
Not only is Bottleshop close to the new Shake Shack (Costa Mesa welcomes second Shake Shack to Orange County, Daily Pilot, May 10), it’s just a few feet away with an expansive view of the new location and even the outside seating. Bottle Shop customers have been following the construction of the new restaurant over the past few months and are eager to try the food there, which they tell me is very good. I happened to be at the Bottle Shop last Thursday when Shake Shack had its grand opening with lots of people celebrating the grand opening ceremony. We Bottle Shop customers even made comments about how we would buy some Scratchers and walk to Shake Shack, sit on the outside seating and enjoy the food while winning or losing money in the lottery. I haven’t tried the food there yet, but I’m looking forward to it along with my new friends from the nearby Bottle Shop. As busy as that little shopping center is, it looks like the new restaurant will attract even more business.
Bill Spitalnick
newport beach
