Johnson County animal shelter to open by fall

The final financial hurdle has been cleared in the quest to build a new Johnson County Animal Shelter south of Indianapolis.

[Langamer]

It's about time. However when is the uneducated public going to spay and neuter their dogs and cats?

[Earn It]

Langamer wrote:

It's about time. However when is the uneducated public going to spay and neuter their dogs and cats?

As soon as the city / county / state has the balls to make it law. Welcome to Indiana haven for backyard breeders and dog fighters.

Communities scream about the cost of animal control but then can quite manage to work up the courage to put a meaningful fix on the problem. Yep, politics at their bright and shining best.

[Stray Owner]

The Johnson County Shelter people are good folks. I occasionally contribute food to the shelter as assistance. All of the 14 pets I've had in my 34 years living in Johnson County have been adopted strays. They were taken to the vet, vaccinated, neutered and given a good home indoors. I currently have four living with me. If others did the same, it would aid the problem of strays. Why purchase pets at a pet store when good ones are waiting for charitable owners at the shelter?

[Johnson County Taxpayer]

Goody! Now instead of keeping a few hundred dogs at taxpayer expense till they're euthanized, we can double that and keep a few more hundred dogs at taxpayer expense until they're euthanized. You won't see any more dogs adopted by spending this huge chuck of taxpayer money when property taxes are at an all time high. We'll just be warehousing them longer till we do the inevitable.

What a boon-DOG-gle.

[PROPERTY TAXES]

Johnson County Taxpayer wrote:

Goody! Now instead of keeping a few hundred dogs at taxpayer expense till they're euthanized, we can double that and keep a few more hundred dogs at taxpayer expense until they're euthanized. You won't see any more dogs adopted by spending this huge chuck of taxpayer money when property taxes are at an all time high. We'll just be warehousing them longer till we do the inevitable.

Read the first post.

The old one is too small.

If you're so concerned about the money spent, start going to county meetings. The Commissioners keep giving contracts for these public works to the companies who put out the most campaign grease.#1 is American Structurepoint,#2 is Schneider Corp. The latter did the design for this thing, rather expensively, although the idea was for them to do it cheaply.

Anyway, they got a half-million private grant (thank you, whoever you were!) so stop griping.

[Johnson County Taxpayer]

PROPERTY TAXES wrote:

<quoted text>
Read the first post.
The old one is too small.
If you're so concerned about the money spent, start going to county meetings. The Commissioners keep giving contracts for these public works to the companies who put out the most campaign grease.#1 is American Structurepoint,#2 is Schneider Corp. The latter did the design for this thing, rather expensively, although the idea was for them to do it cheaply.
Anyway, they got a half-million private grant (thank you, whoever you were!) so stop griping.

It's only "too small" because they want to warehouse more dogs longer, when they're eventually going to be euthanized anyway. Read my post above. I've been to the shelter and it's perfectly adequate for what is needed. But with this animal rights activist mentality -- that we have to keep doomed animals alive as long as we can before we do the inevitable -- there will never be enough room.

You need to go to the meetings, I already do. I have to as part of my job. If you'd visit the facility and stop crying about keeping animals alive in cages -- which is more cruel than euthanizing them -- you'd know wherewith I speak.

Here's an unpleasant fact: the commissioners and council know exactly what I'm talking about because we have discussed it. However, they're afraid to NOT build the unneeded shelter because the activists have been pushing it so hard and the taxpayers -- like yourself -- have just been blindly believing what you're told.

[Earn It]

Johnson County Taxpayer wrote:

<quoted text>It's only "too small" because they want to warehouse more dogs longer, when they're eventually going to be euthanized anyway. Read my post above. I've been to the shelter and it's perfectly adequate for what is needed. But with this animal rights activist mentality -- that we have to keep doomed animals alive as long as we can before we do the inevitable -- there will never be enough room.
You need to go to the meetings, I already do. I have to as part of my job. If you'd visit the facility and stop crying about keeping animals alive in cages -- which is more cruel than euthanizing them -- you'd know wherewith I speak.
Here's an unpleasant fact: the commissioners and council know exactly what I'm talking about because we have discussed it. However, they're afraid to NOT build the unneeded shelter because the activists have been pushing it so hard and the taxpayers -- like yourself -- have just been blindly believing what you're told.

If the taxpayers are willing to support the new facility who are you to pass judgement on whether or not it is an acceptable expenditure? It's the taxpayers money so if they want an new shelter let them have it.

[Johnson County Taxpayer]

Earn It wrote:

<quoted text>
If the taxpayers are willing to support the new facility who are you to pass judgement on whether or not it is an acceptable expenditure? It's the taxpayers money so if they want an new shelter let them have it.

Who am I to pass judgment on whether it's an acceptable expenditure? Read my name up there. I'm a taxpayer. The taxpayers support a necessary expenditure. The problem is, they've been misled by the animal rights wackos that this expenditure is necessary. It's not.

The current shelter is adequate as a place to hold unwanted animals till they can be adopted...if they're adoptable. As I explained above, the wackos want a bigger place to hold more animals in cages for longer periods of time knowing full well that they'll be euthanized in the end anyway. It's stupid, but the wackos don't care since they're spending other people's money...MINE!

[Earn It]

Johnson County Taxpayer wrote:

<quoted text>Who am I to pass judgment on whether it's an acceptable expenditure? Read my name up there. I'm a taxpayer. The taxpayers support a necessary expenditure. The problem is, they've been misled by the animal rights wackos that this expenditure is necessary. It's not.
The current shelter is adequate as a place to hold unwanted animals till they can be adopted...if they're adoptable. As I explained above, the wackos want a bigger place to hold more animals in cages for longer periods of time knowing full well that they'll be euthanized in the end anyway. It's stupid, but the wackos don't care since they're spending other people's money...MINE!

So the majority of the other taxpayers approve (per your own admisstion - regardless of where they got their info)? You're in the minority then? Sorry, much as it sucks that's the way it goes.

For what it's worth I'd much rather spend my tax dollars on the animals as opposed to supported women who squirt out a new kid every other year and then ask me to support them via public welfare programs. However, like you I'm "out voted" on that issue so I cowboy up and move forward.

You might try that sometime.

[Johnson County Taxpayer]

Earn It wrote:

<quoted text>
So the majority of the other taxpayers approve (per your own admisstion - regardless of where they got their info)? You're in the minority then? Sorry, much as it sucks that's the way it goes.
For what it's worth I'd much rather spend my tax dollars on the animals as opposed to supported women who squirt out a new kid every other year and then ask me to support them via public welfare programs. However, like you I'm "out voted" on that issue so I cowboy up and move forward.
You might try that sometime.

I'll try if I have to but I just want to say it's really, really difficult to do that when I have this convenient little forum to whine in. I agree with you about the welfare thing, 100%.
I didn't mean to imply that the majority agrees. They don't know the facts and they're believing what's being told to them. But...I'm going to try to cowboy up.

[Sue]

Rather than building a bigger shelter, why don't we set up free spay/neuter programs? That way, people don't have an excuse as to why they can't afford to spay or neuter their pet. And, make it mandatory that if you own a pet, it's to be spayed/neutered. If we eliminate the overpopulation of unwanted puppies and kittens, we wouldn't have to have larger shelters -- and worse yet, destroy hundreds of thousands of unwanted animals every year.

[Taxpayer too]

I am also a taxpayer and I think it is way past due for a new animal shelter. We can spend money for football and soccer and parks that we don't need. And millions of dollars for schools so the kids can have the newest of everything. So, those of us who are taxpayers also have a heart for animals and want our money spent for that.

Animals are adopted from there all the time. So mister heartless stop complaining. Maybe you should use that effort to stop people from breeding more dogs and cats. Then if people wanted a pet they would have to adopt.

[Taxpayer too]

By the way I think you are the wacko.

[Oh well]

Orphanage for pets .... how sweet

[get educated]

Johnson County Taxpayer wrote:

Goody! Now instead of keeping a few hundred dogs at taxpayer expense till they're euthanized, we can double that and keep a few more hundred dogs at taxpayer expense until they're euthanized. You won't see any more dogs adopted by spending this huge chuck of taxpayer money when property taxes are at an all time high. We'll just be warehousing them longer till we do the inevitable.
What a boon-DOG-gle.

Actually, the average week involves 3-4 adoptions now that the facility is centrally located. Furthermore, the buck starts at the irresponsible TAX PAYERS who bring their animals to the shelter making their unwanted responsiblity someone elses problem. No different than the children being supported on food stamps, etc. We, as tax payers have to pay for all the losers responsibilities to keep order in our community.