THE future of the region’s animal welfare charity remains on a “financial knife-edge” given it is yet to cement a long-term agreement with its two key funding partners.
While Grant District Council has flagged supporting a long term tripartite agreement, it stopped short in making a decision at its meeting this week.
This means the South East Animal Welfare League remains in long term limbo just weeks from its five-year funding agreement expiring with Mount Gambier City and Grant District councils.
During robust debate this week, at least one Grant District elected member foreshadowed they did not want to see ratepayers’ money spent on cats.
In an extraordinary development, the league’s president Trevor Twilley has warned it may snub the City Council’s one-year $60,000 offer and had not ruled out the facility barring wandering dogs from the city council area.
This follows City Council giving an interim 12-month lifeline with a number of conditions attached to the funding.
“We have only got seven weeks left until the tripartite agreement expires … effective from July 1, 2019, one way or another the board will give instructions to our paid staff,” Mr Twilley said in the Grant council chamber.
“The City Council has agreed to provide a one-off $60,000 payment. This does not mean at a board level we are going to accept that. It does not secure us moving forward.
“What we asked for was another five year tripartite agreement.”
He revealed the organisation was “sitting on a knife-edge” and had flagged a $60,000 partnership between both councils.
League secretary Annie O’Connor said the organisation took in any cats they came to them.
“We actually had 82 community strays come to us last year, 27 from Gambier Vets and 27 from owners. The number of strays out there are enormous,” Ms O’Connor said.
“We have a policy of not euthanising any animal unless it is on veterinary instructions. Some people think just kill off the dogs and cats.”
Discussing the issue, Grant District some elected members appeared positive about approving a five year agreement while others were vocal about spending money on cats.
Veteran councillor Shirley Little voiced her opposition to giving a long term agreement.
“I would not like to enter into a five-year funding program,” said Cr Little said, who explained she was uncertain over the issue.
But Cr Megan Dukalskis canvassed this would not give the organisation long term funding surety.
Acting chief executive officer Jane Fetherstonhaugh argued she wanted council to see the organisation’s balance sheet before any decision was made.
“…there is a lot of expenditure on cats. Is council prepared for money to be spent on cats? Ms Fetherstonhaugh questioned.
Responding, deputy mayor Gill Clayfield said she “had a problem with cats”.
“I have a problem with that because when someone drops off a mother cat and four/five kittens and they are all female, the expense to get them desexed is huge,” she said.
“I just do not like the assumption we should pay all this money – and no, I do not want to see it spent on cats.”
While flagging she did not object to a “three, four or five” year agreement, Cr Clayfield said it needed to be a “reasonable amount of money”.
Cr Brad Mann said social media was changing the dynamics of returning wandering animals.
“Micro-chipping and social media were changing the surrenders of animals,” Cr Mann said.
In the future, he warned the facility could be sitting there empty and council money could be going in for “no reason”.
Elected members moved the matter lay “on the table”.
Mayor Richard Sage also flagged there needed more discussion on the issue with City Council.
Council will seek to gain more financial information from the league and a new report will be compiled for elected members.
