- About Us
- Local Savings
- Green Editions
- Legal Notices
- Weekly Ads
Connect with Us
City of Kirkland should explore further options for animal control | LETTER
Further options should be explored prior to the City of Kirkland taking over the task of animal control as proposed by Lorrie McKay.
If Kirkland has experienced low-use animal service, it would not appear to be cost effective to establish a new city facility, position and equipment at $100,000, with recurring cost of more than $100,000 per year.
I suggest exploring readily available commercial services from firms like Critter Control to handle those animals more dangerous than guinea pigs or rogue rabbits.
Only when an animal has attacked someone, should it be necessary for the Police Department to be involved. Sheltering at local veterinarian facilities, PAWS or Human Society makes sense.
My first glance at the March 23 article, I thought I was reading the April Fools’ Day edition.
King County Animal Control sure appears to be ripping off the taxpayers of our fine city.
Reading further, the proposal put forth by the City of Kirkland Intergovernmental Relations Manager fares no better.
Bob Campbell, Kirkland