Travis Tracker: Pflugerville Mayor's 'time capusle' statement on $1,000-per-animal shelter bond

In recognition of "Back to the Future Day," we decided to do a little time travel to ... this past summer.

Pflugerville Mayor Jeff Coleman released the below statement against the Pflugerville pet shelter proposal in July. The Mayor is now legally prohibited from discussing the matter since it has been committed to a ballot. But we're under no such prohibitions. We release this statement from past Mayor Coleman in support of present Mayor Coleman!

Early voting goes through Oct. 30, with election day on Nov. 3, on the pet shelter bond.

Friends and neighbors,

Tonight a very important discussion will begin in our community. It is a discussion that will be emotionally charged but one I think we need to have.

This evening (if all goes as I expect it to) your City Council will vote to have a bond election in November regarding whether to build a new 10.5 million dollar (they could choose as low as an 8.5 million dollar) 28,000 square foot animal shelter in Pflugerville.

As an elected official, I will not be allowed to advocate for or against the shelter once the Council votes to hold the election. Therefore, I have decided to post my opinion prior to the Council vote tonight.

I will be voting against this bond proposition in November. I realize this will be an unpopular position with many of you. I hope you will read all of my reasons prior to making any final decisions regarding this issue.

My reasons are as follows:

1. It is too expensive. If this bond passes, the annual bond payment (principle and interest) will be $650,000. The operations and maintenance (O&M) cost are unknown but the Pflugerville Library is about the same size. Assuming cost are similar, the O&M of the new shelter would be around $188,000. Our proposed 2015-2016 staff cost for the current animal shelter is $430,000. This means the total annual cost (using today's expenses) will be $1,268,000. If I divide the approximate 1300 animals that we will intake this year, the per animal cost will be around $975 (As more animals are brought in, that cost would drop except for the fact that our staff costs are projected to be $1 million a year in 2025).

In comparison, the City of Pflugerville does not currently have a Senior Center. We do provide the Seniors with a room in the Recreation center that is 600 square feet in total size and occasional use of the gym. We have a budget of around $125,000 (staff, programming and 4% of the total Rec center space.) This means the COP spends around $415 on each of the Seniors in the program. I cannot vote to spend $10.5 million on a new animal shelter when we have not taken care of other vulnerable members of our community. There are many other examples of where these funds could be used. For me - People are the Priority.

2. Our current shelter staff, and the incredibly passionate volunteers who help them, have been able to drop our euthanasia rate for "lack of space" to almost zero. That is an admirable goal and feat; however, it does come with a price. We are keeping some animals for up to two years in an attempt to get them adopted. This is the main reason the COP needs such a large shelter. Our community will need to decide during this election if this is truly our goal. If that is our goal, based on current intake and future intake growth, expect this new shelter to be outgrown by 2025. I cannot justify the incredibly high cost of keeping every animal for "however long it takes".

3. Our current shelter is a grouping of repurposed buildings that have been turned into an animal shelter. To put it mildly- it is not pretty; however, it is functional. This year, the Council approved spending over $400,000 in an attempt to improve many aspects of the shelter. If the bond passes approximately $250,000 of that money will be "throw away" money. In other words, we will get very little value from it. It is estimated that we can build additional buildings on the current site for around $1 million that will give the city the additional space it needs to hold the growing number of animals that we are taking in.

In conclusion, I will not be voting for this bond. Not because I don't love animals, I do, I have dogs and a cat, but because I think there are more important PEOPLE priorities that we need to be spending money on.