A proposed regulation change would restrict the variety of felines allowed a neighborhood cat nest and control other activities associated with undomesticated cats in Killeen.
But some members of the city’s Animal Advisory Committee oppose the proposed restriction, declaring it would cause “an explosion” in the cat population.
“We have some of the most progressive animal ordinances in the state,” Janice Holladay said throughout a City Council workshop recently. “This is a regressive ordinance looking at limiting the number of feral cats. It’s not based on science.”
Holladay belongs to the Animal Advisory Committee.
‘Listen to animal advocates’
“It is in the city’s best interest to listen to animal advocates because that actually affects the entire city,” she said. “I understand that Ms. Singh looked for policies … to give us a number. It doesn’t look at whether or not it even reduces nuisance calls. Feral colony caregivers (bear) the brunt of the cost of trapping and neutering. If you stop them and tell them that the law says they can’t (trap, neuter and return) after six and they’re done, it doesn’t mean the cats stop coming. It means they stop being spayed and neutered.”
On Tuesday, Assistant City Manager Danielle Singh explained how she and other employee got to their suggestions for modifying Chapter 6 of the city’s code of regulations.
“This ordinance is two years in the making,” she said. “Originally, the council had directed staff to go back and work with the committee in order to re-look at what we call our feral cat colony regulations. A subcommittee was formed but several of the members resigned so we kind of started over in the process.”
Citing a failure to fix distinctions with city employee and Killeen Animal Shelter, Linda Marzi, Shirley Del Conte, Vicky Duke and Anca Neagu resigned from the committee throughout a council conference in September.
“I’m a little frustrated as a member of the committee because I thought we were still researching this and we were going to discuss it at our April meeting,” Holladay said on Tuesday, relating to the proposed regulation change. “And then we’d bring it to council after that. I think this should be looked at much more carefully.”
In April 2021, city board members directed staff authorities “to work with the Animal Advisory Committee to review and develop” a change to Chapter 6 relating to neighborhood cat guidelines.
“This is our typical process for drafting any type of ordinance amendment,” Singh said. “Staff drafts the amendments, then they present it to the committee. We talked to the committee about these ordinance amendments on Jan. 12 and Feb. 9. They felt like they needed some more time to discuss them after Jan. 12, so that’s why we continued to a second meeting.”
‘Efforts were in vain’
But Neagu challenged an assertion that the committee’s deal with the regulation was inadequate.
“The staff presentation says that very little progress was made by the subcommittee … on ordinance changes,” she said. “This is not true. I was on that subcommittee, and a lot of progress was made. However, city staff did not attend most of those meetings, and they were not aware of all the progress we made. It was clear to the subcommittee that our recommendations would not be welcomed by staff or council, and that our efforts were in vain. This contributed greatly to the resignations.”
Mellisa Brown, a previous at-large council member and routine critic of its choices, concurred.
“Anything that came back should have been their recommendation,” she said. “There was no consensus made by the committee about any numbers. It gets very discouraging when council says, ‘We want your input. We want your advice,’ and then the very people the council appoints to sit on these boards are the very people who are ignored and not listened to. Their recommendations never make it in front of this council.”
Singh acknowledged that she and committee members might not settle on the nest restriction.
“We did not reach a consensus on limiting the number of cats in a residential cat colony,” she said. “It seems like everyone is in agreement on everything except that point. Let’s re-home these to an alternate colony that’s not in a residential area, because that’s really where we’re getting the residential complaints.”
In her staff report to City Manager Kent Cagle, Singh said that committee members settled on “the majority of the amendments” to Chapter 6.
But “the committee could not come to consensus on limiting the number of cats in a residential colony to six cats at any given time,” the report reveals.
“Staff feels this section would help to limit some of the nuisance concerns that occur frequently when community cat colonies are established in residential areas. The amendments to the ordinance also include administrative amendments to the sections addressing aggressive dogs to comply with state law, and wild animals, to provide clarity.”
‘All kinds of damage’
Dialogue amongst animal supporters, council members and Singh focused around neighborhood cats in suburbs, separating in between “responsible” nest caretakers and those who simply permit cats to wander easily.
“We might have 20 cats and while we call them community cats — because that’s what they technically are — these are cats that are staying present all day and they are defecating on their neighbors’ properties,” Singh said. “They’re causing all kinds of damage (and) people can’t enjoy their yards. Our approach in rewriting this ordinance was essentially (to) simplify the governance of community cat colonies. The situation we’re trying to address … is really cat-hoarding situations.”
Those who keep cat nests, especially at or near homes, are thought about caretakers since they frequently trap, neuter and return (TNR) free-roaming felines. The nests are usually controlled by female cats and their kittens, and they share a typical food source in an area.
“We have a lot of responsible colony caregivers doing great work,” Singh said. “If we can reduce the number of cats in some of those colonies creating issues, it’s less likely we’re going to have to go in and seize the whole colony because that’s what we’re looking at. This is staff’s way of trying to put a limit on it so maybe it’s more enforceable so we don’t have to go in and seize entire colonies.”
That would concern an already overloaded animal services staff who are charged with processing an over-population of cats and kittens.
“We are currently full and we stay full,” she said. “This is a nationwide issue. We have to (euthanize them) at our shelter because we’re over capacity very often.”
‘Disgusting thing to say’
And for city employees, euthanizing any animal is tough, Cagle said.
“I’ve heard for the three and a half years I’ve been here that we have a group of employees that enjoy and want to maximum the number of euthanizations, and that’s terrible,” he said. “It’s a disgusting thing to say. It’s one of the most difficult jobs in the city to have to do that, and there is not one person that enjoys it. In fact, we have to be careful not to put too much burden on an employee because it has a huge mental impact on them. There is no one that works for this city that enjoys doing that and would prefer that it never happen.”
The proposed change consists of the list below arrangements:
Changes referrals from feral cats to neighborhood cats and includes a meaning for neighborhood cat.
Allows a neighborhood cat nest caretaker 1 month to deal with the undesirable existence of cats on personal property.
Removes the restriction of neighborhood cat nests within half a mile of a school, church or public play ground.
Allows appeals relating to neighborhood cats to be made to the assistant city supervisor.
Changes how neighborhood cats are dealt with at the shelter to permit them to be gone back to nests one time after they’re seized on others’ personal properties; locations microchips in neighborhood cats while in belongings of the shelter to permit them to be tracked; and enables cats to be launched to alternate nests if they don’t fulfill the requirements to be gone back to their initial nests.
“The city will end up with an explosion in the population of cats,” Holladay said. “Even euthanizing them is an expense. Why not let citizen caregivers bear the brunt of the expense of population control? I think (the ordinance amendment) is counterproductive.”
Marzi, an Animal Advisory Committee member for 6 years, revealed comparable issues.
“First, let me say that cats — even spayed or neutered cats — roam,” she said. “It’s their nature to roam. They do not permanently stay in a colony on a day-to-day basis. A feral cat can travel a mile in each direction from their colony, so a colony will never have the same feral count daily. A colony caregiver cannot control or guarantee that the caregiver will always have six cats in a colony. Having only six cat members in a colony is totally against helping the city of Killeen.”
‘Increase in nuisance complaints’
And like other animal supporters who spoke throughout the public-comment duration, she said that TNR is a crucial part of managing the cat population.
“I feel this revision will cause an explosion in feral kittens and feral cats due to the fact that colony caregivers will not have access to do TNR of any additional cats above the six feral cats they have in their colony,” Marzi said. “I feel this revised language will cause a huge increase in nuisance complaints. Unintended consequences will be experienced by the city of Killeen if you agree that feral cat colonies should only have six cats in a colony. There will be a definite huge decrease in TNR by caregivers.”
The Humane Society of the United States has actually released information on the efficiency of TNR.
“There is scientific evidence that, under certain conditions, TNR can control feral cat populations,” according to the company’s website. “The practice of TNR on a far greater scale, as well as continued and increased funding and endorsement of TNR by private welfare organizations and municipal and government agencies, is essential for the success of TNR.”
According to an October 2021 U.S. Department of Agriculture publication on free-ranging and feral cats, approximately 164 million cats remain in America. The exact same year, the population in the U.S. was 331.9 million. That’s almost one cat to every 2 individuals.
“Free-ranging cats are associated with a number of sociological and ecological conflicts,” the publication reveals. “They impact people directly through the spread of parasites and diseases, damage to gardens and property, and noise nuisances. Cats also cause conflict through their direct and indirect impacts on native wildlife through predation, competition, spread of disease, and impacts on species survival.”
On Tuesday, Victoria Watkins likewise provided her viewpoint on the proposed regulation modifications.
“Community cats can and do cause problems, and something should be done to control them but limiting our colony numbers is not going to reduce the cat numbers or prevent litters,” she said. “Community cats that go into the shelter do not come out lowering the live-release rate. The problem is nothing changes with removing the cats. As soon as the older ones leave, new ones move in. What has been proven as the most effective at controlling community cat population is trap, neuter, return. TNR is when the cat is trapped, sterilized, vaccinated for rabies and other diseases, the ears tipped to show they’ve been through the program and the cat is returned back. TNR keeps the colony numbers stable.”
Feral cats, according to the Department of Agriculture, are the most typical vectors of rabies in domestic animals.
“And it is unclear how many free-ranging cats are currently vaccinated for rabies and other diseases. Cats can transmit several other diseases and parasites to people including cat scratch fever, plague, ringworm, hookworm, salmonellosis, leptospirosis, and toxoplasmosis.”
‘Managing the colonies’
That’s partially why city authorities need to stabilize maintaining feral cat nests kept by accountable caretakers and safeguarding the health of human beings and their property.
“We still have the ability to enforce nuisance issues, which is really the other side of the spectrum that we have to make sure we’re addressing,” Singh said. “We still want to be enforcing the trap, neuter, vaccinate and release part of it. What we want to do is work with these cat colony caregivers to potentially re-home additional cats above that six into a more appropriate area. Maybe it goes into a commercial cat colony. There is a benefit to businesses. It’s more of managing the colonies overall.”
According to the Department of Agriculture, feral cats frequently utilize abandoned structures, consisting of homes, as shelter.
“Cats can fit into any hole that their head can fit through, so holes (three) inches in diameter or larger should be sealed to prevent entry. Cats can easily scale and jump over most fences. Cats can be a major nuisance in residential areas. Unneutered male cats may spray urine on car tires, houses, landscaping, fences, shoes, and other items left outside. Cats prefer loose soil for their latrines, making sandboxes, flowerbeds, and vegetable gardens a popular spot for cats to dig up and urinate and defecate around.”
Furthermore, unneutered cats defend area and mates.
“These disturbances can be a nuisance as they can keep people awake late into the night,” the Department of Agriculture report reveals. “Unregulated feral cat colonies are often established at county and city parks, which puts county and city administrations at risk of litigation if an unsuspecting park patron were scratched or bitten. Wherever concentrations of free-ranging cats are found, the public may feel justified releasing their unwanted pets or stray cats, assuming that they will be cared for by someone else.”
Del Conte said she opposes the suggested modification to cat nests, too.
“I do not understand the restrictions that my city is proposing for our animals,” she said. “Right now, it seems to be cats. It will not solve any problems. Killeen will never be known as a pet-friendly city unless you all change your attitudes and act accordingly. You treat them like you do a paper towel — disposable.”
‘Can’t limit cats’
Councilman Jose Segarra asked Watkins to clarify animal supporters’ primary problem with the regulation modifications.
“I heard a lot of you guys speak but I was trying to narrow down … the one thing in this ordinance you don’t like,” he said. “It’s my understanding it’s the amount of cats in a cat colony.”
“You can’t restrict cats to a colony, sir,” she said. “Our numbers show there are over 40,000 stray cats in Killeen. Some of those are wild. They can’t be pets. Some of those are domesticated. They were dumped or they’re strays. They show up when they want. There’s no way for us to enforce that. We don’t want to be penalized but we also don’t want the shelter to show up to say, ‘You have eight cats here, so we’re going to take two of these community cats to the shelter.’ When they go to the shelter, they are going to be euthanized. The best thing to do is sterilize them so they cannot reproduce.”
After Mayor Debbie Nash-King asked how she got to liming the variety of felines in a cat nest to 6, Singh said she examined “so many city ordinances dealing with this issue.”
“It’s not common to specifically talk about the number of residential cat colony limits like were doing,” she said. “I did find one city that’s enforcing that, and their number is six. The reason we’re putting that in there is because we in Killeen have a specific problem we’re trying to respond to. So that’s where that number came from. Could it be four? Could it be eight? Yes. The problem is the higher that number gets, the more nuisance issues you’re going to have and the more likely we’re going to have to go in there and remove that entire colony.”
City Council members are scheduled to vote on the proposed regulation change on Tuesday. That conference is set for 5 p.m. at City Hall, 101 N. College St.