Councilwoman Mungo Ends Up Agreeing To "Receive And File" (Take No Council Directing Action On) Her Own Agenda Item re Coyotes, Result Will Continue Current Policy And Let LB Animal Care Services Revise Its Draft Coyote Mgm't Plan With Public Comments
LBREPORT.com is reader and advertiser supported. Support independent news in LB similar to the way people support NPR and PBS stations. We're not non-profit so it's not tax deductible but $49.95 (less than an annual dollar a week) helps keep us online.
(Aug. 12, 2015, 7:25 a.m.) -- The Long Beach City Council has voted 9-0 to "receive and file" (take no Council directed action) on an item agendized by Councilwoman Stacy Mungo and instead let Animal Care Services staff put its draft Coyote Management Plan online (which it has been for some time) with revisions suggested by the Councilwoman, and then put the revised draft online for additional public comment so Animal Care Services [not the Council] can revise and finalize the plan and implement it under the Dept. of Parks & Rec without further Council action.
The motion as passed was a blunt reformulation made by Councilman Al Austin (after 11 p.m.) of Councilwoman Mungo's original motion made over two hours earlier, which she accepted saying it was consistent with what she had in mind two hours earlier.
As seen LIVE on LBREPORT.com, the Council heard over two hours of sharply split public testimony -- some strongly opposed to trapping/killing coyotes (some saying data show it's ineffective), others disputing the data and citing specific examples of increased coyote encounters, fearing for the safety of their pets, their children and the elderly, some saying they feel trapped in their homes and the City should do something more than it's doing now.
[Scroll down for further.
In presenting her item, Councilwoman Mungo acknowledged that members of the public had provided her office and the Council with a robust amount of information so the Council "can best make recommendations on where we go from here" and noted that "the Council makes policy for the City as a whole, and that while the Council could make a policy for a Department" but then asked City Attorney Charles Parkin to provide what Mungo called "guidance" for the Council. Mr. Parkin stated: "The item before you this evening is the policy of the Department, an administrative policy that is not approved by the City Council. Obviously, it's here tonight to be vetted in direction, and I'm sure staff will be here to listen to the comments and make any revisions that are appropriate to the policy, but generally speaking, this is at the staff level and not at the Council level."
City Attorney Parkin's response, which he noted was "generally speaking" and concerned a policy already being followed administratively by a LB city department, didn't explicitly forbid the policy-setting Council from taking action to set Department policy [which the Seal Beach City Council did earlier this year in adopting a similar Coyote Management Policy [although unlike Seal Beach, Long Beach city staff already has a draft Coyote Management Plan in effect.] Neither Councilwoman Mungo nor her two co-agendizers (Uranga and Supernaw, who didn't speak) moved to take any action, and the net result produced extended public discussion of coyotes but without consensus. The Council effectively let city staff continue current policy with revisions suggested by the Councilwoman on Aug. 11, putting that draft online for additional public comment and possible changes at staff's discretion and not at Council direction.
[Scroll down for further.]
Advertisement
Advertisement
The outcome pleased supporters of coyote management actions (education, hazing, co-existing) advocated by the Humane Society of the United States and was the opposite of stronger actions, including lethal removal, urged by members of a "coyote watch" Facebook page [closed LBREPORT.com, other reporters and individuals it deemed unsupportive; LBREPORT.com monitored the page's content through alternative means.]
The result comes after the PressTelegram initially reported [July 28 online] that Councilwoman Mungo "wants the City Council to address a growing coyote problem in Long Beach would could include trapping and euthanizing the animals" by creating a possible "coyote mitigation committee" and seek a report back to the City Council within 30 days. [Councilwoman Mungo declined to respond to LBREPORT.com's emailed request for confirmation and information on what she actually would do.] Instead, Mungo agendized an item (Aug. 3) that didn't mention a "coyote mitigation committee" but asked LB Animal Care Services to [agendizing memo, joined by Councilmembers Supernaw and Uranga] to "study the potential of establishing a coyote mitigation program to address the growing presence of coyotes in Long Beach and to report back to City Council within thirty (30) days." Mungo's memo didn't say what methods "mitigation" included or didn't include, did cite costs of trapping [and thus killing] coyotes, and attached but didn't take a position on LB Animal Care Services draft Coyote Management Plan that the city agency had prepared late last year, sought responses from some ELB neighborhood groups on, and has had online for some time at this link.
On August 4, Councilwoman Mungo told an impromptu meeting of about 60 people outside her Wardlow Park (mainly members of a Facebook page favoring trapping/killing, many of them her 5th dist. constituents) that she favored other methods (including more aggressive hazing) and made other statements that left a number of those present disappointed and in some cases angry [visible in their subsequent responses on Facebook.]
The net result was a Council collision on Aug. 11 that produced two hours of polarized public testimony, after which Councilwoman Mungo reiterated actions she said she favored on Aug. 4th including quicker city removal of dead animal carcasses (a coyote attractant), better data to track coyote encounters, better education, better signage. Councilwoman Mungo also suggested tweaking/revising some verbiage in the "orange" tier of the draft Animal Care Service plan's current response.
Scroll down for further
Advertisement
Advertisement
As previously reported by LBREPORT.com, the Long Beach Animal Care Services draft Coyote Management Plan is very similar to a Coyote Management Plan adopted in March 2015 by voted action of the Seal Beach City Council after the Council, in September 2014, initially implemented roughly four weeks of trapping/killing coyotes and other measures (including education and eliminating attractants.) Seal Beach's implemented plan defines "Level Red" as: "A coyote that has been involved in an investigated and documented provoked or unprovoked close encounter or attack on humans. City staff may work to lethally remove the responsible coyote(s) after a thorough investigation of the incident(s).
Long Beach's draft verbiage defines "Level Red" as: "A coyote that has been involved in an investigated and documented provoked or
unprovoked attack on a human. City staff will notify California Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW). City staff will work with DFW to locate and eliminate the responsible coyote(s)."
Long Beach's "Level Orange" response verbiage currently states;
A coyote is involved in an incident(s) where there is an attended domestic animal loss. Coyote entering a dwelling or yard where people are present, or acting aggressively towards people. Several level 2 type incidents in the same general area may indicate the presence of a habituated coyote(s). Education and aggressive hazing needed, volunteer hazing team created, public awareness of incident(s) and circumstances discussed. If multiple level Orange incidents have occurred in the same vicinity within a short amount of time, lethal removal may be recommended.
None of the actions Councilwoman Mungo said during Council colloquy that she favors are required by the Council's vote but are left to the discretion ACS Dir. Ted Stevens, who indicated during Council colloquy that he could consider a number of them.
Regarding coyote dens -- including a den reported on the Facebook "coyote watch" site in the area of Prisk Elementary School (and a tunnel leading to the school area from the 5th Council district north of the 405 freeway), ACS Dir. Stevens indicated he's been in contact with other agencies including CalTrans and L.A. County (to remove brush and the like.)
The net result: no immediate changes for now; future changes consistent with LB Animal Care Services draft Coyote Management Plan, which Humane Society of the U.S. and likeminded advocates support but members of the closed Facebook LB coyote-watch group (many of them 5th district constituents, especially Lakewood Village and South of Conant areas) have argued isn't sufficient.
