AB1634 as it was is essentially dead. The entire bill has been gutted! The old language will not return for this legislative session at least.

The new bill requires sterilization of dogs after three complaints, cats after two.

www.saveourdogs.net has a good summary and links to the bill.

The problem here is the word "complaint" as in an unfounded, unproven unvalidated allegation. Not a confirmed violation, just a written or verbal complaint by anyone will cost you money, then more money then snip snip.

So the language at the very least needs to be changed. You cannot levy fines and penalties based on allegations. The burden of proof rests with the accuser not the accused. Also as there is no appeal and the current language attempts to make those agencies administering this immune from civil action by dog owners, there is that whole matter of yours and my CONSTITUTIONAL DUE PROCESS that needs to be addressed.

It also has some of the same warts as AB1634 1.0. It is not well written and it will still impose the harshest penalties on those least able to afford them. It is problematic for rescues and feral cat caretakers under current language. It provides no appeals or recourse for pet owners and no room for common sense exceptions such as animals impounded due to natural disaster or personal disaster.

While it may be possible to make amendments to repair these gaping holes, in it's present form it needs serious work to make it fair.

And it still actually does little or nothing to address the real issues putting pets in shelters.

Opposition letters are needed at this point to at the very least help force changes in the language of this current bill. Ideally it would be nice to see AB1634 2.0 die completely. Any valid ideas in it could easily be brought back in another proposal next year with better input from all sides, including ours.

So please please write your letters, ask that owners of pets not be denied their constituional right to due process.

And come to the rally on the 25th! should be very interesting!

A message regarding the new AB1634 from Bill Hemby and petpac:

Please cross post:

I haven't had time to read all of the 100 or so emails
sent to me on AB 1634 as amended. PetPAC after looking
at the amendments and conferring has decided to remain
opposed.

While the "new" AB 1634 is a new bill and totally guts
out all of the old stuff, it still remains poorly
written.

I will list some of the concerns we picked up on.
They did not all come from my demented mind, but are a
collection from cat fanciers, sport hunters and dog
and cat people.

Please remember, as you, these are rushed in order to
meet the committee's deadline of today to get into the
analysis.

This is not the "official" letter, but you will get
the gist.

Bill

Please be advised PetPAC is still opposed to AB 1634
as amended on 6/18/’08 for the following reasons:

AB 1634 grants police powers to impound animals to a
private corporation, ie. an S.P.C.A. and Humane
Society.

AB1634 grants government powers to impose fees and
fines to a non-governmental private corporation.
S.P.C.A. , Humane Society are private corporations
under the Corporation Laws of California.”

AB 1634 grants government levied fines or fees, ie.
state funds to private non-profit corporations,
S.P.C.A. and Humane Societies to be used for low-cost
spay and neuter or general administrative programs. We
believe this is prohibited by the State Constitution.

AB 1634 uses state funds to subsidize administrative,
operational and personnel budgets of local animal
shelters over and above that budgeted by the local
governmental agency. We believe this is prohibited by
the State Constitution.

While PetPAC supports increasing budgetary
expenditures for local government animal shelters, we
oppose state fines and fees to subsidize local animal
control budgets. PetPAC does support programs that
allow local governmental animals shelters to utilize
these fines and fees to offset costs of low-cost or
free spay and neuter and educational programs. These
programs will benefit low income citizens, non English
speaking citizens and poor pet owners of California.

AB 1634 will hold harmless from civil litigation, a
private non-profit corporation, i.e. an S.P.C.A. and
Humane Society from injuries that may Adminse out of a
major surgical operation of a dog or cat.

AB 1634 allows an oral or written complaint, (an
allegation), by a citizen, that has not been
investigated or substantiated, and without reasonable
cause to believe has been committed, or committed in
presence of a peace officer to stand as a violation of
this measure. These powers go beyond those granted to
a peace officer under the authority of the Penal Code,
or any Code of Civil Procedure.

AB 1634 allows for a dog or cat of any age or under
the control of a veterinarian to be spayed or
neutered. There is no appeal process by the animal
owner.

AB 1634 allows three separate complaints on the same
day to be counted towards the three strikes.

As mentioned, AB 1634 does not allow for any appeal
process, or due process appeal.