WC CWF Health District Board Minutes - 09/14/2018WICHITA FALLS-WICHITA COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH BOARD MINUTES
September 14, 2018
Wichita Falls -Wichita County Public Health District
1700 Third Street - Parker Conference Room
Wichita Falls, Texas
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT:
David Carlston, Ph.D., Chair
Julie Gibson, D.V.M., Vice -Chair
Kathleen Williamson, MSN, Ph.D., R.N.
Keith Williamson, M.D.
Robin Moreno, MHA-HSA, ACHE, Secretary
Melissa Plowman
Larry Rains, D.D.S,
ra zumm=
Rol �_ I
Amy K. Fagan, M.P.A.
Dr. Arthur Szczerba, M.D.
Amy Gardner
Eric West
Woodrow W. Gossom, Jr.
Citizen At -Large -County
Veterinarian -City
Registered Nurse -City
Physician -City
Citizen At -Large -City
Restaurant Association -City
Dentist -County
Director of Mealth
Assistant Director of Health
Health Authority
Municipal Court Prosecutor
City Council Liaison
Wichita County Judge
1. CALL TO ORDER
Dr. David Carlston called the Health Board meeting to order at 11:59 pm after quorum of members
was attained.
11. APPROVAL OF MINUTES AND ABSENCES
Dr. David Carlston called for the review and approval of minutes from the meeting held on Friday
July 13, 2018. Dr. Keith Williamson introduced a motion to approve the minutes as presented and
Dr. Julie Gibson seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
At this time, it was noted the excused absence of Robin Moreno, Melissa Plowman and Dr. Larry
Rains.
III. NHANES (NATIONAL HEALTH & NUTRITION EXAMINATION SURVEY) UPDATE
Amy Fagan, Assistant Director of Health reminded the Board that NHANES will be at the Health
District from September 21 to November 19, 2018. The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS)
of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) selected Wichita County as one out of fifteen
counties to participate in the National Health & Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). The survey
is to gather information to access the health and nutritional status of children and adults in the United
States. The team consists of 30-40 people in the first group to arrive September 21 with a second
group to arrive later, Today NHANES sent out letters to preselected households for home based
interviews. The Mobile Examination Centers (MEC) will be setup at the Health District in the east
parking lot for examinations at no cost to eligible participants. On questions from the public
everything is driven to the website; uploaded video, brief explanation, links, benefits to participate in
the survey, letters of support from the community. Letters of support are from the Medical Society,
County Judge, MSU, and law enforcement that includes Burkburnett, Electra, Iowa Park. A Media
date has been set for October 18 1h to tour the MEC setup and process.
Eric West asked what their goal was for the number of people to be examined.
Amy Fagan said information was sent out to about 700, the goal is 378 to complete the whole
examination and above 500 for the partial examination. Ideally one person ends up to represent
about 65,000 people in the United States. The data from the 15 counties will be available September
2019 but unavailable specific to Wichita County.
IV. ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE
Katrena Mitchell the Animal Services Administrator informed the Board due to some issues in July
came the need to push through an ordinance to allow vaccinate upon intake, as animals come into
the shelter it would allow further immunity to start taking effect fairly quickly in order to help against
transmission of disease within the shelter. Dogs and cats out in the elements of the community
unvaccinated that come in can expose the animals in the shelter the ordinance would help reduce
that risk. The Vaccination Intake Proposal lists criteria on what animals to choose and not to choose
to vaccinate.
Lou Kreidler mentioned in a prior discussion with Amy Gardner the need to have the ability to
vaccinate every animal suitable for vaccination no matter how the animal entered the shelter whether
through the front door, an Animal Control Officer, a seizure or quarantine. The ordinance would read
as follows:
Chapter 14. Animals — Article IV, Animal Control — Sec. 14-369. Facilities authorized.
(a) The city council shall select and establish a suitable animal reclaim center (ARC) for impounding
all animals, fowl, livestock and wildlife by the health district.
(b) The director or his designee is the designated caretaker of every animal as of the date of intake.
(c) Immediately upon intake the director or his designee, as the designated caretaker, is authorized
to provide each appropriate aged animal with core immunizations and parasite treatment.
Eric West asked what was the current policy, when are vaccinations done and would it substantially
increase cost.
Lou Kreidler responded that the animals brought in do not belong to the shelter therefore the shelter
does not have ownership. Current practice are the animals in quarantine are vaccinated with owner
permission and the animals chosen for the adoption program. After the 3-5 day hold the animals are
moved into the adoption program and vaccinated at that time. The problem with that when it occurs
over the weekend or holiday it extends that period out, if an animal comes in sick then some of the
incubation periods are long so animals are exposed. The Shelter Best Practice is to vaccinate upon
intake which the shelter has not done because of the cost associated to the practice. Vaccinations
are relatively cheap, to vaccinate a dog for Distemper, Parvo and Borclatella (kennel cough) it is
about $10,00, for the adoption animals that cost is accounted for in the adoption fee.
The Underdog Express Rescue group that works through P.E.T.S. sent 2 animals to New York that
had been out of the shelter for 30 days in foster care the animals broke with Distemper on arrival
and 2 others pulled broke before departure. So because of the guidelines of the New York rescue
Underdog can no longer pull animals from the shelter unless the animals are vaccinated upon intake.
Last year Underdog Express pulled over 100 animals which is a large number of animals the shelter
no longer will be able to save that will have a euthanasia outcome rather than a life outcome because
the shelter does not vaccinate on intake.
An Animal Services Advisory Committee (ASAC) convened yesterday to precede the Health Board
meeting in order to obtain recommendations prior to going to Council Tuesday October 2, 2018, One
Underdog Express representative attended the ASAC meeting the group was agreeable to
reimburse the vaccine cost for their animals. Intentions are to meet with the other local rescue groups
before Council for their response to do the same to offset the cost to the shelter for the service.
Rescue groups have to vaccinate anyway that cost is included in their end adoption fees.
The reclaim fee has not been raised in a couple of years Council will be presented with an increase
K
of $10,00 in the fee to cover the cost if Council approves to vaccinate on intake. The only lost cost
would be those animals vaccinated then euthanized.
ASAC was presented with two options for a recommendation:
1) Vaccinate every animal that is suitable for vaccination upon intake all healthy animals with
the exception of aggressive animals.
2) Establish a set of guidelines that any animal listed in the criteria would not be vaccinated.
The ASAC recommendation was to vaccinate all animals on intake that is the Shelter Best Practice
practice, the majority of shelters vaccinate on intake.
Dr. David Carlston ascertained that the shelter would do a selection of those animals most likely to
be euthanized.
Lou Kreidler confirmed yes, the extremely aggressive animals unless reclaimed are not going to be
suitable for adoption. Money is the reality of what can be done the shelter does not have any area
for isolation but considering the idea to convert a room or space which would still cost money. There
are two separate runs a possibility is one side keep the vaccinated animals and the other side those
not to be vaccinated the ventilation system was structured to provide some protection. The situation
now is the shelter is at full capacity a couple of the animals are in kennels in the back because of not
enough room up front it is also a reality at other shelters. Today the Board is asked for a
recommendation of whether or not to take the ordinance to Council along with another
recommendation on information provided today on whether to do a complete vaccination on intake
knowing that it would be a financial loss to the City or to only vaccinate those animals suitable for
adoption or a rescue group.
Amy Gardner asked on those animals not vaccinated was there any information on the effect to the
community.
Katrena Mitchell replied Distemper, Parvo, all sorts of illnesses are in the community especially with
animals running loose that can carry illnesses into the shelter to effect the health of the other animals.
Lou Kreidler cited currently animals reclaimed have to get a rabies vaccination it is a State
requirement. In the ordinance animals would get the rabies and other vaccinations to increase
protection against diseases.
The opinion of Dr. Gibson was those dogs not vaccinated would need to be kept on separate air
conditioning and heating systems because of contamination to the others from the airborne diseases.
She asked if it was known if the animals on intake had been vaccinated.
Lou Kreidler replied that the shelter when built was structured with different ventilation systems for
different areas. The only vaccination history known would be when an owner brings in their animal.
There would be the potential to revaccinate many animals that had been vaccinated but what has
been read it is not harmful.
Eric West asked Dr. Gibson if the vaccinations would take effect immediately.
On revaccinations Dr. Gibson stated those more than two weeks would not affect the animal possibly
a little if within two -days of the initial vaccination. Vaccinations do not take effect immediately, An
animal already coming down with an illness being vaccinated possibly would get worse, it comes on
faster because of the nature of vaccine but the benefit out weights that. It can never be 100% rid of
disease especially with stray animals the vaccinations do help keep horrendous incidents from
happening such as the whole group to get Distemper or a break of Parvo.
Lou Kreidler stated immunity begins anywhere from 24 hours to 3 days. Definitely by the time they
are in the adoption program or a rescue group pulls them if they were not sick and incubating
9
something when they came in then they would have some level of immunity.
Dr, Gibson neutered an Animal Services dog that came in and left the same day, every dog at the
clinic got an upper respiratory tract infection all the dogs had been vaccinated. If possible could
Animal Services advise the client when told to spay/neuter to go home wait a couple weeks to see if
the animal gets sick before taken to a Veterinarian and infect all the animals at the clinic.
Lou Kreidler said tracking could be created if it was an issue for the veterinarians. The process to
z)fi& currettIv
Dr. Gibson asked if the animals are microchipped can their history be tracked.
Lou Kreidler replied the adopted out animals are microchipped but not the reclaims. If Council passes
the ordinance �t requires every animal that comes through the shelter be microchipped. Also under
consideration is for every animal in the City to be microchipped which would replace the City license.
The animal profile includes the microchip number, vaccinations and history.
Dr. Gibson inquired when animals are reclaimed or adopted does Animal Services transfer the owner
onto the microchip or would the owner be expected to do that.
Ratrena Mitchell said Animal Services uses the Pet Point database, as a lot of shelters, each animal
gets an ID number associated with their history. Adoptions, reclaims or citizen walks in to microchip
their animal the information is put into Pet Point that automatically registers with 24-hour Pet Watch
the person's name, address and contact information.
Dr. Carlston asked does each (a), (b) and (c) of the ordinance need to be determined.
LOU Kreidler said (a) was already in the ordinance it was just (b) the director or his designee is the
designated caretaker of every animal as of the date of intake and (c) immediately upon intake the
director or his designee, as the designated caretaker, is authorized to provide each appropriate aged
aninial with core immunizations and parasite treatment, A recommendation is needed from the Board
on whether or not to take the ordinance to Council.
El
Eric West voiced the better way would be to vaccinate all the animals even if the most expensive,
either way there would be a cost.
Judge Gossorn mentioned on the rescue or transfer with a loss of that resource it should have some
implication on the positive side to offset the expense.
Lou Kreidler explained when proposed to vaccinate all animals as the standard there still would be
animals not suitable or too dangerous to vaccinate such as those pregnant, sick or aggressive.
Dr. Gibson expressed to be okay with the exclusions it is the same criteria used at a veterinary
hospital. At her clinic geriatric animals are vaccinated but Animal Services is different if deemed not
adoptable why vaccinate when more than likely a geriatric had been vaccinated in their life and if not
are rather resistant to have not gotten something by now.
Katrena Mitchell stated on the geriatric dogs it is case by case because of a population in the
community prefers the older dogs also it depends on their condition.
Dr. Kathleen Wilkarns recommended to change the language from "not vaccinate" to "not suitable to
vaccinate".
Dr. Carlson affirmed the recommendation of the language change in the proposal to be taken to City
Council.
Eric West asked if the Animal Shelter Advisory Committee (ASAC) specified to vaccinate all animals
and was a veterinarian on the committee. He was concerned about the two different opinions even
though he was not on the Health Board was inclined to lean toward the recommendation of the
veterinarians.
0
Loi!'?�reidler replied ASAC recommended all animals be vaccinated and does have a veterinarian as
the Board has Dr. Gibson. The veterinarian was not at the ASAC meeting yesterday it was two rescue
groups and citizen -at -large, The difference in the recommendation from ASAC and the Health Board
would be members of ASAC are animal focused tend to be very passionate orientated about every
animal life and the $9,500 was not a lot of money. The Health Board members have a broader range
from many different focuses in the community.
Dr. Keith Williamson retorted not much money because it is not their money. In defense of ASAC to
immunize the animals in the criteria it would not be for their protection but for the others protection
to decrease the burden of disease in the kennel.
Dr. Gibson responded there can be repercussions to vaccinate all the animals it can be a risk to the
animal or human life that deals with the animal. If it is recommended to not vaccinate those in the
criteria, could it be revised later.
Lou Kreidler informed the Board it can be revisited at a later date. The Health Board and ASAC
discussions of the risk, benefits, cost associated and recommendation can be presented to Council
to allow them to make a decision based on the advisory boards information. The language now will
simply change the policy to allow us to vaccinate on intake.
Dr. David Carlson asked for a motion of approval to vaccinate all suitable or viable animals upon
intake. Dr. Katheleen Williamson introduced a motion to approve and Dr. Keith Williamson seconded
the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
V. NEXT MEETING DATE
Friday November 9, 2018 was noted as the next meeting date.
VI. ADJOURN
Dr. David Carlston adjourned the meeting at 12:55 pm.
Print Name
David C,atfsto PhD e
Wichita Falls- Wichita Count v Public Health Board
City- County Board
101