Proposition 415, the bond proposal to use $22 million to build a new county animal shelter in the shadow of the old one, easily passed by double digits on Tuesday.
The bond passed with a margin of roughly 59 percent to 41 percent. Backers of the proposition said the overwhelming margin showed support for the countyโs efforts to save as many pets as it can.
โThe community has chosen to extend their hearts to lost and homeless pets,โ said Vince Rabago, the co-chair of the Pets Are Worth Saving-Proposition 415 Campaign.
The building that the Pima Animal Care Center is currently housed in was built in 1968, when Pima County had 300,000 people and pets were held there on a temporary basis in accordance with animal-care standards at the time.
The facility was built primarily to hold stray animals for no more than several days. If animals were not claimed by an owner after the time had passed, they were euthanized in an attempt to control rabies.
The population of Pima County is currently almost 1 million people. The growing number of people and pets in Pima County, in addition to the shelterโs move toward a no-kill approach, has led to issues with overcrowding and rampant spread of disease within the shelter.
According to Karen Hollish, PACCโs development director, the humane capacity for shelter pets is 500, and the shelter houses as many as 1,000 animals at any given time.
Last summer the county installed an air-conditioned tent on the grounds of the shelter to temporarily house the overflow of animals. In the 2014 fiscal year, PACC took in about 24,000 animals.
Pets are now being held longer as the shelter tries to reduce the number of pets being euthanized and increase the number of adoptions and live releases taking place.
The proposed new building will be larger and built to comply with current standards for animal care. It will have separate areas for adoption and the intake of new animals, in addition to other improvements that will reduce stress on the animals.
Opponents of the bond measure have stated their concerns about the cost of the shelter and the countyโs past misuse of bond funds as reasons to vote no.
Ann Holden, an opponent of Prop. 415, said she voted no because Pima County has a history of mismanaging bond money and she considers the cost of the shelter reconstruction excessive.
Mark Spear, another detractor, also listed those reasons for why he voted no.๏ปฟ
