It’s been more than two years since almost half a million Miami-Dade voters 
approved a referendum that would fund a no-kill animal services climate and program at the county.
Now the advocates who took that initiative to the ballot are pushing for statewide legislation that would force the county to respect that November 2012 vote where 65% of the people agreed to pay additional taxes, about $15 per average home, to create a dedicate source of revenue for this endeavor.
It was non-binding. But the numbers are also overwhelmingly a mandate.
And Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez and the county commission have had the gall to pose with puppies at practically useless adopt-a-pet events while they continued to ignore that mandate for two annual budget cycles. They have money to give away in subsidies for friendly billionaire sports team owners and millionaire developers — Gimenez funding priorities that the people never got a chance to vote on, by the way.
Michael Rosenberg and Rita Schwartz, who are the Pets’ Trust organizers, have been fighting to get the 2012 referendum respected. They went to county municipalities and had the councils and commissions pass resolutions urging the county commission to approve the funding and the program. Now, they have taken that battle statewide with a bill that would force the county to respect the referendum and make it binding.
State Rep. Barbara Watson and State Sen. Dwight Bullard have sponsored corresponding bills which would allow citizen petitioners in Florida’s 67 counties to tax themselves to fund improvements in animal services. It is mirrored after the Children’s Trust initiative. The Pet’s Trust initiative was only non binding because the law prohibits self-taxation for those reasons. This bill would allow citizens, like us, to tax ourselves for such programs.
“We are spending millions of dollars to kill animals when we could be spending those same resources to save them,” Watson told Ladra. Somewhere around 60,000 people in her district voted in favor of the tax. For Bullard, whose district is larger, the number is probably higher.
And their law would be retroactive five years — which means that the 2012 referendum on the Pets’ Trust initiative would have to be respected and the county would have to fund a $20 million program aimed at decreasing the population of feral cats and stray or unwanted dogs through spay and neutering as well as education.
But first, it has to get through three committees. The Pets’ Trust advocates have been sending out email blasts urging people to call Representative Debbie Mayfield (772-778-5077) and ask her to put House bill 207 on her March 3 committee agenda and Sen. Wilton Simpson (850-487-5018) to ask him to put Senate Bill 670 on his March 4th agenda.
Rosenberg said that the calls must be made by today, Wednesday, in order for the bill to be placed on the agendas.
“When this passes, all counties, if they desire, would be allowed to have a vote to create their own Pets’ Trust, and the vote would be binding,” said Rosenberg, adding that 800 animals are killed each day in Florida at a cost of about $200,000 a day.
“This has gone on for decades. We’ve become complacent. But we can solve it,” he wrote in the email blast. “We don’t have high powered lobbyist fighting for this. We don’t have developers seeking their own self interests. We are not a corporation looking for selfish tax breaks. But rather, we have you…and only you.”
Time and again the mayor and others who voted against giving the Pets’ Trust Initiative its funding have said that the people “didn’t know what they were voting for.” What people? I knew what I was voting for. So did a majority of the people that Ladra has spoken to about this. Does the mayor get to pick and choose when the people knew what they were voting for? Because he apparently thinks they knew they were voting for a $9 million subsidy when they approved the use of Miami city waterfront property for some preposterous “privately-funded” tourist attraction that is going to mar our skyline.
They approved an additional $4 million in funding to animal services, but those monies have largely gone to an increase in staff and have not addressed the issue of misspending at animal services.
An online petition started two years ago to have the county approve the Pets’ Trust Initiative — “support the will of the people and fund the entire amount that was voted for” — has collected more than 7,000 signatures. The Pets’ Trust people are getting handwritten signatures from people demanding that their vote be honored. So far, they have collected about 1,000, Rosenberg said.
“After the election, Mayor Gimenez said he would ‘support the will of the people’ and fund the entire amount they voted for. He even included the amount in his initial budget proposal,” Rosenberg reminded Ladra this week. “After saying this repeatedly for months and months, the Mayor decided that the people ‘really didn’t know what they were voting for,’ and killed the Pets’ Trust.
“He took it upon himself to cast aside almost a half million votes,” Rosenberg said.
Now, let’s hope the state takes it out of his hands.
Pets’ Trust goes statewide to force county’s 2012 referendum added by Ladra on
View all posts by Ladra →
Dear Isaiah,
I don’t know how to reach you, but here is my phone number. 305 439 3571. Please call me so I can tell you about the Pets’ Trust.
The Pets’ Trust cannot raise a tax. We are a very large group of people that love our animals and want to make sure we can stop killing them, and to have enough resources to do the huge amount of spay/neuter surgeries we need to do.
When the community overwhelmingly voted to support this mission, we felt a huge committment needed to be made back to the community to make sure the job was done correctly.
The first day after the election, we started creating a plan to make sure every penny would be spent wisely. After we reviwed the plan we thought….”what if we are missing something”….so, we sent that plan to dozens of experts across the country, asking them to make sure we did not leave anything out. Over the next four months animals experts from around the country helped tweak the plan. The Mayor approved it as did all 13 Miami Dade Commissioners.
We felt a huge responsibility on our shoulders to make sure this was done correctly, and that our promises to the citizens of Miami Dade would be accomplished.
We recognized the problem, created a solution, educated the community, and rather than just sit back and complain….created an entire package that would solve the overpopulation probem of our animals. That is what you voted for.
Again my number is 305 439 3571. Please call anytime, any evening, anyday. We have nothing to hide. I look forward to speaking with you…
Michael Rosenberg
Founder Pets’ Trust
Isaiah,
Please do not be misled into believing that “many thousands did not understand the language on the ballot”. This is gibberish from Mayor Gimenez who is looking for excuses (and flimsy ones, at that) to justify betraying the Voters of Miami Dade. And, please understand that a tax increase to support the sharp DECREASE of killing of healthy adoptable animals will NOT “open the doors to our taxes being raised whenever the Pets Trust feels they need additional money.” In our political system taxes are not raised on a whim. Additionally, if you read the post by Rita Schwartz, she explains that as fewer animals need to be killed (due to the implementation of What the Voters Voted For, taxes would likely DEcrease.
I heard about this today and I am very upset. I am sorry that I am one of the many thousands that did not understand the language on the ballot. I am a responsible pet owner as a matter of fact I have 3 dogs, however I do not want a tax increase. This will just open the doors to our taxes being raised whenever the pet trust feels they need additional money. We were already given the option to contribute funds with our tax bill. If thousands voted to increase our taxes for the pet trust then I am sure they collected a large amount of money already. DO NOT INCREASE MY TAXES.
The very first sentence on the ballot question stated there would be a slight tax hike. It turns out that the average homeowner would pay $15 per year per household. We are currently spending over $300 to kill an animal when it is $65 to spay/neuter.
This measure is cost effective and as time goes on the $15 tax would decrease and eventually we wouldn’t have to spend millions of tax payer dollars to kill the animals which we have done for decades.
Thank you for voting for the Pets’ Trust and for recognizing this is the solution for this problem.
I voted for the Pet Trust because I was told that it would not impact my property taxes. The next thing we find out that if enacted my property taxes would have been hit. Now I know it wasn’t a lot of money, but it still a property tax hit.
When does it stop? Don’t we have other issues that need our attention? Transportation? Prison? Sea Level Rise? I like my pet and consider myself a responsible pet owner. I would like to see pet owners that abuse, abandon or neglect their pets fined.
The biggest fallasy in every debate is the creation of opposing forces that have nothing to do with each other. Don’t throw the Children’s Trust into the mix. Other than the word “Trust” which was a political device condoned by county lawyers and lobbyists, don’t pick apart either one or set up the “children versus pets” debate. That is just a diversionary tactic.
Did I get a vote to chose taxpayer funding for David Beckham’s stadium project versus Donald Trump’s golf course project versus Jeff Berkowitz’s Sky Rise project versus Steven Ross’s stadium project.
I don’t care if these proposed projects are receiving funding was through the state and not locally – it’s all from we, the tax payers. I had no vote on these decisions that will create huge debt into the 2040’s for Miami residents.
Pet’s Trust will at the very least, SAVE you and I money in the decades to come through sterilization of unwanted and unloved overbred cats and dogs.
A friend recently told me that she would rather fund the PETS Trust than the Children’s Trust. (She’s looking into where the Children’s Trust money is going, who when, where, why and how).
I love Pets and support this wholeheartedly.
We have an incredible community and can take care of our children, our sick, our homeless, and our animals. In fact, the people of our community have demonstrated it with their vote. It is that vote that DEMANDS our leaders do what they are supposed to do, which is work for us.
Our hearts are big, and our minds are smart. I’m proud to call Miami home!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLMLOz8kC8E
I believe our community is very intelligent, and we should not underestimate our voters.
(1) We voted for the School bond.
(2) We voted for the Jackson bond.
(3) We voted for FIU expansion.
(4) We voted against the Courthouse.
(5) Almost 500,000 people voted for the Pets’ Trust. It seems to me that our community is very smart when it comes to knowing what is best.
Now, please…everyone….watch the video. Watch our leaders state publicly that they will let the voters decide. We decided. Ladra….your readers should be extremely upset that the voice of the people was not implemented. The reality, in America…it is our voice that is the ONLY voice that should count..We elect leaders that are supposed to work for us. In this case, several did not. Watch the video…..
By the way, I agree with hiking fines to help offset these costs. We should do both.
Love, Ladra
Ay, Pedro, you’re so fanatical. And your grammar is terrible.
First of all, it was a non-binding referendum, same thing as a straw ballot. Referendum can be defined as a vote on a measure, or a measure thus referred. It is NOT ONLY defined as a vote on a measure floated by a legislative body.
Second, regarding the legislation’s chances: You could say that about a lot of legislation … and you could also say that some far more far-fetched laws have been passed.
THIRD, this only opens the doors for animal wackos to put pets’ trust initiatives on the ballot.
And what is wrong with letting the people decide? Why can our elected officials decide when we know what we are voting for and when we don’t?
I trust my neighbors more than I trust them.
Love, Ladra
You so clueless…..let me help you. First it wasn’t a referendum, it was a straw ballot question (a poll), 2nd the sponsors will NEVER pass this legislation, because it opens the doors for wackos to put stuff on ballots that will prove to be very expensive to voters.
Sadly this is a problem…..the requires responsible pet owners to be fined for neglecting their pets.