Queen Creek Arizona dog shelter ordered to close

[SargeUNN]

Source: Arizona Republic


Queen Creek Town Council's vote to force a dog shelter out of business at its current location could mean a death sentence for some of the animals, the facility's owner said.

"We're scrambling to find them homes," said Sheila Iyengar, owner of Reservation Rewards Animal Rescue, which she runs from her new home near the corner of Sossaman and Chandler Heights roads.


The relocation effort could take months, but Iyengar faces a possible misdemeanor charge and fines of up to $2,500 per day if she doesn't comply by Oct. 11 with a town order to shut down.

Iyengar, who operated for six months without a permit, said she may have to euthanize some of her 12 dogs, many of which have physical handicaps or other ailments that limit their chances of finding families. "It's devastating to have to think about it," she said.

The council voted 6-1 at its Sept. 1 meeting to deny the 36-year-old woman a conditional-use permit for the shelter and a related business called Lotus Dog Training & Boarding. Revenue from the training and boarding operations paid the shelter's costs and supported Iyengar and her small staff.

"Not only is it a death sentence for the dogs, but I'm going to lose my house and my livelihood," she said.

The topic roused passionate debate among council members and the public, but in the end, only Councilman Craig Barnes voted in Iyengar's favor.

Council members praised Iyengar for her efforts to save dogs but criticized her for not getting the permit before buying the property and investing thousands of dollars.

They called the shelter and boarding center inappropriate in a residential-neighborhood setting. Others said approving the permit would give Iyengar an unfair advantage over businesses in commercial areas that have to pay sales taxes.

Barnes said he stands behind the council's decision but pointed out that many residents operate businesses from their homes. He said he doubts Iyengar's dogs would disrupt neighbors much.

"I think this was a molehill that was turned into a mountain," he said.

Iyengar said she knew she needed a permit, but town staff told her that she could apply for it after starting her business.

"They had told me, 'Don't worry about it. You can move on in there. You can apply for the conditional-use permit later on' (and) that it wasn't 'a big deal,' " she said. "I got green lights everywhere."



Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/community/pinal/articles/2010/09/10/20100910queen-creek-animal-shelter-closing.html#ixzz0z97TBXgj

Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/community/pinal/articles/2010/09/10/20100910queen-creek-animal-shelter-closing.html

[Lightning Count]

1. Over a stupid permit?

Facepalm.

[yellowcanine]

4. Would you feel that way if your house and back yard were next door to the "shelter"

This is a residential neighborhood. People have a normal expectation that a dog shelter is not going to suddenly show up next door. Hence the need for "stupid" permits. Build a house without a building permit and you may have to tear it down. The fate of the animals is the woman's fault, not the people denying the permit after she broke the law.

Read the neighbor's perspective:

Art Rispoli, a neighbor whose complaints about the facility's barking dogs triggered the controversy, said he works nights and the dogs wake him.

While Iyengar said she accommodated Rispoli by keeping kennel doors closed and limiting the number of dogs outside, Rispoli insisted his complaints went unheeded.

"She had told me to come to her personally, and I did three times," he said. "The fourth time, I called the town."


Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/community/pinal/articles/2010/09/10/20100910queen-creek-animal-shelter-closing.html#ixzz0z9MnQVNb

[Kweli4Real]

11. Except ...

The Sossaman/Chandler Heights Road area isn't exactly a residential neighborhood, as the article/anti-shelter folks suggest. And the shelter is located on a 3/4 acre lot.

This is about a pissed off neighbor.

[yellowcanine]

17. According to the article it is zoned residential. There is a process for getting a permit

for a non-zoned use in a area. It is called a zoning variance. The right way is to apply for a variance, go through the public hearings, etc., and make your best case - NOT just start doing something without a permit. SO WHAT if this is "about a pissed off neighbor." That is part of the point of zoning laws. People buy property in an area that is zoned residential, they have the right for the area to be residential, not commercial.

[Lightning Count]

20. Sounds like the council needs to run a crackdown operation then.

"Barnes said he stands behind the council's decision but pointed out that many residents operate businesses from their homes. He said he doubts Iyengar's dogs would disrupt neighbors much."

They also need to make sure all the horse shelters are shut down immediately.

[Lightning Count]

12. If this was one of the city council's businesses, you can bet that permit would have been

there yesterday.

[LaurenG]

2. Oh no that's devastating.

I hope she gets someone to speak up for her and I hope the City Council changes their decision.

[yellowcanine]

5. Why should the City Council change their decision? She broke the law.

She put the animals and maybe her neighbors in danger by not following animal control and zoning regulations. What if your house were right next door? Would you want them to change their decision then? This is a no brainer. Dog shelters do not belong in residential neighborhoods.

[LaurenG]

7. I don't know maybe you could think of a reason. I hope they do.

:eyes:

[yellowcanine]

9. No I can't. They should uphold their zoning laws. Read the neighbor's account:

Art Rispoli, a neighbor whose complaints about the facility's barking dogs triggered the controversy, said he works nights and the dogs wake him.

While Iyengar said she accommodated Rispoli by keeping kennel doors closed and limiting the number of dogs outside, Rispoli insisted his complaints went unheeded.

"She had told me to come to her personally, and I did three times," he said. "The fourth time, I called the town."


Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/community/pinal/articles/2010/09/10/20100910queen-creek-animal-shelter-closing.html#ixzz0z9MnQVNb

[LaurenG]

10. I am really sorry for the neighbor

but the owner was under the impression that she could do this according to the article.

"They had told me, 'Don't worry about it. You can move on in there. You can apply for the conditional-use permit later on' (and) that it wasn't 'a big deal,' " she said. "I got green lights everywhere."

I am also concerned that the animals will be put down and that is never a good solution.
I really hope she gets some help here.

[yellowcanine]

18. No one with any sense buys property based on "what they told me"

She should have had a lawyer reading the zoning laws and advising her what to do based on the law, not "what they told me." Besides - this is her own account - the city people say something quite different. A lawyer would have told her to get a permit and how to do it. I have very little sympathy for this woman. She did this without regard to how it might affect her neighbors - or the animals. It would be sad if the animals have to be put down but it is nobody's fault but this woman's - not the neighbor and not the City Council. The dogs and the neighbors are the victims here. The City Council is not the villain - they are simply upholding the law as they are sworn to do.

[Lightning Count]

19. So to shelter animals in a rural locale you need to pay a lawyer a few grand?

And then of course pay the permit fee. As long as her neighbors must get rid of their horses than it seems fair though.

[yellowcanine]

25. If they are in violation of zoning laws - absolutely. And it is a bit disingenuous to make this

about just "sheltering animals". She was running a dog training and boarding business. Call me a cynic, but I suspect that the dog shelter is secondary and she is using it to to garner favorable publicity.

[LaurenG]

22. The fact that she did buy the property

and in her mind thought it was all good is what I'm concerned about. Others in this thread have told you about the neighborhood. City Councils' uphold the law when they feel like it - we ALL know this, we all have anecdotal stories, think (past) mayor of Wasilla. So really they could give her a break and the animals that she is caring for could be saved.

Just for full disclosure - are you on the City Council somewhere?

edit: spelling

[yellowcanine]

26. Don't be absurd. Just for full disclosure, do you run a dog boarding business?

And I don't KNOW anything about this neighborhood other than the fact that it IS zoned residential and this woman was running a dog training and boarding business as well as a dog shelter, without a permit. I am not on a city council. I DO own two dogs and I would not let them near this woman, based on what I have read here. She knows just enough to be dangerous when it comes to taking care of dogs. City Councils uphold the law or they get voted out and/or jailed. At least where I live.

[LaurenG]

29. I wish the best for her and her animals

I would like to see a better outcome for all of them.

[Kweli4Real]

13. I understand your point ...

about the lack of a permit; but with your "house right next door" comment, you clearly are not familiar with the area.

Did you know that several of the surrounding properties board several horses? Or, that the township has no limitation on the number of "pets" one can have on one's property?

[yellowcanine]

27. People have made claims - I can only go by what is in the article.

If there are other zoning violations going on that is no reason to allow this one. You might as well not have any zoning. In my experience the way zoning violations work in many more sparsely populated areas is that people often get by with them if they maintain a low profile and do not piss off the neighbors. She obviously didn't do that and once the violations came to the attention of the City Council their obligation is to uphold the law.

[lillypaddle]

3. This is so sad, BUT

I know I'll get shit for this, but I don't think an animal shelter & boarding/training facility is appropriate in a residential neighborhood. She wasn't very bright to invest money and establish a business on someone's "oh, you can get a permit later, don't worry."

I have two rescue dogs. I love dogs. I wouldn't want a shelter & business next door to my home. There is a good reason for zoning, especially for residential zoning. Apparently she did NOT get "green lights everywhere."

[yellowcanine]

6. Exactly right. Dog shelters do not belong in residential neighborhoods.

Not only that, but the permitting process can also weed out individuals who are not capable of or should not be running an animal shelter - and from what I have read here - that includes this woman. A professional would not make the mistakes this woman has made. She has no right running an animal shelter of any kind.

[LiberalFighter]

8. This is a stupid statement.

Others said approving the permit would give Iyengar an unfair advantage over businesses in commercial areas that have to pay sales taxes.


How the hell does she have an advantage over businesses that pay sales taxes? Those businesses are in the business of making a profit. I seriously doubt that her shelter is nothing more than a non-profit business that is barely meeting expenses for the sole purpose of saving rescue.

[yellowcanine]

14. She also operates a dog training and boarding business out of the same building.

The more I read about this the less defensible this woman's position is. She operates a dog shelter and a dog training and boarding business out of a residence without appropriate permits in a residential neighborhood. How can anyone defend that? As "wonderful" as her defenders make her sound, to me she sounds like a twit. I have 2 dogs by the way, and no way would I leave them with someone who operates this way.

[RaleighNCDUer]

16. The training and boarding is what makes the rescue operation possible.

And this 'residential neighborhood' sounds to me like an edge of town, huge lot section - she's on 3/4 of an acre herself - which means the only people who would be bothered are those who CHOOSE to be bothered. And, there was no mention of the facilities being inadequate or the dogs poorly cared for. If she was led to believe that setting up there and getting the permits after the fact would be no problem, then it is incumbent on the town to either change the zoning or assist her in re-locating.

[yellowcanine]

23. "If she was led to believe....." That is her account. Some people choose to hear what they

want to hear. She is incompetent. A competent business owner does not buy property based on conversations with a few people at the municipal building. They hire a lawyer who knows zoning law and how to get the proper permits for the intended use. And no competent lawyer would have advised her to take this course of actions. It is incumbent on the City Council to uphold the law and not make special exceptions for every dimwit who decides they are going to do something regardless of the law. Why should the taxpayers in this community help pay to relocate her business? And make no mistake - this was not JUST a dog shelter. She was running a training and boarding business out of the same residence in a residential neighborhood. Residential neighborhood means residences, not businesses, regardless of the size of the lots. If the nature of the neighborhood is such that this business would be a reasonable use, she could have applied for a zoning variance.

[Lightning Count]

28. You mean a wealthy business owner.

"A competent business owner does not buy property based on conversations with a few people at the municipal building. They hire a lawyer who knows zoning law and how to get the proper permits for the intended use."

Businesses are for the wealthy. The poor/middle class shouldn't try this at home.

[yellowcanine]

32. B.S. That is a total cop out. Lots of small businesses hire lawyers.

Lots of individuals hire lawyers. And there are free legal services available for people who can't afford them. I would wager that any sincere person who wanted to start a dog shelter could get pro bono legal services with little effort through one of the many animal protection organizations or a university legal clinic.

[Lightning Count]

33. You would be wrong.

Find me a pro bono lawyer who handles zoning laws.

You also seem to think that people are aware of all this. She may have just thought that she received correct information from the people she spoke with in city government.

[yellowcanine]

35. People hear what they want to hear. That is why they need to get competent legal advice.

Nearly every university with a law school has a free legal clinic. That is how law students learn their trade. You think they don't study zoning laws in law schools? Besides that as I mentioned there are the animal protection groups - all of them have lawyers who would likely help out in a case like this if the person were mainly opening an animal shelter - but of course she wasn't was she?

[RaleighNCDUer]

30. You do get, don't you, that this is not a 'business'. It is a vocation.

People seldom get an MBA to open animal shelters. She apparently DID go to the city for advice, and was ill-advised. Again, taking in a half-dozen boarded dogs on irregular occasions in order to buy food and medicine for the shelter is NOT a business - it's what she was doing to keep the shelter running.

Why should the taxpayers...? Because she went to the town for information and advice and she started the shelter there on that advice. Had she been told 'no' from the git go, it would have never been an issue. She acted on what she believed to be authoritative information - that it would be OK, and she could get the permits later.

So she's a bad businesswoman. I guarantee, I'd rather have her as a neighbor than the neighbor whose complaints are shutting her down - or you.

[yellowcanine]

34. Yeah I got that part. And I don't believe it. She was running a dog training/boarding business.

Says so right in the article. Read it. She is obviously playing up the rescue operation to gain good publicity and sympathy. And it works with some, apparently. And the feeling is mutual about you being my neighbor if you think it is ok to just do anything you like regardless of zoning laws. That is a formula for bad neighbor relations. My dogs don't bother my neighbors. Hers obviously do. And it is naive to think that only one neighbor was bothered by her operation. One is reported as having complained. That doesn't mean that no one else was bothered. It didn't sound like many neighbors were coming forward to support granting the permit after the fact and she got only Council member to vote her way. That tells you something right there.

[LiberalFighter]

24. I agree that she was wrong to build without a permit.

But I still stand by my statement. The dog training classes and boarding business pays for the shelter. Few private shelters are going to be self sustaining. They would at best barely meet ends and the woman is not in it to make money but to save dogs.

Having 2 dogs is a fine attribute but in no way does it give you the understanding in operating a shelter. A shelter operation that involves long term rescues with medical issues is not cost effective and unavoidable unless one operates a kill type operation. It would be nice if shelters were all able to house rescues for just a few days before someone adopts. That would lower expenses but when long term are involved expenses go up. Especially, when rescues are fixed, vetted and analyzed before being adopted.

[yellowcanine]

31. Well I guess I am more cynical. I think this is mostly a dog training and boarding business.

I think the shelter is secondary. The woman certainly does not behave as if her main interest is in sheltering dogs or at least she is very stupid about it because she has done these dogs no favors in the way she has acted. Because I have been a dog owner (including adopting rescue dogs) for a long time I have interacted with a number of different dog trainers, dog boarding businesses and shelters. So spare me the lecture about how "I can't possibly understand." I am not going to run a shelter if that is what you mean and neither should this woman.

[classysassy]

15. Another act of lunacy by the loons in Arizona

When will the sane people of Arizona make a stand against the fools in this state?

[glinda]

21. Calling Ellen Degeneres!!!!!!!!!!! Bail this animals out.