* What is the name and number of the ordinance?

https://www.ci.san-marcos.tx.us/departments/health/AnimalServices/docs/09jan_ordinance.pdf

 

 

* What exactly does the ordinance call for pet owners to do (related to microchips)? What animals are targeted?

 

Section 6.044. Identification/Registration Microchip Required.

(a) It is a violation of this chapter if any person owning, keeping, harboring or having custody of

a dog or cat over the age of four (4) months within the City of San Marcos does not register such

animal as provided herein. Police dogs or assistance animals shall be exempt from the

Identification/Registration fee; however they must be in compliance with all other provisions of

this chapter. This section does not apply to animals temporarily within the city limits for a period

not to exceed fourteen (14) days.

 

 

Section 6.030. Impoundment and Redemption.

(d) Redemption of impounded animals:

(5) If an animal is impounded by an Animal Control Officer for violating this chapter

and the owner cannot prove that the animal has been previously microchipped, the owner

must purchase a microchip before the animal may be released from the Animal Services

Facility. The identification number provided by the microchip, shall be maintained on file

at the Animal Services Center or with a nationally recognized registry, for future

identification purposes.

 

 

• What are the penalties for non-compliance?

SECTION 7: Any person violating any provision of this ordinance commits a misdemeanor and

• is subject to the penalty provided in Section 1.015 of the San Marcos City Code upon conviction.

 

 

* Who proposed this ordinance? Who approved it and when? Were they anyhearings?

https://www.news8austin.com/content/top_stories/default.asp?ArID=231745

“The San Marcos Animal Services Advisory Board recommended mandating microchips as part of a new animal ordinance that will bring the city into compliance with state laws, and promote responsible pet ownership.”

 

* What events have you protested and when?

(1) ONLINE PROTEST FOR MANDATORY MICROCHPPING

New Social Media - Get Involved Online - NO MANDATORY Microchipping

Saturday, January 31, 2022 at 5:55pm THRU Saturday, February 7, 2022 at 7:55am

There are various ways to have your voice heard online thru new social media:

• Post a discussion item at the CETI Facebook Group https://tinyurl.com/cdre4u

• Express your opinions to your local online newspaper Newstreamz – here are some threads already in process

• https://tinyurl.com/ctkydpand here https://tinyurl.com/bcdrj6

• Fashion a response to discussion thread at Statesman blog article on CETI group https://tinyurl.com/ao66k2

 

(2) PROTEST OUTSIDE CITY HALL – FOLLOWED BY PUBLIC Q&A; WITH STAFF

Saturday, February 7, 2022

1:00pm - 2:30pm

 

(3) After 3 educational hearings a public hearing section was added to the agenda for the Animal Shelter Advisory Board Meeting and CETI members attended and spoke

Wednesday, February 11, 2022

12:00pm - 3:00pm

Grant Harris Building

 

 

 

 

 

 

* What does the animal control board say in response?

https://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/hillcountry/entries/2009/02/11/san_marcos_animal_board_to_rev.html

“Today, a city board made what could be the first move toward rescinding a mandate on microchipping pets before it has even gone into effect. If this happens, it would be entirely in response to vocal opposition because board members, who initially recommended the mandate, haven’t changed their minds.”

 

What has the City Council said in response?

JAN 2009

January 23, 2022 https://newstreamz.com/2009/01/23/pet-ordinance-survives-council-meeting

““My reason for voting for this (animal ordinance) is to change how we look at animals … treat them more like family,” Jones said. Jones said he was asked for the possibility of an alternative to microchipping for cases in which religious thinking goes against the implantation. City staff was at a loss for words, and a definitive answer was not produced. The emotional question provided for an intense environment.”

FEB 2009

 

* What are we calling on the City Council to do in response to ourconcerns? ("rescind the bill?" "revoke the ordinance?" "overturn thedecision?")

{please see Rob’s letter}

To:  The Honorable Chris Jones and John Thomaides,

On behalf of the San Marcos citizens who are concerned with the upcoming April 1st, 2009 implementation of the Animal Ordinance, I wish to thank you for the chance to voice our concerns at the March 3rd City Council meeting.  Though the agenda has not yet been published officially, we are grateful that you have given your word that this discussion will be on the docket.

But, this does not address the root cause of the major issue that our citizens have:  MANDATORY RFID Chipping.  At the public information sessions, many got up to voice their concerns that the mandatory implementation of this new technology went against their rights and personal freedoms. 
We know from your voting records on the City Council, and from your remarks, that you respect the rights of the citizens of San Marcos to think and act for themselves, in the best interest of this community.
This is why we need TWO council members to put a motion forward at the meeting on March 3rd for the following modifications to the ordinance:
1.)  Remove article II, Section D, subsection 5.  (This does not fit with the wording in the rest of the ordinance, and does not give the option of other identification as prescribed.)
“ARTICLE II. IMPOUNDMENT
Section 6.030. Impoundment and Redemption.
(d) Redemption of impounded animals:
(5)  If an animal is impounded by an Animal Control Officer for violating this chapter and the owner cannot prove that the animal has been previously microchipped, the owner must purchase a microchip before the animal may be released from the Animal Services Facility. The identification number provided by the microchip, shall be maintained on file at the Animal Services Center.”

2.)  Insert into section 6.044 the following:  "Since other forms of identification are defined as acceptable throughout this ordinance, microchipping will be a voluntary alternative to tags, and other forms of identification."
To support this, please note the following sections from the ordinance:
- "Traceable identification means a type of identification, such as a tag, microchip, or tattoo, that can be readily used by an Animal Control Officer or Animal Services to identify the current ownership of an animal.
Registration means a rabies certificate issued by a licensed veterinarian and an identification tag recognized by Animal Services from an approved issuing agent. "
- Within section 6.044, (b) says that Issuing Agents can issue pet animal "Identification/Registration Microchips".  "Identification / Registration Microchips" is used all throughout the rest of the section.

The wording clearly gives owners an option, and we feel that the impoundment clause making this a MANDATORY (as well and non-enforceable) issue will cause confusion, and future legal issues for the city.

Our supporters will work to assist in raising volunteers and assitance for education and community involvement on all other aspects of this initiative.  The ordinance's intention was, and still should be, to show that San Marcos cares about the quality of the life for it's citizens, animals as well as humans.

I look forward to talking with you both personally about this request for assistance.
Best Regards,
Rob Roark

* Have they formally agreed to put this on the agenda for March 3rd?

 

* Have they formally agreed to consider the research I will be

presenting?

San Marcos, Texas, located in the Texas Hill Country, passed an Animal Control Ordinance after two readings on December 16, 2021 requiring mandatory micro chipping of all pets within the municipality.

The ordinance goes into effect on April 1, 2009. Hot button issues such as banning tethering dogs in trucks and pet chaining were extracted from the ordinance due to possible undue social and financial pressure on residents. But the mandatory micro-chipping element was never debated the council simply ignored it. Now there is organized public protest to the mandatory aspect of the measure, being coordinated by Citizens Educational Technology Initiative (CETI).

“Many of us worked whole heartedly for passage of anti cruelty elements in the new ordinance. We attended the City Council meetings. We wrote our elected officials. Our council members heatedly debated just about every issue and possible multiple scenarios to each issue and yet failed to discuss mandatory micro chipping. Since the educational hearings, the public outcry over the mandatory micro chipping section has become a paramount issue in San Marcos.

“In addition to raising awareness online through social networking venues and on the ground grassroots efforts, we have unequivocally requested our elected officials to make one minuscule change by adding one word, “NON”, to the mandatory micro chipping section of the ordinance. We are requesting an open and honest debate and simply want the mandatory element out of the ordinance. Many of us are concerned about possible dangerous side effects, some have religious concerns, and we simply don't believe in legislating personal responsibility. It is vital that expert testimony be entered into the public record. Residents are taking time and effort to educate themselves about RFID chipping and their questions deserve answers.”

CETI has successfully (with the aid of two elected officials) managed to have the animal ordinance placed on the Council agenda for March 3rd, and the Animal Control Board, where the ordinance originated, has agreed to discuss the mandatory micro chipping section of the ordinance.

“The anti mandatory micro chip movement in San Marcos has been a collaborative effort with everyone working together towards a common goal, an example of democracy in action, with the community working locally on national issues. This has sparked renewed interest in the political process after the November elections. Citizens want to get involved beyond the ballot box and be proactive in their community by safeguarding the sanctity of civil service."

 

RADIO

 

 

Rule of Law Radio

https://mp3.ruleoflawradio.com/ROL/16k/ROL_2009-02-16_16k.mp3

 

Café Liberty

VIDEO

Pet microchip mandate to begin in San Marcos https://www.news8austin.com/content/top_stories/default.asp?ArID=231745

Newstreamz Video Extra - Animal ordinance citizens meeting https://newstreamz.com/2009/02/09/newstreamz-video-extra-animal-ordinance-citizen-communication

 

ARTICLES

Could microchip mandate be repealed? https://newstreamz.com/2009/02/11/could-chip-mandate-be-repealed

San Marcos animal board to “revisit” microchip mandate https://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/hillcountry/entries/2009/02/11/san_marcos_animal_board_to_rev.html

Letter to the editor: Dreams of empty animal shelters https://newstreamz.com/2009/02/11/letter-to-the-editor-dreams-of-empty-animal-shelters

CETI vs. City in final animal ordinance session https://newstreamz.com/2009/02/07/ceti-vs-city-in-final-animal-ordinance-session

Group prefers tattoos to microchips https://newstreamz.com/2009/02/02/group-prefers-tattoos-to-microchips

Organization proposes ear tattoos over microchips https://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/hillcountry/entries/2009/01/29/the_city_of_san_marcos.html#postcomment

Pet ordinance survives council meeting https://newstreamz.com/2009/01/23/pet-ordinance-survives-council-meeting

Microchip tag law stirs city pet owners https://newstreamz.com/2009/01/10/microchip-tag-law-stirs-city-pet-owners-2

Council gives nod to pet rules https://www.sanmarcosrecord.com/archivesearch/local_story_353114201.html

San Marcos makes animal laws stricter https://www.statesman.com/search/content/news/stories/local/01/19/0119smanimal.html?cxntlid=delicious

 

USDA document on microchipping
https://www.amacausa.org/UserFiles/File/USDA%20Microchip%20Report.pdf