Seizure of dogs unfair

To the editor:
Ready, shoot, aim, is the sentiment that expresses the grave injustice recently bestowed upon a husband and wife team whose break-even business was rescuing, loving, reviving and placing unwanted dogs that are otherwise euthanized.
It is tragic injustice and likely unlawful that a business operation which placed more than 9,000 dogs in the past 10 years could be subject to public humiliation and forced into bankruptcy within a few days by a young disgruntled ex-employee and the Muncie City appointed layperson, Phil Peckinpaugh, animal control director.
While Peckinpaugh stands firmly by his decision to seize 63 dogs, one has to wonder what happened. How do the assessments of animals being in good physical condition, with no finding of malnourishment or dehydration, no sign of widespread illness by the veterinarian for the State Board of Animal Health — a court recognized authority — get trumped by a layperson? Why have there been no citations issued if complaints were valid? How can real property (63 dogs) be seized without a warrant being issued by the court?
How did pictures provided by the disgruntled ex-employee that prompted Mr. Peckinpaugh actions and depicting the reasons for ex-employee firing get validated?
Finally, how does Mr. Peckinpaugh justify placing animals at this facility one week before he put it out business?
In the future, before pulling the trigger, before abruptly ending people’s long time love and livelihood, before unlawful seizure and threats of jail, restructured statutes and protocols for animal control must be adopted.
Richard L Shirey
Muncie

Fiscal crisis
To the editor:
I am writing to address an upcoming problem that could affect every citizen of Indiana. At this time the nation is approaching a fiscal problem that almost every American is aware of. At the same time our state is sitting on a large surplus, even though they will admit they are not sure of how it was acquired.
But at the same time, the counties in our state have had to endure more and more unfunded mandates and the curtailing of certain operations to make the state look good.
Our local Sheriff’s departments have also had to endure new unfunded mandates that may cause, in the long term, a declining of the public’s safety.
The overall infrastructure at the county level is showing the wear and tear that is going to snowball shortly unless our citizens wake up and see the real picture unfolding covertly in front of them. This will first become evident in counties with smaller populations.
Here is the problem. We, as Indiana citizens, have been led to believe that the state is in great shape. In reality, the state is made up of counties and the counties are being stressed financially by the state. Therefore, the state is not as financially sound as we have been led to believe. The illusion brought on by the serendipity surplus needs to be addressed now. A large portion of any surplus should be returned to the counties before declining infrastructure jeopardizes safety at the local level.
I am trying to get the state legislature to do what is right and propose a bill that any surplus should be returned to counties before other allocations are disbursed.
Please understand I am not affiliated with any organization or political party. My problem is I have to play politics in order to be heard at the Statehouse.
What I’m asking for is this: If our 92 counties make up the body of the state, then why does the state not want its body in top fiscal shape. Check with your county auditors about unfunded mandates. This is a growing problem for which no one seems to have a solution. As for me, I will try to visit as many Indiana counties as possible to get support at every stop with the message for our citizens that they have the power to make those at the state level understand our counties deserve better.
James M. Carter
Tell City[[In-content Ad]]