| # | Name | Comments |
|---|
| 101 | Robert Keller | The Pets, Inc. proposal is more likely to accomplish the goal of reducing our animal problems and it is risk free because it pays for services rendered - not services promised by a company that has never been able to live up to their promises. Project Pet has been collecting money for this building for nine years. Even after Lexington Co. gave them the land they couldn't get it going. Now they want us to give them the building too. What's next? Council should sell the land and add that money to the spay/neuter fund. |
| 102 | PAULA ISAACSON | |
| 103 | hazel crowley | Thank you for doing this. |
| 104 | Amy Rybarczyk | Over 60,000 spays will prevent far more suffering than a pretty building in Harbison - and, in the long run, it will SAVE TAXPAYER MONEY! We don't need more buildings crowding Harbison, either. |
| 105 | Anonymous | I don't believe the building in the Harbison area is the answer to the pet overpopulation problem. I support a fund to provide spay/neuter services to the counties. It is more immediate, and MUCH more easily administered. PLEASE ! |
| 106 | Toby Porter | |
| 107 | Heather Boland | |
| 108 | Karen Sutphin | |
| 109 | Tracy L Young | |
| 110 | Anonymous | |
| 111 | Jamie McCulloch | |
| 112 | John Myers | |
| 113 | Susan Fulmer | Why are both counties looking to support a 25,000 square foot facility on Bower Parkway? Because of the traffic? Because folks will stop by on their "way to the movies" or "out to eat?" That's expensive real estate to build a facility we'd be foolish to support. Put the money where it belongs - on spay/neuter programs to decrease the numbers of animals that end up in the shelters or euthanized! |
| 114 | Bryan Ziegler | |
| 115 | Anonymous | |
| 116 | Judith Duncan | |
| 117 | Christine Spicer | |
| 118 | Anonymous | |
| 119 | Rachel Wilson | |
| 120 | Kristin Smith | |
| 121 | Brad Wilson | |
| 122 | Anonymous | Project Pet is an organization that has proved itself to be untrustworthy. Pets Inc. has shown to be upstanding, honest and caring!
The choice should be simple. I VOTE FOR PETS INC! |
| 123 | Judy Hundley | |
| 124 | Anonymous | |
| 125 | Terry D. Rowell | |
| 126 | Anna Skipper | I have adopted two dogs from Pets Inc. and know that they do excellent work. I also believe that an aggressive spay/neuter program is needed to prevent overpopulation of cats and dogs. |
| 127 | Jimmie Ewing | |
| 128 | Teresa Jordan | Pets, Inc. has done an incredible job. We adopted our Stormy from them. I agree that the funds would be better spent if used for an aggressive campaign to spay and neuter. |
| 129 | Laura Greenwold | |
| 130 | Marshall Derks | |
| 131 | Melissa Edwards | |
| 132 | Kim Smith | |
| 133 | Rae Simpson | |
| 134 | Kat Kinnie | |
| 135 | Miriam Fling | Please help these poor defenseless animals. |
| 136 | Harold Brown | |
| 137 | Jean Westmoreland | I fully support PETS inc. The people there have struggled to be able to helpstray animals. They should get some help. Jean Westmoreland |
| 138 | Suwana Tereshchenko | |
| 139 | Sallie McCutchen | |
| 140 | Jenny simpson | |
| 141 | Kacie Atkinson | |
| 142 | Julie Baldwin | I believe that both counties need this cilnic. |
| 143 | lorri potts | |
| 144 | Lisa Rivera | As a low-income family we so often have had to forego spaying/neutering and basic vet care due to low funds and no available low cost options. We love our pets and want to be able to keep them healthy. |
| 145 | Anonymous | don't want just one rescue org to get all the money, divide it up |
| 146 | Allison Shipman | As an avid pet lover (and getting my new pup spayed this Tuesday), I think this proposal makes much more sense. While on my recent search for a new dog, I was amazed at how many owners did not get their dogs fixed. We will never have enough shelters until we get our own and the stray animals spayed and neutered. |
| 147 | Mary Baylor | |
| 148 | A. MOREFIELD | |
| 149 | R.MOREFIELD | |
| 150 | R.MOREFIELD | |