Hi AdvoCats,
Council voted for the 24-hr cat curfew again. Their final stage is feedback between 28 Oct - 28 Nov. We all need to revise our complaints, against the new DAMP and send them in again during these dates.
Link to read the DAMP 2021-2024 draft https://www.knox.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-10/2021-10-25%20-%20Agenda%20Meeting%20of%20Council%20Part%202%20of%202%20.pdf
(Will make a later update with some flaws in the DAMP 2021-2025.)
Please keep all your correspondence with Council. Unanswered emails and letters are also important as they prove lack of response. Please keep all your Council replies. Please let residents know how to join our group Ombudsman case.
We need to add more points to these below - specifically on how the Domestic Animal Management Plan 2021-2025 still does not contain evidence, and its own data does not match its action for a 24-hr cat curfew
- Council is unfairly targeting cats, and their owners, in the absence of any evidence, the sunset-to-sunrise pilot did not have evidence of efficacy - no scientific evidence was collected
- Council are facilitating hate speech towards cats and cat-owners.
- Complaints of dog nuisance are triple that of cats, yet Knox has a Council Order allowing dogs off-lead in almost 300 parks, reserves and sporting fields
- Council is advantaging dog-owners, and disadvantaging cat-owners
- 80percent of impounded cats are not the registered cats owned by the residents afflicted by the 24-hr cat curfew (latest 2020 figures)
- Council is claiming ‘animal welfare experts’ that are private organisations that are not experts in animal welfare. September Knox News, again quoted an ‘animal welfare expert’, who does not have qualification, and who is contracted to Knox Council. The RSPCA (private org) euthanised 9714 cats in 2019-2020. Is being a leading contract killer an 'expert'? They are not animal welfare experts, nor are they experts in wildlife conservation
- Knox Council did not advertise its proposed law of 24-hours, and used a flawed feedback survey for a night curfew, to instead put through a very different law that harms many residents
- the surveys used to make this law could be accessed beyond Australia, allowed multiple responses from a person anonymously, anyone could say they were a cat or dog owner, etc, and there is no verification
- there is already state law in place to deal with nuisance cats (Section 23 DAA 1994), so is it ethical or legal for the burden of proof be lowered by Knox Council to make the collection of revenue (enforcement) easier?
- a 24-hr cat curfew divides the community, and removes cat-owners rights to know the identity of the accuser. It enables neighbours to target and victimise a minority group - aided and encouraged by Council law.
Many of the 3317 survey responses were due to Andy Dixon's call-out, though Council claims it was a success of their SMS messaging. The DAMP leaves out our concerns we wrote in the survey - a false survey again manipulated to falsify for Council Agenda.
Who benefits from this 24-hr cat curfew?
The wild life being decimated by overdevelopment where Council does not listen and prevents community consultation?
The 80percent of impounded, unregistered, cats now more likely to face death than adoption?
The cat-owners forced to live in cages, like their cats, with wire enclosures, and high-fenced yards?
The renters denied their hard-won rights to keep their cats?
The foxes, owls, dogs and humans who all have more rights than cats?
The neighbours who can hide their identities to get rid of cat-owner neighbours?
The community divided between those with rights, and those without as ‘second-class’?
Council from the high fines, made easy from many being unable to comply?
It is not that we cannot see clearly - it is that we see all too well.
Difference is not a reason to deny rights. When is it ever okay to act unconscionably and to blame others? Or to misuse power to harm lives? Knox dog-owners are three times that of cat-owners - we all need to stand up for our community and not be divided. Welcome pet owners and good neighbours! We love our fur families.
Knox residents please join our Ombudsman case. Each resident needs to individually send their authority (petitions are not accepted.)
Please copy this sentence: I give authority for Knox AdvoCats to act on my behalf with regards to the complaint to the Victorian Ombudsman case no: C/21/19177 (adding your name, address Or suburb, postcode and email address, and phone number - two methods of contact are needed: phone & email or mail address. Please add your signature if sending by post.) with Case number C/21/19177 in the email subject line. Please email to: complaints@ombudsman.vic.gov.au or by mail to Victorian Ombudsman, Level 2, 570 Bourke St, Melbourne, Vic 3000
Names and contacts will be confidential to the Ombudsman. Formal Complaint can be read on academia.edu (free to join and download.) https://www.academia.edu/52471373/24_hr_Cat_Curfew_Knox_Council_Trajectory_and_Formal_Complaint or email me to send it to you. morgan-shae@ihug.com.au
Remember in the Local Government Act
The primary principle of councillor conduct is that in performing their role, a councillor must: - act with integrity; - impartially exercise responsibilities in the interests of the local community; - not improperly seek to confer an advantage, or disadvantage, on any person.
Specific principles include the obligation to:- treat all persons with respect;- exercise reasonable care and diligence;- act lawfully; and - lead by example and act in a way that secures public confidence in the office of Councillor.
The Local Government Act 2020 ‘Misuse of position’ means attempt to gain advantage; to cause detriment to another person; making improper use of information. Transparency of decisions, actions, clear information, community engagement for those affected, and not being inconsistent with human rights.
To those who blame cats. who are voiceless, and turn things around. What is spreading 'misinformation’?
Not advertising the proposed 24-hr cat curfew at all before voting upon it, then claiming advertising was ‘extensive’?
Calling 24-hr cat curfew an ‘option’ informed by ‘expert advice’ and ‘community consultation’, when no experts were used, a council contractor is quoted, using flawed survey without verifiable resident response?
Stating this is only strengthening an existing law? Providing no proof of efficacy of a night-time curfew?
Saying ‘talk to your neighbours’, when hate-speech is being facilitated by Council, after removing our rights to know the identity of accusers, property rights, renters rights, and rights to live healthily in a community as we did before?
I have always believed that good lawyers do not resort to untruths. Who uses their personal agendas, sticks by false surveys, refuses to be transparent, accountable, if they actually have integrity and evidence to back up their claims?
Using power language to demean cat-owners as ‘passionate’ ‘emotional’, delusional, needing an ‘education’, 'protection', 'safety' and ‘help’ with our future cage ‘confinement’? How are you really, Knox Council? Do you need help? We are learning, asking questions. Does our Community Matter to you?
AdvoCats this is a long fight for justice and the lives of cats. Hope some AdvoCats consider standing for Council in years to come - we need integrity, honesty and people who stand for cat and human rights. As one AdvoCat says of the Councillors mis-using their power to abuse us 'Rooster today, Feather Duster tomorrow'
Cat Lives Matter! Community Matters to Us!