Council to consider amending stray cat ordinance
POTTSVILLE — Pottsville City Council could amend its ordinance regarding the feeding of stray cats, which currently carries the potential to be fined up to $600.
The current ordinance — adopted in June 2024 — prohibits the feeding of or interaction with wildlife, unless permitted to do so. Licensed animal rescues and similar organizations are granted permission.
If the new ordinance is adopted, people would be able to feed stray cats if they are participating in a Trap, Neuter and Release program.
Feeding must be done with the intention of trapping the cat, then taking it to be spayed or neutered before releasing it. These programs are designed to limit the number of stray animals by taking away the ability to reproduce.
Penalties will be assessed to those who are found to be feeding stray cats without participating in the TNR program. Warnings will be given first, followed by a maximum $250 fine for each offense.
Council had the first reading of the change in April, with adoption possible at the May meeting.
'This is not a whether we should feed them or not debate,' council member Andy Wollyung said.
He said there is no 'right answer,' besides getting the cats the medical care they need.
Former Mayor Dave Clews said the changes are for health and safety reasons.
Denise Gehrman, a volunteer with Strays No More, spoke at the council meeting.
She talked about kittens they recently helped in Pottsville, and urged people to volunteer.
The organization has five volunteers who contribute money and time to addressing the stray cat problem.
'You may say they are not my cats, and maybe not, but by feeding them and not fixing them, you contributed to the population growing,' Gehrman said.
Wollyung also commented on a letter from Hillside SPCA Director Sherrie Schafer, and the Hillside SPCA Board of Directors.
The letter urges the council to continue the Trap, Neuter and Release approach.
However, the letter also opposes the potential penalties the proposed ordinance would allow for.
'While we understand the City's desire to address concerns related to community cats, we believe that punitive measures and restrictive ordinances targeting stray cats or those who care for them may be both ineffective and counterproductive,' the letter read. 'Experience and evidence from municipalities across the country have shown that programs focusing on removal or penalization of community cat caregivers do not result in sustainable population control and may inadvertently lead to increased inhumane death rates through poisoning and starvation as well as wrongful prosecution.'
Helping local cats
Andy VanArsdale, health and animal control officer, said about three cats have been trapped since the city started its TNR Program.
Trapped cats are taken to Hillside SPCA to be spayed or neutered.
VanArsdale is committed to helping other felines in need, not just those surrendered for TNR
He was contacted by the city codes department on April 28, after police notified them about a city woman who was no longer able to care for herself.
She had four young cats and numerous older cats, which she rescued from outside, VanArsdale said.
The younger cats were taken to Ruth Steinert Memorial SPCA in Pine Grove. Once spayed or neutered, the older cats will go to a farm in Tamaqua.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Tom's Guide
4 days ago
- Tom's Guide
Netflix is about to lose the wildest psychological thriller of 2024 — here's your last chance to stream it
"Trap" is one of 2024's more infamous releases; you don't need to look far to find plenty of critics and viewers telling you to steer clear of the M. Night Shyamalan thriller... but I'm no "Trap" denier. I saw this twisting thriller in theaters and left with a smile on my face; despite its flaws, "Trap" is a ton of fun. And, seeing as this movie is leaving Netflix very soon, now seems as good a time as any to recommend it to would-be viewers. Yes, now that we have Netflix's June schedule, we know that your last day to stream "Trap" on Netflix is Tuesday, June 10. As of the time of writing, that means you've got just one week left to stream "Trap" on Netflix, at the time of writing. If you need convincing, you can find a little more info about the movie — and why I think "Trap" is worth adding to your watchlist — below. "Trap" sees American firefighter and picture-perfect suburban dad Cooper Abbott (Josh Hartnett), taking his teen daughter Riley (Ariel Donoghue) to see her favorite popstar, Lady Raven (Saleka Shyamalan) in concert... where something sinister is about to go down. Turns out the cops believe that a grisly serial killer known as "The Butcher" is also in attendance, so they've got the whole place locked down to finally bring his reign of terror to an end. And given we learn Cooper's the one with a killer secret mere minutes into the film, that presents him with a major problem. How on earth is he going to make it out of the arena? Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips. In addition to Hartnett, Donohue, and Shyamalan, "Trap" also stars Alison Pill, Hayley Mills, Jonathan Langdon, Marnie McPhail-Diamond, and Mark Bacolcol, among others. Look, I'm not entirely sure that "Trap" is actually a good movie, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't have a good time when I saw it in theaters. Chiefly, that's because of our protagonist. Josh Hartnett's playful performance is worth the price of admission alone. Watching Cooper puzzle out his predicament is a real treat precisely because Hartnett is so invested in the role. It's the same commitment that makes his recent action-comedy "Bullet Train" riff, "Fight or Flight" work so well. He's committed to doing as much as possible with this absurdly silly conceit. And, while "Trap" at times feels like little more than a way to promote Saleka's music career, when we're outside the concert hall, it's packed with increasingly absurd turns that make it worth sticking with. "Trap" is assuredly messy and will doubtless not work for everyone, but if you can revel in Hartnett's killer charisma and buy into campy storytelling, this is a entertaining ride that lives up to the "thriller" label. Critically, the reaction could politely be described as "mixed." At the time of writing, "Trap" currently holds a 57% critics' rating on Rotten Tomatoes, with a slightly higher 64% score from fellow moviegoers. As an example of what reviewers had to say, THR's Lovia Gyarkye described "Trap" as "a concert movie for Shyamalan's daughter [...] wrapped in a middling thriller kept afloat by a compelling performance from Josh Hartnett." Entertainment Weekly reviewer Jordan Hoffman called "Trap" Shyamalan's "most preposterous movie yet" and "a film mostly of surface pleasures," but adds "there's a lot of fun waiting to be had for those willing to check any large items like scrutiny or skepticism before entering the arena." Empire's Dan Jolin offers a more negative take, giving it a 2-star rating and calling it "an oddly inert wannabe nail-biter", summing "Trap" up as "an initially cool premise that goes nowhere interesting as it heads off somewhere else too quickly. Hartnett does his best, but director Shyamalan seems more interested in trying to convince us of his daughter's pop-star credentials." Nevertheless, I do think there's some fun to be had with "Trap," and if your interest is piqued, I'd strongly recommend streaming "Trap" on Netflix before it leaves the platform on June 10. Not convinced? We can still help you find something new to watch. Check out our round-up of the best movies on Netflix for tons more streaming recommendations perfect for your next movie night.
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Yahoo
Voters Ended This State's Abortion Ban. Then Conservative Judges Got Involved.
Sign up for the Slatest to get the most insightful analysis, criticism, and advice out there, delivered to your inbox daily. Missouri voters in November chose to pass a ballot measure establishing reproductive rights in a state with one of the strictest abortion bans in the nation. Last week, because of a decision by the Missouri Supreme Court, abortion is again unavailable in the state. What happened won't necessarily last, but it's reminder that ballot measures won't always be enough to protect reproductive rights. Within days of the passage of Amendment 3, Planned Parenthood and other plaintiffs challenged the vast array of bans and restrictions in the state. Missouri not only banned virtually all abortions from the moment of fertilization but also enforced a variety of what are called TRAP (targeted regulation of abortion provider) laws. Clinics must have admitting privileges at a hospital within 15 miles and comply with state licensure rules and the rules governing ambulatory surgical centers. Other rules make patients wait 72 hours before getting an abortion or prohibit the decision to have an abortion for certain reasons. These laws made a big difference in dismantling abortion access even before the overturning of Roe. At one point, Missouri had more than 25 clinics. Before the state's absolute ban went into effect, only one remained open. In rulings handed down in December and February, a judge in Jackson County, Missouri, Jerri Zhang, blocked most of the TRAP laws ahead of a trial scheduled for early 2026. Abortions soon resumed in the state, even if access remained limited. Only three clinics opened, and these facilities performed only a handful of surgical procedures before the state Supreme Court's order was issued. The attorney general, Andrew Bailey, one of the most committed abortion opponents in the nation, appealed directly to the state Supreme Court, seeking a special order called a writ of mandamus. He agreed that the state's absolute ban couldn't survive under Amendment 3, but argued that other restrictions—the TRAP laws—were different because they protected women from dangerous procedures. He also argued that women wouldn't be harmed if every clinic in Missouri shut down because they could get abortion pills online or travel out of state. The state Supreme Court allowed the restrictions to go back into effect, all because of a technicality—the trial judge had applied an older standard for granting a preliminary injunction that asks whether the plaintiffs have a fair chance of succeeding. Missouri courts, since 2008, have followed a more demanding standard set forth by the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals focused on whether a plaintiff is likely to succeed at trial. Because the trial court cited the wrong case, abortion in Missouri came to a stop. The three open clinics canceled appointments and counseled patients on how to go out of state. This is hardly a fatal blow for the plaintiffs. The judge may well already believe that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed, and the plaintiffs might have a relatively easy time making that case. Amendment 3 provides broad protections for reproductive rights, requiring not only that a state law serves a compelling interest but also that the government uses the least restrictive means of achieving its goal. And the state can't discriminate against abortion by treating it differently from other medical procedures. The judge might conclude that there are less restrictive and more effective ways of protecting maternal health, or that TRAP laws don't do much to improve patient health at all, as the U.S. Supreme Court did before Roe was overturned in a case about similar Texas regulations. But what is happening in Missouri is still a sign about the limits of ballot measures. Missouri Republicans already have crafted a new ballot measure that voters will face, most likely in 2026. The proposal asks Missourians whether they want to 'ensure women's safety during abortions,' 'ensure parental consent for minors,' and 'allow abortions for medical emergencies, fetal anomalies, rape, and incest.' It would ban all abortions from fertilization in every other case—a fact that it doesn't advertise. For good measure, it also asks whether voters want 'to protect children from gender transition,' even though gender-affirming care for minors is already illegal in the state. That voters adopted Amendment 3 less than a year ago is doing nothing to dissuade the state GOP. The ballot effort may fail. Republicans in other states have a poor track record when they ask voters to make it harder to pass ballot measures. If politicians ignore a result that voters just reached, that might not be popular either. But abortion opponents in the state will have a way forward even if Republicans' latest gambit fails. The attorney general can argue that any abortion restriction should survive, even under Amendment 3, just as he has with the TRAP laws. He could repeat that abortion hurts women, or that the state has a compelling interest in protecting fetal life. The attorney general may even seek to establish that an embryo or fetus has constitutional rights. Five of the court's seven supreme court justices were nominated by Republicans, including four selected by the current governor, Matt Blunt, who has made his opposition to abortion central to his political career. The court barely allowed Amendment 3 on the ballot, choosing to do so by a margin of 4 to 3. Voters just ensured that two of the three dissenters will serve another 12-year term. State judges, not voters, are ultimately the ones who will decide what Amendment 3 means. They won't have much fear, when they face retention elections, that an unpopular vote will matter. State judicial incumbents have a high rate of success; the two judges Missourians just retained won well more than 60 percent of the vote. As long as Missouri elects Republican governors and retains judges regardless of their rulings, the Missouri Supreme Court will become more conservative, and Republicans will experiment with new restrictions and bans to see what the state Supreme Court will tolerate. All of this makes Amendment 3 a cautionary tale, even if the effects of the state Supreme Court's latest rulings will only be temporary. For supporters of reproductive rights, ballot measures like Amendment 3 are critical, but what happens after the vote is just as important.
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- Yahoo
Pottsville City Council poised to select new mayor, maybe
POTTSVILLE — City council is having a special meeting at 6:30 tonight with the main order of business selecting a new mayor. Pottsville Mayor Mark Atkinson stepped down abruptly in early May for health reasons. He was finishing the unexpired term of Mayor Dave Clews, who also resigned for health reasons. Four candidates have submitted a letter of interest for the mayoral seat: City council members Andy Wollyung a Democrat, who recently ran on the Democratic ballot in the May 20 primary, Tom Smith, a Republican who also ran in the May 20 primary; William Messaros, also a member of city council; and Mikaela Gavaletz, an advocate for the LGBTQ+ community. With two of the four siting council members seeking the mayoral seat, the potential for a conflict of interest arises as they can't vote for themselves, said Melissa Melewsky, media law counsel for the Pennsylvania NewsMedia Association. According to the Pennsylvania Ethics Act, a conflict of interest arises if a person uses their authority or their public office/employment or confidential information received through their public office or employment, which is used for the private, pecuniary (monetary) benefit of the public official/public employee himself, any member of his immediate family, or business with which he or a member of their family is associated. Ed Brennan, solicitor for city council, was not immediately available for comment. This story will be updated.
