Home |   Search |   Programs |   Newsletters |   You Can Help |   About Us |   Contact Us |   Emergency
AFLP: FLORIDA


AFLP Home Page

AFLP History

States with Legislation

AFLP Status Nationwide

I want AFLP in my state

AFLP Best Practices


AFLP NEWSLETTER & DISCUSSION FORUM


"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly, what is essential is invisible to the eye."

-- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

Back to the Florida License Plate Main Page

History of the Florida Animal Friend/Plate for Paws Issue

In January 2003, representative Nan Rich (District 98) initiated and hosted a collaborative meeting to discuss a Florida pet specialty license plate program. All interested parties were invited to attend, and Representative Rich and Florida Senator Debbie Wasserman Schultz volunteered to sponsor a Florida Animal Friendly License Plate in the 2004 legislative session. With legislative approval, the license plate would then be written into Florida law as a statutory amendment.

A couple of animal activists representing Florida Voices for Animals (FVA) were invited to the meeting also. The FVA representatives had already been preparing an effort to obtain a license plate program in Florida, but did not have a bill sponsor. They took on a strong coordinating role in this joint effort. The coordinators continued to develop a website and outreach materials, and to bring on grass roots support.

In addition, the FVA representatives coordinated the task of administering the collection of the 15,000 signatures and significant funds required to qualify for specialty license plate legislation in Florida. All of the participants in the effort thought that the FVA representative efforts were exceptional and were delighted that two individuals had the time to work on a license plate program for the state. The FVA representatives offered their non profit organization to hold the funds, and the program was named "Florida Plate for Paws"

All those involved directed signatures and funds to the central Florida Plate for Paws website and collection systems which they believed were on behalf of the broad based collaborative effort.


A misunderstanding: Two different approaches to the program:

There was however a serious misunderstanding from the beginning, concerning to whom the program "belonged" and based on that who would be involved in the effort, where to maintain the funds raised through the license plate program, and how to manage them.

The "Florida Plate for Paws" representatives informed PaLC that they viewed the program as their private endeavor and that it was not intended to be community property. They took issue with some of the parties (and their positions) working on the legislation sponsored by Representative Nan Rich. They believed that as coordinators of the Florida Plate for Paws program, who had invested time and money into the process, that the Florida License Plate effort should be theirs to direct. They believed that funds should be managed by them to ensure that their vision was implemented, and promises that they had made in the process of obtaining grass roots donations were upheld.

Others who initially supported license plate effort under the Florida Plate for Paws name (believing it to be a collaborative community effort) continued to feel that a program of this potential magnitude should be a broad based and state program.

From initial meeting notes, archived in PaLC's discussion forum it is clear that there was not an understanding that Florida Plate for Paws would incorporate and run as a private endeavor. It is unclear to our organization at what point this decision was made, and if/how this information was communicated to the bill sponsor and the rest of the committee. Florida Plate for Paws informed PaLC that this information was made clear on their website.

It is clear that the rest of the committee and members would not have supported/used the Florida Plate for Paws' name or collection systems had they been aware that it was not intended as a community effort. The remaining committee do not believe that private individuals or a newly formed organization (Florida Plate for Paws filed for incorporation as a separate organization on 10/03/03) should have unilateral control over who may or may not participate in a state supported program.

Broad based supporters also believed that funds raised through a state wide coalition and program could amount to millions of dollars, and should not be maintained by private individuals or a single organization, over which the state and license plate supporters and Florida citizens would have little control.

Florida Plate for Paws could not obtain representative Rich's support of their proposed bill instead of the existing committee bill. Representative Rich stated "I couldn't sponsor their version of the license plate that would eliminate these other partners. They are important players in this very unfortunate problem of pet overpopulation."

Believing that the program was theirs to direct, the Florida Plate for Paws organization made the decision to separate from the original sponsor without discussing the issue with the committee, stating their reasons for leaving included*:

  • There had never been a coalitionTrap Neuter Return programs would not receive fundingThe funds would be raided by the Department of AgricultureThere would be no advertising of the free spay/neuter servicesThere would be no spay/neuter educationThe overhead was too high at up to 25% and up to 20% in subsequent years
  • The proposed committee was made up of big government agencies and special interest groups that supported one another
*Please note that PaLC is not entirely clear on which issues resulted in Florida Plate for Paws decision to separate from the bill sponsor/license plate committee, as this information has not, in our opinion, been consistent.

You can view Florida Animal Friend's responses to the above Florida Plate for Paws issues on their website at www.floridanimalfriend.org

In addition, the remaining committee believes that educational programs (which are hard to measure) should be funded through a grant process rather than an off the top expense, thereby ensuring accountability and effectiveness. The committee believes that the grants should cover existing demand for subsidized or free spay/neuter services before funding less concrete programs.

The remaining committee members had not been aware that the Plate for Paws coordinators considered the program a private endeavor and were surprised to learn in September 2003, that Plate for Paws had expected to manage the funds, including up to 25% overhead that the organization would use to administer the effort and run educational programs. The Committee had also had been unaware that Plate for Paws had raised issues directly with Representative Rich.

Florida Plate for Paws have stated that they were forced to withdraw by contributing groups who threatened to pull their support if they did not receive more representation on the grant committee.

After the remaining committee members learned that the Plate for Paws representatives had left the group, they made attempts to resolve the issues that had been raised, but were unsuccessful.

There was significant concern that Florida Plate for Paws had maintained posession of the funds and signatures obtained while the efforts were united, and did not appear to be disclosing the program changes that had taken place.

Florida Animal Friend State Approach:

Although the remaining committee no longer had access to the funds raised and signatures collected under the name Florida Plate for Paws (see below regarding potential legal challenges), they believed that they had an obligation to continue to support the initiating bill sponsor and the legislation that was in the works.

They renamed their program "Florida Animal Friend." The team is comprised of representatives of the veterinary community and animal control who support a broad state based approach. To learn more about this coalition, please visit www.floridaanimalfriend.com

The Florida Animal Friend license Plate program, is endorsed by Rep. Nan Rich, Senator Debbie Wasserman Schultz, The Humane Society of the United States, the Florida Veterinary Medical Association, the Florida Animal Control Association, and private individuals and foundations.


Florida Plate for Paws Private Approach:

The representatives of Florida Voices of Animals who filed for incorporation as Florida Plate for Paws www.floridaplateforpaws.com on October 3, 2003 have chosen to seek a new legislative sponsor for their vision.

Florida Plate for Paws informed PaLC that they are primarily sponsored by grassroots and feral cat groups from across Florida. A list of supporting organizations* can be found here.

Notes:

*This list may be inaccurate. The Florida Plate for Paws coalition is not a voting body, and information about the coordinators' decision to sever ties with the original effort and legislative sponsor has not been publicized on their website. It is therefore not yet confirmed if all organizations and individuals are aware of the separation and which of them continue to support the Florida Plate for Paws coordinators' decision. It is PaLC's understanding that several supporters of the original coalition have requested that their donations be returned, but are still listed on the Plate for Paws website as sponsors.

Florida Plate for Paws filed as a separate corporation on 10/03/03. They are registered as a non profit organization with the State of Florida (#CH-4327) However they are not an IRS 501c3 tax exempt organization. Their account is (was?) sponsored by Florida Voices for Animals.

Status:

The funding and survey data, collected while the coalition worked as a whole under Representative Rich, remained with the Florida Plate for Paws representatives. Florida Plate for Paws informed our organization that they found a new sponsor and hired a lobbyist. However they declined to provide further information about their sponsor and their bill language and did not file a bill in 2004.

It should be noted that there is the potential for legal challenge about the ownership of the funds and signatures raised while the coalition worked as a whole under Representative Rich. (See below for questions about the legal ownership of these donations/signatures.)

In addition, given the circumstances leading up to this separate effort, and the now private approach by a newly formed organization that is not tax exempt, there was significant question as to whether Florida Plate for Paws program could obtain the legislative support it needed to succeed.

While the Florida Animal Friend team have legislative sponsors who have made great strides for the legislation that has been in the works since January 2003, and have secured the legislative support they need to pass their bill, they no longer had access to the funding and survey data that was collected during the united effort, and started raising funds and surveys they needed to qualify at the last minute. However, Florida Animal Friend did qualify in time to qualify for legislation in 2004. Florida Plate for Paws did not file for legislation in 2004, and it is unclear whether they were able to qualify or find a bill sponsor for their program.

Note: while there was hope that the efforts would unite thus remaining true to their original intent, there was no desire to take action with regard to who owned the original signatures and raised funds. A legal challenge of that nature could have removed the signatures and funds for both efforts.

Responses to this issue:

There were a variety of responses to this separation. Some individuals and organizations felt strongly about supporting a specific effort (some believing it a matter of principle, even at a cost of not passing the bill) and were not interested in a united approach.

Others were not concerned with implementing a license plate program in Florida, but were concerned that given the circumstances, Florida Plate for Paws had not demonstrated the big picture, collaboration, communication or leadership skills necessary, and do not have the experience to manage a state-wide program and state raised funds. It is believed that such a proposed program should not prevail "as is" or at all.

Many other concerned individuals and organizations, interested in seeing a long-term and successful plate program implemented, believed that a united effort stands the highest chance of qualifying AND subsequently passing legislation AND succeeding as a long-term statewide program, and therefore is in the best interests of Florida animals.

Mediation efforts stalled, however there was still hope that the two groups could unite to ensure maximum success for the program.

Media Coverage:
What about funds and signatures raised while they were united?

The possibility of a legal challenge exists since there is some question as to the intent of the donors who made contributions to the program under the united effort and Representative Rich's name, and therefore who has "ownership" of the original signatures and funds collected.

If you have made a donation to “Florida Plate for Paws" and wish to retract it, we have been informed that you can do so by writing an original letter with your signature to:

Florida Plate for Paws (Sponsor: Florida Voices for Animals)
Post Office Box 49045
St. Petersburg, 33743

If in turn you wish to support the new “Florida Animal Friend" license plate, you may send donations to:

The HSUS - Florida Animal Friend (Sponsor: Humane Society of the United States)
Florida Animal Friend
P.O. Box 669
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33302


PaLC's Opinion

In PaLC's assessment, animal/pet friendly license plate programs have greater chances of long-term legislative and marketing and pet population success if they are designed as broad based and statewide collaborative efforts rather than private endeavors.

In our opinion while the issues raised by Florida Plate for Paws merited discussion, based on our enquiries, it turned out that there was a great deal of misinformation and misunderstanding and much more common ground than had been initially suggested.

In addition, unfortunately while the key stakeholders of many communities and states have made great strides in learning to respect one another and to collaborate with great success, not all organizations have been able to set aside their feelings and perceptions. For example, larger and more established groups, animal control and state/national animal services associations with salaried employees and broader missions are often distrusted by smaller volunteer groups, many of which are private and personal efforts, rather than formal non profit organizations.

PaLC believes that there is need for everything from a hands on approach to big picture analytics, and that no single "type" of organization has found all the solutions or has the ability on their own to resolve the tragedy. PaLC believes that a state wide program should be above such divisiveness, and embrace a big picture and broad base community approach, and be able to lead participants to focus on the goals rather than on one another and who cares more.

In our opinion the separation of efforts was not so much an issue of differences of opinion with regard to animal welfare issues, but more an issue of coalition experience. It is unclear to us why all the issues were not raised, clarified and negotiated within the committee at the very beginning of the effort. PaLC believes that with experienced coalition skills, there would not have been an issue of separate efforts.

In PaLC's opinion, Florida Plate for Paws has strong design and administrative skills. It is clear that the FVA, now Florida Plate for Paws, representatives have made tremendous personal sacrifices of time, money and effort towards this cause. However, PaLC believes it is in the best interests of Florida, that while the Plate for Paws efforts are laudable and noteworthy, it is not in Florida's best interests to have a state sponsored program managed by a private group.

In addition, given that Florida Plate for Paws is an unestablished organization with no track record of accomplishments or guarantee of its longevity, we are concerned about the following issues that arose over the past year or are not defined:
  • The lack of communication with the committee before the separation
  • The misunderstandings and inconsistency of the issues raised
  • The breakdown in communication with their original bill sponsor
  • The current lack of information on the newly proposed bill and sponsor
  • The lack of information about the organization and grant committee structure
  • The organization is not tax exempt, how will it be funded?
  • The lack of distinction between advertising, marketing, social marketing, and education
  • The lack of information on what qualifications or experience in education and marketing the organization has
  • The lack of information on the Plate for Paws website to past donors and supporters about the separated effort
  • The organization made promises in the process of fundraising, and was forced to withdraw by its supporters
  • The focus on what has not worked in the past rather than working on goals for the future
PaLC is unable to comment on the content of the Plate for Paws proposed program, given that the organization has declined to provide details about their sponsor, the bill or their grant committee.

Given all these circumstances, and that Florida Plate for Paw is not an established organization, PaLC cannot endorse a separate Florida Plate for Paws effort "as is" and as a private endeavor.

Some of the committee members of the Florida Animal Friend program do have strong opinions on pet population programs, and PaLC can understand that this could lead to concern.

PaLC has reviewed the actual draft bill for Florida Animal Friend, and heard discussion on the proposed grant committee process which includes a point qualification process and mentoring for organizations with good potential. Based on this and our review of other animal friendly license plate programs (we invite you to explore the PaLC website to see other state program information), we believe that the Florida Animal Friend program is worthy of support and has the flexibility to adopt best practices over the course of the program.

PaLC believes that the separated effort is extremely unfortunate, given that the focus now required to try to mediate and/or qualify as separate programs, would have been instead much better spent on finding common ground within the committee and building and gaining support for a strong single program.

PaLC continued to believe that a united Florida behind a single effort is still in Florida's short and long term best interests, and encourages supporters of both programs to focus on the goals of a license plate for Florida, building a program greater than the sum of its parts and with the flexibility to adapt to pet population needs now and in the future.

Prevent a Litter Coalition, Inc. believed even at the late date, and after the bill(s) are filed that it would be in the best interests of the animals, if there were once again a united approach to the Florida License Plates.

In addition PaLC encourages supporters of a license plate effort in Florida to set aside their own differences and to support a single effort.

It takes a Community....

The preventable tragedy of homeless, stray and feral animals goes beyond merely an animal welfare or an animal rights issue. It touches every American. It is an American and a community issue.

  • An estimated 8-10 million animals are taken in by shelters each year
  • An estimated 4-5 million animals are euthanized in shelters each year
  • The stray/feral cat population is estimated to be in the tens of millions
  • It is a significant financial expense to taxpayers and private humane organizations
  • It is a public safety concern
  • It is an emotional and a moral issue
As a community issue, the solutions also depend upon the community.
  • Animal Control Agencies
  • Breeders
  • Feral Cat Organizations
  • Municipal Animal Shelters
  • National Animal Protection Organizations
  • Pet Owners/Guardians
  • Private Animal Shelters
  • Rescue Groups
  • State and local Governments
  • State and Local Animal and Veterinary Associations
  • Veterinarians
  • The General Public
  • Community Leaders and Educators
And it will take a community effort to end the tragedy, and to implement sustainable solutions.

With all key stakeholders contributing their services and expertise towards a united approach, the whole becomes much bigger than the sum of the parts.

A Focus on Goals, NOT on each other:

Collaboration between key stakeholders provides incentive for state and city officials, businesses and private citizens to participate and support the effort. Community goals can be defined, strategies developed, and sustainable solutions can be implemented. Efforts are enhanced and are more effective and efficient.

Currently there is tremendous debate over what community programs have the greatest effect. Little data and few sustainable community program best practices are available to draw upon. Such a program should therefore exist in its own right, and not be a reflection of current thinking, or participant perspective. It must exist long after the original crafters of the bill have done their work. It should have the flexibility to adopt best practices and new methods as the field gathers more information and discovers more effective solutions.

Therefore where we are today, who has done what in the past, or who is doing what in the present, and least of all who "might" do what in the future, should have no bearing on what should be a program, for now and the future on behalf of Florida's animals and communities. The goals should be simple - to reduce the numbers of animals taken in by shelters and that roam our communities, thereby reducing the numbers of animals that suffer and are euthanized. Both the grant committee, and the funded programs should be measured for results against this goal.

In PaLC's opinion, the design of the grant program should not be based on what size of organization/who benefits, or on what type of programs are funded, rather the grant program should be based on which organizations have the greatest and most cost effective impact for their WHOLE community and state, and with mentoring available to those organizations with great potential.

Prevent a Litter Coalition, Inc. believes that it is in the best interests of Florida animals and citizens to present a broad based, flexible and accountable program to the legislature in 2004, with a strong chance of success, both for getting passed, and for the long-term viability and community success of the program.


What are the issues? (partial information available)

Click here for information about the Florida Animal Friend team and its proposed legislation

Click here for information about the Florida Plate for Paws team and its proposed legislation



Prevent a Litter Coalition, Inc.
Post Office Box 9294, Reston, VA 20195