I oppose this proposed substitute in its current form. When punitive measures are introduced before there is adequate opportunity for the appropriate proactive community resources to provide care for situations that are largely already unmet—due to long waits and cost for service—the attempt becomes inhumane. When we support pet owners, we create the healthy, responsible, and informed community that we all ultimately want. Partnerships create a trust that systems will support them, whereas creating barriers makes pet ownership that much less accessible—this will ultimately increase shelter intake and euthanasia rates due to inability to place the high frequency of said pets that already had homes. When partnerships with families are created, this provides more opportunity and higher likelihood for families to engage with the animal welfare systems that provide vital services. When pet owners are faced with the option to provide care, they are driven to say yes because they want their pet and family to be healthy. The intention of creating partnerships is so much more impactful for our community than putting our pet owners, the animals, the shelters, and our community in crisis.