[NFBN-Lincoln] FW: Animal Control Services

[Cheryl Livingston]

Thank you, Mark. I guess I should have checked further into my email before
I asked if anything else had developed, I will certainly read through this
because I am interested in this resolution. Or lack thereof.
On Sun, Apr 19, 2026 at 7:52 PM Coleman Mark via NFBN-Lincoln <
nfbn-lincoln at nfbnet.org> wrote:

>
>
>
>
> *From:* markmurraycoleman at gmail.com <markmurraycoleman at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, April 9, 2026 6:20 PM
> *To:* 'Cheri L. Howard' <CLHoward at lincoln.ne.gov>
> *Cc:* 'Denise S. Bollwitt' <dbollwitt at lincoln.ne.gov>; 'Mayor' <
> mayor at lincoln.ne.gov>; 'Lincoln Commission on Human Rights' <
> LCHR at lincoln.ne.gov>; 'Cc: Kerry L. Kernen' <KKernen at lincoln.ne.gov>;
> 'Rick W. Tast' <RTast at lincoln.ne.gov>; bhayen at gmail.com
> *Subject:* RE: Animal Control Services
>
>
>
> Hello Cheri,
>
>
>
> Thank you for your response. Given that all prior communication regarding
> this incident had been conducted via email, I did not anticipate receiving
> a response from Mr. Tast by mail. Had it occurred to me that this was a
> possibility, I would have specifically requested the response be in an
> electronic format. Given that I am blind, paper based written communication
> is not accessible to me.
>
>
>
> The response to my complaint from Mr. Tast is not satisfactory because it
> dances around the factual question of whether a blind member of the
> community was in fact denied services he otherwise would have received on
> account of his blindness. At no point in Mr. Tast’s response was this
> fundamental factual question even addressed.
>
>
>
> Mr. Tast discussed the procedures followed by Animal Control and issues
> of who ultimately bears responsibility for wildlife removal. But the
> response does acknowledge that “In some instances, if wildlife is within
> private property and there are available personnel, Animal Control may
> assist in removal.”  This is consistent with Brent Hayen’s report that when
> he contacted Animal Control, they initially gave the impression that they
> would be able to assist only to withdraw the assistance specifically
> because of Mr. Hayen’s blindness. This account was not disputed by Mr. Tast
> even though I was told that phone records would be available for reviewing
> the call. Certainly, if the  phone recording indicated that Mr. Hayen’s
> account was inaccurate, this  information would likely have been included
> in Mr. Tast’s response. The evidence, even in light of Mr. Tast’s response,
> indicates that Mr. Hayen was inf fact discriminated against on account of
> his blindness.
>
>
>
> Mr. Tast states “However, Animal Control cannot do so unless the
> individual has eyes on the wildlife the entire time”, which further
> demonstrates the fact that Animal Control in fact does have a  policy of
> discrimination against the blind. It is regrettable that Mr. Tast chose the
> word “cannot”, because no evidence is given that Animal Control lacked the
> ability to assist in this instance. Animal Control appeared to have made
> the decision not to assist Mr. Hayen not according to what abilities or
> resources were available to them at the moment, but rather to a preordained
> procedure that by its very nature automatically discriminates against blind
> Lincoln residents.
>
>
>
> Mr. Tast writes “This applies equally to all individuals, regardless of
> ability. If a sighted person loses track of wildlife in a private residence
> before an Animal Control Officer arrives, and there is not otherwise an
> emergency, that officer could not conduct a full search of the residence
> for the wildlife.” By indicating the same policy applies to sighted people,
> Mr. Tast seems to be implying that this somehow precludes the possibility
> of discrimination. There is no explanation about why sight has to be the
> mechanism for tracking a  bat. Obviously, Mr. Hayen was able to identify
> the presence and location of the bat using nonvisual means. By requiring
> the information regarding the presence and location of wildlife be based
> only on vision, the policy is de facto discriminatory and is based on the
> same disproven tropes that blind people face every day regarding the
> inherent incompetence and ignorance of those who utilize nonvisual methods
> for scanning and evaluating their environment.
>
>
>
> What makes this practice even more pernicious is the fact that blind
> residents are actually being held to a higher standard than the sighted.
> Mr. Tast claims that Animal Control will only help if the individual “has
> eyes on the wildlife the entire time” and
>
> “if a sighted person loses track of wildlife in a private residence before
> an Animal Control Officer arrives, and there is not otherwise an emergency,
> that officer could not conduct a full search of the residence for the
> wildlife.” Let’s examine these claims from a standpoint of common sense.
> Wildlife in a  person’s home will seldom stay in one place to ensure the
> homeowner can keep an eye them the entire time. A bat will dart around
> corners and between rooms. A rodent may dash under furniture and not be in
> direct line of sight the entire time. A resident would have to be extremely
> lucky to have the wildlife situated as to remain visible to the homeowner
> when the homeowner has to open the door for Animal Control. The advantage
> the nonblind resident has over the resident is the ability to give a
> different type of approximate truth when they claim to have been able to
> keep an eye on the wildlife even if the wildlife darts in and out of the
> person’s line of sight. By contrast, if a blind person were to track a
> wildlife equally as well nonvisually, but made the truth-adjacent claim
> that they had kept an eye on the wildlife the entire time, they would
> obviously not be taken seriously by Animal Control or receive equal
> assistance even if their ability to track the animal were every bit as
> effective.
>
>
>
> The fact that the policy is discriminatory against the blind is self
> evident. For those with an understanding of the capabilities of the blind,
> the various harmful forms of discrimination faced regularly by blind
> residents, and the mental gymnastics a thinking person would have to
> perform to believe that most sighted people who do receive such assistance
> from Animal Control actually manage to keep their eyes on the wildlife the
> entire time, it is extremely difficult to imagine a cogent argument to
> justify this discrimination.
>
>
>
> If you have any advice on how to  proceed on this matter, please let me
> know.
>
>
>
> Thank you,
>
> Mark Coleman
>
> National Federation of the Blind of Nebraska Lincoln Chapter First Vicce
> President
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Cheri L. Howard <CLHoward at lincoln.ne.gov>
> *Sent:* Thursday, April 9, 2026 2:35 PM
> *To:* Mark Coleman <markmurraycoleman at gmail.com>
> *Subject:* RE: Animal Control Services
>
>
>
> Greetings Mark,
>
>
>
> I was provided a copy of the attached letter from City Attorney Rick Tast,
> which was originally sent via US Mail on January 19, 2026.
>
>
>
> Hoping this additional information is helpful.  Thank you for reaching
> back out as we do strive to respond to all queries.
>
>
>
> If there were any follow up questions, Rick is most familiar with the
> situation and Heath Department policies and protocols.
>
>
>
> Warmest regards,
>
>
>
> Cheri
>
> 402-441-7511
>
>
>
> *From:* Mark Coleman <markmurraycoleman at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, April 6, 2026 4:23 PM
> *To:* Cheri L. Howard <CLHoward at lincoln.ne.gov>
> *Subject:* Re: Animal Control Services
>
>
>
> Thank you, Cheri. I look forward to hearing back.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
> On Apr 4, 2026, at 3:38 PM, Cheri L. Howard <CLHoward at lincoln.ne.gov>
> wrote:
>
> 
>
> Greetings Mark,
>
>
>
> Thank you so much for your patience and for the prompt.
>
>
>
> I’ll be glad to follow up on this Monday.  Hope you’re having a good
> weekend.
>
>
>
> Cheri
>
>
>
> [image: Image removed by sender. City of Lincoln Logo]
>
> *Cheri Howard*
> Mayor’s Office Manager
> City of Lincoln
> Office: 402-441-7511
>
>
>
> *From:* markmurraycoleman at gmail.com <markmurraycoleman at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Saturday, April 4, 2026 11:21 AM
> *To:* Rick W. Tast <RTast at lincoln.ne.gov>
> *Cc:* Denise S. Bollwitt <dbollwitt at lincoln.ne.gov>; Mayor <
> mayor at lincoln.ne.gov>; Lincoln Commission on Human Rights <
> LCHR at lincoln.ne.gov>; Kerry L. Kernen <KKernen at lincoln.ne.gov>
> *Subject:* RE: Animal Control Services
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> I have made several attempts to address the issue that a blind member of
> the Nebraska Federation of the Blind was reportedly denied services from
> Animal Control on account of his blindness. I have been ensured each tie
> that I have reached out that the issue was being looked into and that I
> would be receiving an answer to my inquiry. However, six months have now
> passed since the original inquiry was made and I have not received an
> answer other than the cookie cutter refrain that the situation is being
> reviewed and that I would be receiving a  response. Has a review been
> completed? If so, when can I expect the “appropriate response: I was
> promised.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Rick W. Tast <RTast at lincoln.ne.gov>
> *Sent:* Thursday, December 11, 2025 2:00 PM
> *To:* markmurraycoleman at gmail.com
> *Cc:* Denise S. Bollwitt <dbollwitt at lincoln.ne.gov>
> *Subject:* Animal Control Services
>
>
>
> Mr. Coleman,
>
>
>
> The City is currently in the process of reviewing all the circumstances of
> the event you are seeking information on. When we have completed this
> review we will send you an appropriate response.  Thank you in advance for
> your patience.
>
>
>
> Rick Tast
>
>
>
> *Rick Tast, JD* *|* *BSN* *|* *RN*
> Asst. City Attorney
>
> City of Lincoln | Office of the City Attorney
> O: 402-441-7281
>
> 555 S 10th St | Suite 300
> Lincoln, NE 68508
> *lincoln.ne.gov/Attorney <https://lincoln.ne.gov/Attorney>*
>
>
>
> <image001.png>
>
>
>
> Confidentiality Notice: This email message, including any attachments, is
> intended for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
> confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized use, review,
> disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please contact the sender and destroy this e-mail, any
> attachments, and all copies thereof. Thank you.
>
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is
> for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
> and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
> distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
> contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
> message.
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is
> for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
> and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
> distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
> contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
> message.
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is
> for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
> and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
> distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
> contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
> message.
> _______________________________________________
> NFBN-Lincoln mailing list
> NFBN-Lincoln at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbn-lincoln_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> NFBN-Lincoln:
> %(user_optionsurl)s
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/nfbn-lincoln_nfbnet.org/attachments/20260419/c58c020e/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ~WRD0000.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 823 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/nfbn-lincoln_nfbnet.org/attachments/20260419/c58c020e/attachment-0001.jpg>