IN THE PIPELINE:

The writer’s strike is on, and so many of you may be wondering if there will be anything good left on TV. If this past Monday evening was any indication, as long as the mandatory spay/neuter law is up for discussion before the City Council on local Channel 3, we’re safe. The show was dramatic, funny and even a bit tragic, all rolled up into one six-hour-plus epic. So who needs writers?

Admittedly, even with the somewhat bleak, semi-static production values, I sometimes find myself pulled in to watch the raw drama (depending on what is being hashed out). Though the production could use some music and perhaps even a host to keep things humming along, once the “Public Comments” segment begins, things usually take off in terms of drama and gravitas. Plus, the three-minute bell is great. If only award-accepting actors and directors could be as well trained to obey a timing device that tells you when to shut up. And all that said, this week’s debate was one for the ages.

I won’t rehash the whole thing here because no doubt you have heard that the City Council recently voted 4-3 in favor of drafting a resolution that would require pet owners to spay, neuter and microchip their cats and dogs. The purpose of the ordinance would be to reduce uncontrolled breeding of both cats and dogs, to better manage the city’s pet population and to reduce the stress on Orange County Animal Care Services’ resources.

This past Monday, it was back up for discussion with a new version of the proposal. Now, cats and dogs would need to be spayed or neutered at 4 months old, but pet owners with a few extra bucks could opt out of the program by paying a special fee. (In all instances, the microchip would still be required.)

A few of my observations as I watched the show unfold: Most of the locals were dead-set against this law. The people in strong support of it seemed, predominantly from out of town (Santa Cruz, Long Beach, Santa Ana, etc.) These folks seemed to have agenda of their own that had nothing to do with the lives of locals — the people who would have to live with this slice of Orwellian pie.

Some critics of the proposed bill challenged the idea of allowing an “opt out” fee because it rewards people with more money and defeats the purpose of trying to solve a problem — that it turns this whole thing into a new tax; simply a way to make more money for the city.

Another critic accused Councilman Keith Bohr of a conflict of interest because Bohr’s wife is on the board of Save Our Strays, a primary proponent of the ordinance.

Other opponents challenged the notion that there actually is a problem at all in Huntington Beach (just one dog was euthanized here last year). They plainly asked why the city should target people who already behave responsibly — and stated that people who are causing the problem will still not comply with the law so why bother passing it? People poked holes in the language of the ordinance.

How can it call for exemptions for police dogs and show dogs at four months of age, when at that age their future is undetermined? Another citizen made a crack about corruption in Huntington Beach. There was sarcasm, snide comments, stabs at humor and heartfelt pleading. There was a woman so nervous with public speaking she said she’d rather be having a colonoscopy, and then one guy got up to call for the impeachment of President Bush (with the calm one might have while explaining how to remove a splinter).

At the end of it all, this bill made absolutely no sense to me — mostly because there does not seem to be a severe pet problem in Huntington Beach.

So is this just another scheme that will cause some more ugly headlines in years to come? I hope not. The concept of door-to-door mandatory sterilizations seems depressingly “Nanny State” to me, and judging from the show, many others are turned off as well.

If I had stood before the council last night, I’d have asked: Why inflict something this polarizing on a community that does not seem to need it, and certainly does not seem to want it? What are the ramifications of enforcement? What if a dog or cat dies as a result of the procedure? How will the city handle the inevitable lawsuits? Aren’t there other, real problems that need to be fixed in this city? What’s driving the urgency of this issue? What about simply encouraging more education about spaying and neutering? What about better enforcing leash and clean-up laws? What about — then the buzzer would go off and I’d have to be quiet. However, inside I’d be thinking, let this one go, City Council. It will almost certainly bite you back, over and over again.

At the end of the marathon session, the City Council transformed the mandatory spay, neuter and microchip law into an incentive-based deal with increased fines for anyone who still owns an unaltered dog or cat without a microchip. As well, a provision was created that will require breeders who advertising in local papers to be licensed, with the license number printed in the ad. Very good outcome. (The new proposal will probably be voted on next month.)

So let the show go on each Monday night on Channel 3. Let the ratings soar, let the debates rage on, let the community involvement continue. This is reality TV at some of its best.

CHRIS EPTING is the author of nine books including his latest, “Led Zeppelin Crashed Here, The Rock and Roll Landmarks of North America.” He also hosts “The Pop Culture Road Trip” radio show on webtalkradio.net.