Is This Why Julie Bank Suddenly Resigned?

(BTW - I hope Helena's family sues the shit out of the city, and Boles)....

The Real Reason Julie Bank Resigned

by Urgent Part 2 - Urgent Death Row Dogs on Thursday, September 27, 2012 at 9:38pm ·

(By Jeff Latzer, co-founder of Adopt NY, in collaboration with Urgent: Pets on Death Row)

Behind every corrupt politician’s sudden resignation to, “spend time with family” is a dark scandal hidden from the public; the same goes for Julie Bank – who was, until yesterday, the Executive Director of Animal Care & Control. Buried behind her official press release is a tale of negligent homicide that also brought the firing of Doug Boles, AC&C Director of Operations. The heartbreaking story is the result of a shelter system that has always found ending lives more convenient than rescue or adoption; killing at AC&C is routine, rife with errors and, until now, never subject to any sort of accountability.

Helena was a charming, mellow pit bull with a black coat and brown eyes who would whimper softly in her cage, waiting for a walk from a volunteer, or a new family to adopt her. She would quietly cuddle with volunteers in Thomas Jefferson Park on 112th Street, but had a tendency to avert her eyes around cameras. Helena also had a family looking for her.

Since Helena was a black pit bull, she was put on the kill list almost immediately after arriving at the Manhattan shelter as a stray. She was put on the at-risk list on September 19th, pulled off of it for unknown reasons, and then put on the kill list again on September 20th. At this point, the family that had been looking for their lost dog located her online, and arrived at the shelter at 9am the following morning to be reunited with Helena.

The family paid the reclaiming fee. A memo was placed in the Chameleon computer system which removed Helena’s EUTH command, rendering her safe. For unknown reasons, the family was told by the front desk staff to come back at 5pm to receive Helena-- even though adoptions typically begin at noon. Seeing no other choice, they left the shelter and returned at 5pm sharp.

Since AC&C kills anywhere from 10 to 30 dogs and cats each day in each shelter, the often unlicensed vet techs can spend about half of their work day putting animals to sleep. At 3:00pm, one such vet tech in Manhattan checked his handwritten list of dogs to kill, and came across A0945637. He typed the number into Chameleon, only to find the system had crashed – a routine occurrence. Sitting in the room connected to the industrial body storage freezer, the vet tech called Doug Boles, Director of Operations for all of AC&C. Despite not having access to the computer system, Boles told the vet tech to end Helena’s life. Once the computer system was restarted, and the vet tech entered a new memo in Helena’s file, appearing right next to her anxiously waiting family’s credit card receipt. “PTS,” it read. Put to Sleep.

At 5pm, Helena’s family returned to the shelter. AC&C staff apologized, then removed Helena’s body from the industrial freezer, providing the family with a last glimpse of their beloved pet. According to a shelter memo, the family was offered a free cremation.

On September 26, six days after Helena’s death and amidst an ongoing lawsuit, Julie Bank offered her resignation; in an email sent to all volunteers, she wrote, “I have family issues that I need to address and I am sure you understand that family always comes first.” Unheard amidst the Department of Health’s flattering press releases documenting her accomplishments was that they also fired Doug Boles on the same day.  Today, two more heads rolled.  A staff member from the Brooklyn New Hope Department and a Brooklyn Shelter Manager.  Who will fall tomorrow?  We don't know, but we'd be happy to put forth a few suggestions!

The killing of Helena follows another gruesome incident of employee neglect inside the Manhattan shelter – this one caught on video camera. A volunteer was very badly bitten as she walked a dog.  Despite her screams the only people to come to her aid were other volunteers.  Two staff members stood by and did nothing while two more staff members ran briefly to the scene only to see what was going on and then left to return to the yard (without rendering any sort of assistance) where they resumed playing with dogs while the volunteer was still being actively attacked. Also troubling is the "security system" which requires codes be punched in to both enter and exit doors.  That several people had difficulty remembering the code to punch in during a crisis delayed help... it is also scary to think about what would happen if someone's life hung on the ability to recall said code in order to EXIT a door under the stress of a life-threatening emergency.

When a shelter system is structured around euthanasia as its sole method of operations, mistakes happen, and at AC&C they happen very often. This is not the first animal AC&C killed by mistake; many other erroneous deaths can be read about here on Urgent. But Helena’s death is particularly indicative of an institution managed by those who do not place any value on the lives of the animals in its care. As long as the Department of Health maintains control of the city shelter system, and the shelter’s Board of Directors is stacked with appointees of the Mayor’s political choosing, the shelters of New York City will never change.

Dogs May Deserve Better Than Dogs Deserve Better

In "Didn't see THAT coming!" news, the founder of Dogs Deserve Better, the group that took over michael vick's property in Virginia and turned it into a dog sanctuary, has been charged with animal cruelty.

Allegedly, they used mace and tasers to discipline the dogs held there (though that's a weird charge to make up, who knows, it may be the result of some disgruntled ex-staff looking for revenge).

In addition to the mace and tasering charges, the article states...

"...and dogs are being crated for long periods, up to 19 hours a day. According to the warrant, injured and sick dogs are not getting proper veterinary care..."

Huh?

That sounds a lot like our not-so-friendly neighborhood animal "shelter," doesn't it?

Why isn't the ASPCA using their legal powers to enforce animal cruelty laws in NYC?

Harris Bloom
Founder/President
Stewie to the Rescue

Ed Sayres Is Full Of Shit

My wife just fowarded this Ed Sayres penned piece in the Huffington Post.

Remember when I wrote that Mayor Bloomberg was a piece of shit? Well, his buddy Ed Sayres is full of shit...

Where do I begin? Okay, let's begin at the beginning. Sayres says...

"New York City has the lowest per capita rate of killing homeless dogs and cats by animal shelters, according to the latest findings of cities studied by Animal People, the leading independent newspaper providing original investigative coverage of animal issues worldwide..."

Knowing what I know about the state of NYC's shelter system, this doesn't exactly make me all warm and fuzzy about our system as much as it scares me about what's going on outside of NYC. I mean, seriously, are other cities killing animals that rescuers are on their way to get? Do their Executive Directors (Hi Julie!) blame the rescuers, as Julie Bank did in that article rather than take some responsibility for not having any back-up plan in place? Anyway...

Then, he hits us with these statistics...

"...Data in the July/August 2012 issue of Animal People shows that New York City's shelters now kill 1 dog or cat for every 1,000 people (a 1.0 per capita kill rate), which makes New York the most successful city in the country in saving homeless animals. This is a stunning turnaround for a city that had a 5.5 per capita kill rate in 1995; a 2.6 per capita kill rate in 2005; and a 2.1 per capita kill rate in 2008..."

You can't argue with stats, can ya? Well....

Couple of things ...

I love how Sayres uses 1995 as the base mark for when things were at its worst. That was just after the ASPCA quit running the NYC shelter system, basically because it was hurting their precious money-making image. So, basically, if things were terrible, it was the ASPCA's fault.

Also, Sayres cant be this stupid. He claims that the kill rate is going down per capita from year to year. Gee, I wonder if the fact that the NYC ACC's hours have been cut back, as have their field operations had anything to do that. Does he think it's a coincidence that there has been less intake the last couple of years? In this economy? Please...

Also, the entirety of any reduction in the kill rate can be traced back to the rescue groups (assisted by the Mayor's Alliance and Maddie's Fund). The ASPCA helps to the tune of a total of $1MM a year...that's out of revenues that exceed $100MM a year. I'd love to know how much of that $100MM can be traced out of New York.

Anyway, Sayres trumpets himself and the ASPCA as being some sort of leading advocate of the no-kill movement, and yet, his organization has killed most legislation that no-kill advocates claim would help. For example, see Oreo's Law, which he may've wanted to kill due to the ASPCA being the one's responsible for killing Oreo.

Why is he writing this fluff piece about the NYC rescue scene? I think there are two reasons.

One - Sayres is leaving at the end of this year and he wants his legacy to be as clean as possible (impossible in NY to anyone who knows how little he has helped our shelter system by enabling the status quo). Everyone wants to go out on top... I may disagree with him, but I can't blame him.

and

Two - He throws in a generous (and well deserved) plug to Maddie's Fund, which helps a heck of a lot more than the ASPCA does. Maddie's Fund recently dropped one of its specified grants benefitting NYC's animals. I can't help but wonder if there is a fear they will pull out entirely, especially given Maddie's CEO Richard Avenzino's tiring of the crap he has to put up with in regards to our dysfunctional system. A lot of people have been clamoring for them to use their muscle for change, but quite frankly, I worry about pushing them too far.

All I can say is, God help us if Maddie's Fund totally pulls out.

Harris Bloom
Founder/President
www.stewietotherescue.org

How Did Richard Gentles End Up at NYC's Animal Care and Control? (And how did he manage to get a raise during budget cuts!)

I came across this recent blog post, authored by fellow animal activist John Sibley.

In it, John mentions (and links to proof) that Richard Gentles was arrested on felony charges while working in the Parks Department, under Commissioner Adrien Benepe. Here is the "money" part of the PR about his arrest -


Manhattan District Attorney Robert M. Morgenthau announced today the arrest of the Director of the New York City Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) Enforcement for lying on an affidavit which he stated that "he had no relatives or friends taking an exam for Associate Urban Park Ranger (AUPR)." The defendant's fiancée, who is also a DPR employee, took the exam and received an above-average score.
The defendant, RICHARD GENTLES, 40 of Staten Island, has been charged with Offering a False Instrument for Filing in the First Degree, a class E felony which is punishable by up to four years in prison.

I can only guess is that Richard didn't consider his fiancee, with whom he lived with at the time, his friend.

We know that Richard ended up at NYC's Animal Care and Control (The "AC&C"), and has been there ever since. We also know that Adrian Benepe is also a Board member of NYC's Animal Care and Control (though you wouldn't know it by his lack of attendance at the meetings). We also know that Sara Hobel was a friend of Gentles, and was a Director at the NYC Dept of Parks and Recreation. Hmmm...

What we don't know is what happened to those charges? Anyone? 


Actually, according to this lawsuit, which the AC&C lost (for racial discrimination), it appears as though Gentles pled guilty to the charge, which makes his employment at the AC&C even more curious.

Something in the lawsuit even makes his hiring even more bizarre...

Plaintiff also submits evidence that he was substantially more qualified than Gentles for the Director of Operations position. Plaintiff states that Gentles had no experience with animals, and highlights Gentles' admission that his "only experience with veterinary personnel was when he took his pets to the veterinarian."

So, he was just arrested and pled guilty to a felony AND admitted that he had no prior experience with animals an yet, he was hired as Director Of Operations of an animal shelter (of course, not just any animal shelter, but the largest pet organization in the Northeast!)????

And the lawsuit seems pretty sure about how Gentles got his job...

Plaintiff also submits evidence that Gentles had a close relationship with ACC Board Member, Sara Hobel ("Hobel"), and that she recommended Gentles to Boks

What else do we know about Richard?


We know that sometime in their 2009 fiscal year (which ended on 6/30/10), Richard got a RAISE, from $104K in base salary to $116K - This, mind you, was at a time when the AC&C was in dire financial straits, employees were being fired and services were being cut. Ironically, the interim director at the time, Risa Weinstock, was making these budget cuts, under Richard's guidance no less, as she hadn't a clue.

And, oh yeah, in their 2009 fiscal year, Richard also received $13,590 in "other compensation." I don't know what constitutes "other compensation" but I gotta ask my job why I don't qualify for "other compensation."

(BTW - Info from their 2010 fiscal year, which ended 6/30/11, is STILL not online)

By the way, he also gets use of a company car, which makes a lot of sense too. It's not like the city is navigable by public transportation.

He also changed responsibilities during this time period, moving from day to day responsibility for operations of the shelters, into development/fundraising (I'd LOVE to hear how that move warranted a raise, especially considering he also got an assistant out of it, something he has always clamored for, since he arrived at the AC&C. In fact, one volunteer confided that he was upset because had several assistants in his previous job but none in this one.).

Speaking of assistants, all of his assistants have been attractive young women...but I'm sure that's just a coincidence.

How do the people under him see him? Well, one volunteer described him as an "entitled, smug jackass" and added "He's exactly what you'd imagine -- a snake, two-faced, a diva."

Why does this person think so little of Richard's work ethic? Here are a few examples -

1 - He promised, and then failed, to thank major food donors on the website.
2 - He promised, and then failed, to create a "feel good" thank you presentation showing staff giving out blankets after an unprecedented flow of donations.
3 -His last couple of hires to add volunteers included one woman who wouldn't train anyone and Elisabeth Manwiller, a former waitress and actress, whose first move was to shut down the volunteer program. During that summer, she was redirected to assist Gentles on offsite events.

Oh, also, he discouraged press, including a reporter from NPR, from covering the compassion program (which deals with volunteers who make animals on the euth list have one last great day on earth), in favor of doing interviews with Julie Bank.

Other quotes about Gentles from volunteers - "The most maddening thing about Gentles is not his laziness or his stupidity but the fact that he gets raises when key hard working people get laid off" and "He is completely useless" and "We call him Genitals" (!?!)

 On the bright side for Richard, he sits on the BOD of Stop the Silence, certainly a worthy charity, though I have to say, his bio on the website is pretty entertaining....

 Richard Gentles, Special Advisor - New York, NY Richard is a highly qualified Executive who brings proven leadership, operations, administration, fundraising, media relations, financial management, and strategic planning capabilities to Stop the Silence. He is a visionary with strong interpersonal communication and team building skills.  Richard has worked since 2003 in various positions with and current as the Director of Development and Communications for Animal Care & Control of NYC in New York, NY (formerly, he was the Director of Administration and the Director of Operations, and thus also brings expertise in areas of staff supervision, budgeting, etc.). His work includes operations, human resources, development and fundraising, the volunteer program, special events, field operations and facilities management. As the Director of Development and Communications, Richard heads a new Development Department of the Animal Care & Control, which raised over $1.4 million in the first year. He plans and manages several successful fund raising events and four direct mail campaigns per year and brought in 6,000 new donors in less than a year and a significant increase in shelter donations over previous years, as well as secured over $3 million in capital funding, managed several multi-million dollar capital projects working closely with the City, and increased numerous partnerships and initiatives. He played an active role in revamping and expanding the volunteer program to include over 500 volunteers. Richard directs all aspects of media relations for Animal Care & Control and has been enormously successful at creating and implementing proactive communication strategies based on organizational success as well as external factors, including his monthly appearances in The Today Show’s “Bow to Wow” segment. He is responsible for new marketing materials including a logo, website, brochures and flyers, and three monthly newsletters...

So, he is a "visionary with strong interpersonal communication and team building skills"
Huh? I'm guessing that most of the staff at the AC&C would have a good laugh at that one (as the volunteers that I quoted did.)

He also takes credit for over $1.4MM in fundraising! I would LOVE to hear how he came up with that figure, I HOPE he's not including Mayor's Alliance, Maddie's Fund monies, or monies SI Borough President Guy Molinari raised for the Staten Island shelter as he had zero to do with any of it. 

He claims to have played an active role in revamping and expanding the volunteer program to include over 500 volunteers!! When I asked a volunteer if this is true, she laughed (most laugh when I ask about any of Richard's "accomplishments")...She's love to know where he's hiding those 500 cause they sure as heck ain't at the shelters.

I wrote to Richard asking for his comments on the felony arrest as well as his bio claims. As of now, he hasn't gotten back to me, though even if he did, why should we believe him?

Harris Bloom
President/Founder
www.stewietotherescue.org

Upper East Side Working Mom Lets The AC&C Board Have It!

I wasn't the only one giving it to the NYC Animal Care and Control Board at their meeting last week -

Here's self-described Upper East Side Working Mom Felicia Greenfield giving it to 'em...

Great job Felicia!!!

Rock On,

Harris Bloom
President/Founder
www.stewietotherescue.org

Oooops, I Did It Again!

Here's the vid of me at the latest NYC Animal Care and Control Board of Directors meeting (They may not let me in anymore, between this and the last time)...

My Review of the NYC Animal Care and (Mostly) Control Board Meeting - January 31, 2012

Yesterday, I attended my second NYC Animal Care and Mostly Control (AC&C) BOD meeting. I made a bit of a splash at the last one, making over 700 new Facebook friends (97% women...my wife loves it!).

How did this one go? Read on...

First of all, the Powers That Be at the AC&C gave us about a week's notice. Of course they knew when they were to meet before that, but they wanted to ensure as weak a turnout as possible. And even then, it was posted in a section of their website that a forensic scientist couldn't find. Well played AC&C!

I got there at 8:30 AM for the 10:00 AM meeting for two reasons -

1. The last meeting was a bit of a clusterfcuk as many who did not get there early were unable to get in. Now, while I knew this meeting was in a larger room, I was still worried that the animal rescue community would should up in droves in spite of the AC&C's best efforts, and

2. Since they were allowing public comments on a first come-first served basis, and the amount of time allocated to public comments was shorter than usual, I wanted to make sure that I had my say...

To my shock, I was the first person there. Friend and Shelter Reform Action Committee Executive Esther Koslow soon joined me. It soon became obvious to me that for whatever reason, turnout amongst the animal rescue community would be down from the previous year. Some blamed the time, but as I recall, last years' was also in the middle of a workday, no?

The unfortunate thing is that some people on Facebook spend a lot of time wondering how to create a buzz about our mission, and here we were, with media in the room (I saw someone from The Daily News), a perfect opportunity to be heard, and few showed up. Then again, I can't blame people who need to work to survive (I took a half of a vacation day from my job - some vacation day!)

The BOD agreed to amend it's by-laws, as required by new law, to admit two new Board members. They didn't announce who these people will be but I'm sure these two two members will be completely independent animal lovers and vote according to their heart. Ahem...

Then we were treated to Julie Bank telling us about the state of the shelter. One fascinating aspect was how she explained that intakes were dramatically down over the past year or two, and euthanasia was down (btw - her speech will be on YouTube soon). She neglected to mention that in the middle of 2010, the AC&C stopped rescuing cats and cut its field operations in general. I'm no genius, but I'm guessing this would result in fewer intakes, and therefore, fewer animals to be euthanized. I wouldn't expect her to mention that, nor would I expect the Board to question her about. I wasn't disappointed.

Then again, the BOD had zero questions for ANYONE who spoke, including Julie, their internal accountant and external auditor. I'd like to think it's because they are always questioning Julie and her cohorts, but I know better.

One bright spot of the poor community support was the amount of respect given to the various speakers. Last time, there were a lot of interruptions, and quite frankly, even though I understand our frustrations, it was a little embarrassing and unproductive.

Another bright spot was the quality of speakers when we reached the public comment part. My speech (rant?) will be on YouTube shortly, but there were several extremely eloquent and heartfelt speakers, including a woman from (I think) Second Chance Rescue (who brought the ashes of a dog she rescued from the AC&C that was healthy when going in, but had parvo upon exiting), a mom and dog owner from the Upper East Side (that's how she described herself), and someone who simply wanted to adopt a dog from the AC&C, and got such a runaround, you'd think the staff there gets paid according to how many people they can anger.

I would be remiss if I didn't mention that although the BOD sat in stone-faced silence the entire meeting, no matter who was speaking, that Patrick Nolan and Bruce Doniger came into the audience after the meeting was over, and actually seemed to listen to people who wanted a minute of their time. It's kind of bizarre that I would feel the need to mention that (It's kinda like when we're shocked when a professional athlete or famous actor does something "nice"), but I guess it's something.

Rock On,

Harris Bloom
President/Founder
www.stewietotherescue.org

A Plea To New York's Animal Rescue Community

As we all know (or should by now), this upcoming Tuesday is the Board meeting of the New York City Animal Care And Control's Board of Directors.

Yes, they waited until the last second to post this.
Yes, they have cut down the amount of time allocated for speakers.
Yes, they have cut the time for each individual speaker.

My response?


There is nothing we can do about it so I am not going to get up into a lather over it.

I will say this - Sometimes, we are our own worst enemy. I don't think we did ourselves any favors by talking over the speakers, or heckling them. If you don't want to listen to me, fine, I'm no one.

But, I know a lot of you follow Nathan Winograd and his (I think it's his) "No Kill Equation." I'd like to point out Step Three (page 8). What's the first item listed under "Fight Smart?"

Be Professional.

"One of the most important aspects of No Kill advocacy is to be professional at all times, including in your appearance, preparation, presentations, and communications."

Think about it. What good do you hope to accomplish by shouting down Farley or Bank? Any press that is there will refer to us unruly fringe-type activists, cause that's what's going to sell newspapers. Not only that, but it will give Farley ammunition to further limit our rights at these meetings.

You wanna scream about Bank claiming euthanasia is down, do it on Facebook. You wanna heckle Farley when he commends Bank on a job well done, write down your frustration, write an op-ed about it, and send it to a newspaper. You wanna laugh when Bank talks about how great their tea is selling, well, okay, laugh, cause that would be pretty funny.

I know it's hard, but for the animals sake, try to be respectful...even if you don't think they deserve it.

See you there...

Harris Bloom
President/Founder/Wet Blanket
www.stewietotherescue.org

You Have 60 Seconds...Go!

I was taking a look at the No-Kill guide to reforming shelters on your area  and I saw something that interested me..

"Focus your message so succinctly that you could tell a complete stranger everything they need to know in 60 seconds."

I agree, as I have at times come across people interested in whats going on with our shelter thanks to my Facebook/You Tube posts, but can't tell the story without, well, telling a story.

How would YOU tell a stranger our problem with the NYC AC&C in 60 seconds?

Go!

Harris Bloom
Founder/President/Bon Vivant
www.stewietotherescue.org

You Are Julie Bank! (A New Series!)

Okay, so Julie Bank's contract is up in a couple of months and there's a good chance she's gonna get a new one. That would mean another two years of Julie.

What does that mean for us? 

Well, my guess is two more years of adversarial relationships between Animal Care and Control (AC&C) management and the rescue community (if you're new here, just read some older blogs with "Julie Bank" tags). Actually, that's a pretty educated guess.

We know nothing's going to change in a big way until NYC divests itself of the ACC (can anyone tell me why they are so headstrong on keeping it?), but let's put that aside for now. I think that will happen but not in the foreseeable future (meaning two years). So, we're stuck with the DOH and Julie. With that in mind, let's look at the here and now, as animals are needlessly dying due to actions that the AC&C has taken (or not taken) that just seem like no-brainers (pun intended). 

This series of blogs is intended to come up with solutions to some of the issues that we have with the AC&C in a way that would help the animals and also help Julie save face (and like I said in my previous blog, I really don't care if she takes credit for implementing others' ideas - All I care about is the animals).

So, let's start....

As I mentioned on Facebook recently, I have no idea why, not only doesn't the AC&C market its animals on Facebook, but actually impedes Urgent Part 2, who does! (By the way, my monthly animal rescue fundraiser will be mostly to assist Urgent on February 15th at Gotham Comedy Club). I think it's pretty indisputable that the social networks have played a major part in animal rescue and there's no reason why the AC&C shouldn't be on there.

Well, there is one reason.

Having a FB page that allowed people to comment (and they would have to allow people to comment on the various animals' posts) would open the floodgates to hundreds (thousands?) of nasty posts a day by people not willing to give the AC&C the benefit of the doubt.

The solution?

How about if, instead of fighting Urgent, they actually helped them by feeding them info willingly? News of that change would certainly get out, and while it wouldn't change most peoples' opinions about Julie or the AC&C, it would be an olive branch that some may accept as good faith for the sake of the animals. Best of all as far as the DOH is concerned, it wouldnt cost a cent!

What do you think?

Harris Bloom

Grand Poobah

www.stewietotherescue.org

This is OUR Freakin' Shelter!

Let me make one thing clear before I get into this blog entry -

No, I do not think we should give up reforming New York Animal Care and Control, our city shelter. We should continue to fight tooth and nail (okay, maybe not "nail") to get it out from under NYC's DOH's thumb, we should continue to fight for them to hire better management (maybe hiring an animal lover to the BOD and Executive Director position would be a decent start), and we should keep fighting for greater transparency about what the heck is going on in there (as there's no way that the stories that we all hear can't come with another side...here's the latest unbelievable story making the Internet rounds - please tell me there's another side).

We all know that any progress made in that area is due, not to the ACC's management or BOD, but due to the rescue groups, those who work with the rescue groups, and the volunteers and some of the staff at the ACC. I say "some" because, well, as with any organization, some staff will just work there for the paycheck, which isn't tragic when you're an accountant (ahem)  but it is when you are in charge of animals.

BOTTOM LINE - As long as the DOH runs the show, the city's homeless animals will NEVER be a priority, and there's no reason to believe that the DOH will be relinquishing control anytime soon. So, for any more progress to be made in lowering the euthanasia rate, it's up to US.


I's time we all took the bull by the horns (ok, maybe not the "horns") and redoubled our efforts to do what, at the end of the day, is all we really care about, and that's getting as many animals out of there alive as possible.

Every single one of us should think "What more can I do?" and do it. Here are just a few ideas ...

1 - Apply to work or volunteer at the shelter (I know, they make it extremely difficult to volunteer there, but just think of how the animals appreciate it, and by perhaps giving the animals an extra walk a day, you will relieve their stress, making them less energetic, and therefore easier to adopt out)

2 - Not only share the animals close to being euthanized on Urgent Part 2's Facebook page (I will link later if you don't know them) but really try to get your animal-friendly friends involved (if you just share animals every day, most of your friends will just start ignoring it), or

3 - Volunteer at one of the dozens of animal rescues around the city (My rescue can use someone to help with fundraising - speaking of, anyone wanna buy a t-shirt? We're having a sale! Only $15 each or two for $25!)

I will write more in subsequent blogs about other ways to help...

What am I doing to help?

I am allocating a percentage of Stewie to the Rescue's financial resources to pledge for rescues to pull animals about to be killed at the shelter.

While I ain't gonna stop bitchin', I do think it's time we ALL stepped up our action.

This shelter "system" is a black eye for all New Yorkers. And being a city owned shelter in a city that we live in, this is our freakin' shelter in more ways than one!

If history has taught us anything, it's that we can't depend on anyone but us to make it better.

One last thing - Quite frankly, I don't care if Julie Bank or Bloomberg or Farley or anyone who has done nothing to help, takes credit (as Bank did at the last ACC BOD meeting, not only ignoring Urgent Part 2's obvious role, but actually condemning it). All I give a crap about is that the killing stop.

Enough is enough...

Harris Bloom
Founder/President
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/

A Dog Named L.L. Bean

Ok, so I am gonna really try to blog every day or two - I know, I may've said this before but this time I mean it!

So...

I love this story about a shelter dog, that they named L.L Bean, which was subsequently adopted by an employee of, yup, L.L. Bean! Not only that, but employees of L.L. Bean chipped in to pay the $800 of transportation expenses to get the pup to it's new owner!

One of the smaller criticisms of the ACC shelter here in NY is how lazy they are in naming the animals. At the very least, they can use corporate names that are well-liked and that people feel a connection to. Here are some good ones...

Apple
Lexus
Dr. Pepper
Hershey
Cheesecake Factory (what!?!)

Harris Bloom
President/Founder
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/

Notes From The Underground

As anyone who knows me knows, the ACC is a freaking nightmare.

This is no secret to anyone even remotely involved (even if various public officials and heads of "important" animal-related non-profits suggest otherwise).

What we don't know is what goes on inside, and that's because any staff member or volunteer will be fired if they speak out against the ACC (in fact, rescues wont go on record either as they will be kicked out of the Mayor's Alliance, thereby losing funding, if they speak out).

So, how can we find out what the volunteers think?

We can go HERE - A link to the Shelter Reform Action Committee's Notes From the Underground, which will publish any stories they get from staff/volunteers, with the promise of anonymity.

The first one is already up here.

It will no doubt be an infuriating, but important series.

Harris Bloom
Founder/President
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/

NYC's Animal Care and Control Manages To Lose Money Doing Fundraisers

Here's what I don't get...

The "Humane" Society of the U.S. (I put that in quotes because I think they're a horrible organization - start HERE if you wanna see why) did a benefit in NYC and raised a freakin' million dollars...

Just to show that's not out of the ordinary, the ASPCA also had an event here, and yes, they too raised over a freakin' million dollars!

(BTW - The ASPCA sucks too.)

So, you may wonder, how much does NYC's Animal Care and Control make off of their fundraisers?

It must be easy as pie to raise funds as the HSUS and ASPCA show - I mean, this is NYC, mecca of money, celebrity...not to mention people who are insane about their animals. And, I'm sure they were able to use the fact that they are the self-described "largest pet organization in the northeast" (per their website) to get the money flowing...

They must do a ton of them, right?

I mean, they complain about being underfunded (which they are), and what better way to make up for the lack of funds than pushing up your sleeves and going to work.

I believe Richard Gentles, making six figures, as the Director of Development (fancy!) is the person on their management team in charge of getting the money flowin'!

And, he shlould have plenty of help, in the form of their impressive roster that is their Board of Directors (After all, this is what BOD of a non-profits is supposed to do - Look at number 4 here)

Speaking of their BOD, they are lucky enough to have not one, but two Wall Street titans on there, Mssrs, John M.B. O'Connor (former partner at Morgan Stanley, now CEO of J.H. Whitney Investment Management) and Bruce Doniger (hedge fund trader). In addition, they have Patrick Nolan on the Board - He is the Director of Marketing at Penguin Books - Surely, he can share his marketing prowess to help, instead of just keeping a seat warm.

Given all of this, I am excited to see how money they have raised due to their collective fundraising efforts...

So, I took a look at their latest Form 990, which are a non-profit's financials, and guess how much they made in their last fiscal year from fundraisers?

$26,943.

Huh?

Actually, it's even worse than that (believe it or not).

If one takes into account expenses associated with these fundraising "efforts," they raised a total of, are you ready...

($388)

That's right, they lost money.

I guess I have to retract my earlier comments - NYC's Animal Care and Control should immediately stop doing fundraisers!

Harris Bloom
Founder/President
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/

NYC Comptroller (Sorta) Audits Animal Care and Control

So, here is the full report, and here it is in brief.

First of all, this isn't a true audit, it was merely a follow-up to an audit they did over five years ago (great that it took them five years to follow up to see if what they deemed important was implemented, huh?).

In other words, they weren't looking for anything new, or even to see if what the AC&C was doing satisfactorily previously was now in disarray; no, they just wanted to see if Farley/Bank et al fixed what the Comptrollers office thought was broken in 2006.

Naturally, they didn't...

How much is still broken is tough to say, say the auditors, because...are you ready?

The AC&C and DOH (Dept of Health) wouldn't  cooperate with the auditors' requests for information and the ability to speak to staff and volunteers (Hmmm... I wonder why)

The AC&C claims it was concerned that their volunteers' privacy would be compromised, even though, not only does the Comptroller's Office have the authority per the City Charter (The DOH isn't big on following the law, are they?) and is required by law to keep them confidential, so, in reality, the AC&C didn't really have to worry about that, and was just stonewalling.

Even funnier is that in the report it states that initially, the AC&C claimed it was "legally entitled" to withhold information. When challenged, AC&C couldn't provide the legal basis for its claims.

I'm picturing Thomas Farley swearing he read it somewhere, while leafing through his copy of the City Charter, knowing he didn't read it anywhere, while several auditors are surrounding him. I can't blame him for trying.

Okay, some points about what the Comptroller's office was able to look into and did find...and my thoughts on it....

1 - Underfunding "plagues" the agency - True, and that's why the DOH has no business being in the animal budiness. They've run it (into the ground) since 1994 with no sign whatsoever that funding will ever be adequate (even with Bill 0655, funding is less than half what is needed per HSUS, and that assumes all the backloaded funding makes its way to the AC&C in 2014 - yeah, right)

2 - Auditors found cleaning procedures to be implemented - Huh? I guess the NYC Comptroller's Dept doesn't know how to google, or they'd find this story, among many others. My guess is that either they announced when they were doing an inspection, OR somehow the AC&C was tipped off.

3 - Sick Animals are Sometimes Separated From Healthy Animals - The AC&C actually disagreed with this, claiming they are always separated - How can they disagree? Either the auditors found it to be true and showed them, or they didn't, in which case, they wouldn't have included it on the report.

4 - Dogs are now being exercised - Huh? Again, looking back at this article, check this section out (Gentiles is Richard Gentiles, Director of Development and Communication)...


We obtained dog-walking schedules that show dogs not getting out for as long as 3 days.
WALLACE: So wait. It's not unusual to have a dog not being walked for three days?INSIDER: Not unusual.
"We want all of the dogs to be walked every day," Gentles said, admitting that it does not happen. "It's not acceptable. That's why we want volunteers to come into the volunteer program."


Again, maybe if they insisted to be able to speak to volunteers and/or staff without threat of termination, the auditors would've reported back differently.

Heck, they didn't even have to worry about speaking to current employees. A quick google search woulda given them someone to speak to who would be more than happy to point them in the right direction. I'm guessing they didn't get a chance to speak to former employees/volunteers like Emily Tanen or Jeff Latzer about that.

5 - Missing animals aren't always being investigated - I'm only bringing this up due to this excerpt -

"Forty four percent of missing animals were cases where foster care adopters did not return the animal to the shelter. AC&C's policy does not discuss procedures for investigating or acting on missing animals not returned by foster caretakers."

Good Lord...

Later, in their response to this point, the AC&C said, "The AC&C ... will update its Foster Care program guidelines to include investigation of missing foster care animals."

I hope this is already implemented as it shouldn't take more than a week, especially with all the new volunteers they claim to have thanks to their "revamped" program.

6 - They had a problem in 2006 with the "Level of Adoption Efforts," recommending that adoption services should be provided at the Queens and The Bronx receiving centers - In this audit, this finding was considered "no longer applicable" because the leases in The Bronx and Queens don't allow for adoptions there.

This is exactly why the DOH shouldn't be running the AC&C (Well, the fact they have sucked at getting funding for their non-profit is really why, but this is a secondary reason)...

God forbid they try other means of getting animals adopted - They refuse to think outside the box  - What about offsite adoption events? Why don't they have long-term partnerships as other rescues do (Why did they let the Petsmart partnership dissolve?). Why not have special events at the shelter (like a pitbull awareness class led by a pro bono trainer) to get people accustomed to the walking in the building. AC&C has to know that there is an element of emotional trauma to walking in a "kill" shelter for most animal loving adopters. 


7 -

That was from 2006, when they had five licensed vets and 25 vet techs.

In 2011, they have two licensed vets and 13 vet techs, and yet, the AC&C argued that this finding was unwarranted, I assume because they now have 14 unlicensed vet staff members, whereas they didn't have any in 2006.

To summarize, they have about the same number of total vet employees - they are just far less qualified than five years ago, when the staff was deemed insufficient. Mmmmkaaaay!!!!

8 - The auditors recommended that the in-house computer system (Chameleon) be changed so that it can distinguish between animals missing and/or lost in the agency's care or in the care of outside sources.

The AC&C's response? We agree that it's needed, but, hey, its not our system, we just lease it - If they wanna upgrade it, it's up to the lessor.

I dunno about you, but judging by their responses, I get the feeling Farley, Bank, et al really aren't into this whole animal saving thing.

I think you guys get the gist -

To summarize, this audit wasn't a real audit, merely a follow-up to an audit done five years ago, and yet, of the 13 recommendations made at that time, only seven were fully implemented (and I'm not sure that I agree that they were - the cages are clean?!? the volunteer program is robust?!?)

Thing is, does it really matter? Any and all deficiencies will continue to get swept under the rug as long as the DOH is in control of the AC&C.

Harris Bloom
Founder/President
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/

btw - If you wanna read more about this joke of an audit, click here.

Mayor Bloomberg and Speaker Quinn Doing Excellent Jobs... At Screwing NYC Homeless Animals

Holy Crap...

That's all I can say...

I am writing this after everything went down so there's nothing left to do but recount the timeline of how it was politics as usual in NYC, and who lost out? Those who can't vote (or speak).

1994 - The ASPCA gives up ownership of the NYC shelter system because they didn't want to be so closely associated with the killing machine that was the NYC shelter system. 

You don't believe me? Read this. (That deserves it's own blog - How the ASPCA basically abandoned NYC's animals when they needed them most because it was a PR nightmare and was costing them donors)

1995 -  Animal Care & Control (ACC) is created by Mayor Giuliani and the Department of Health to take over the contract for animal control services. ACC is supposed to be an independent charity, but it was to be controlled and funded by the DOH.

April 2000 - The NYC Council passes a law, mandating new shelters be built for the two shelter-less boroughs - Queens and The Bronx. The law was passed following a scathing audit by the City Council’s Contracts Committee showing the inhumane conditions in the ACC’s overcrowded shelters.

2000 – The DOH budgets $7.8MM for running ACC. 2002 - Mayor Bloomberg gets an extension on building the new shelters.

2002 - The DOH allocates $8.5MM for the ACC.

2005 - The DOH allocates $8.1MM for AC&C.

2006 - Bloomie's extension passes...No one on the City Council says a word.

2009 - Animal rescue group Stray from the Heart says, "Eff this...You don't wanna obey the law, let's see what the courts have to say about it." They file a lawsuit, against the DOH and NYC, in hopes of forcing the city to obey it's law (I couldn't make this up if I tried).

Stray From The Heart won! A Superior Court Judge judge says the city must come up with plan to obey their own law!

NYC appeals (becaaaause...they don't want to follow their own law?)

April 2011 - NYC wins - For some reason, an appeals panel ruled that Stray from the Heart didn't have the "standing" to sue (if they don't, who does?)

SUMMER 2011 - Bloomie, Speaker Quinn, Councilmember Lappin, the ASPCA, and the Mayor's Alliance meet in a dark, smokey, backroom (I'm assuming) somewhere and upon emerging, announce Intro Bill 0655.

I'm not going to get into why this is a horrible bill, just read this statement from Stray from the Heart here.

The worst part of it  is because it reverses the law that the City Council passed in 2000, mandating shelters for Queens and The Bronx, two boroughs so large that population-wise, if they were cities, they'd be in the top 15 in the U.S.

A few other things stood out about this bill...

1 - The vast majority of the "new" funding is backloaded to fiscal 2014 - If anyone believes that the AC&C will see that money, I've got new shelters in Queens and The Bronx to sell ya, if ya get my drift.

2 - I put "new" in quotes because, not only does some of this "new" funding only gives back funds previously cut, if you take inflation into account, even if all the funding does come in, it barely makes it back to 2002 levels, when the shelter was killing about 70% of the animals that came in.

3 - Many don't think mandatory spay/neuter works.

4 - The fact that they are suddenly willing to give all this money to the ACC, given the dire economic straits that the city and the people in this city are in (I don't think links are needed here) tells me that things are even worse at the shelter than we previously imagined. I mean, we've read and saw stories about the filthy cages, animals being killed who weren't supposed to, a volunteer program without volunteers, dogs not being walked, and an executive director so enamored with power, that she's managed to alienate pretty much everyone, from her staff to rescue groups. Is there even more!??!

5 - This op-ed, by Ed Sayres (he runs the ASPCA), telling us why this bill is awesome, kills me. Especially these sentences...

Nevertheless, a few detractors are upset because the city did not agree to build animal shelters in Queens and in the Bronx. Let me be clear -- of course, I want the city to build animal shelters in the boroughs that currently do not have them. But the reality is that the city does not have to do this based on a recent appellate court's ruling (in re Stray from the Heart, Inc. v. Dep't of Health and Mental Hygiene of the City of New York, April 19, 2011) that a rescue group did not have standing to challenge the City's failure to open animal shelters in Queens and in the Bronx.

Given the appellate court's decision, I believe the agreement we brokered with the city has the animals' best interests at heart for the immediate future

This is funny to me because...

SEPTEMBER 2011 - Stray from the Heart convinces the NY Court of Appeals to hear their appeal from the mid-level decision. All of a sudden, it appears that our State’s highest court is verrrrrrrry interested in deciding whether a rescue group does have standing to sue a City for violating its own law. If Stray From the Heart wins the appeal, it means not only that it had standing, but that the City must build those shelters!!

So, now that the "reality" has changed, I assume Sayres will go back to his buddies (Bloomie, Quinn, Lappin et al) and tell them that he stands by his belief that the city needs the two new shelters and that they should amend the bill to remove the deletion of the law requiring NYC to build them. Right?

Wrong.... Instead...

SEPTEMBER 2011 - We get this Daily News headline

 City Council fast-tracking bill to let city wriggle out of obligation to build animal shelters

(slaps my head)

which leads to this...

This.

Excuse me while I vomit.

Harris Bloom
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/

Ed Sayres (and the ASPCA) to NYC Animals: Drop Dead!

I think more needs to be said about this deal, which I (and others) have railed against, but none so eloquently as Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer here.

The vote to approve this deal is coming up and in order to drum up support for the deal that they apparently helped negotiate, I recently received this email from the ASPCA - 

Dear New York City Animal Advocates,

Annual budget cuts to New York City's Animal Care and Control (ACC) program have had a predictably negative effect on New York's citizens and our at-risk animals.

You used to be able to phone ACC to come rescue and shelter lost/stray animals found in the streets—that's no longer true. Animal receiving centers in the Bronx and Queens have been forced to cut back their hours, and now operate only one or two days a week. And slashed funding has meant a loss of jobs at the city's three shelters, making it harder for remaining staff to provide the best service possible to animals and potential adopters. We would like to stress that none of this is the fault of ACC employees—it is a simple matter of insufficient funding from the City.

It is time to correct the mistakes of the past and implement the type of animal control and sheltering programs to which a first-rate city like ours is entitled. We are excited to announce that Councilmember Jessica Lappin has introduced a bill that will restore vital programs and services and improve conditions at the city's ACC facilities. Along with this legislation (Intro. 655), the City will commit to increasing its investment in the shelters by millions of dollars over the next three years.

A well-funded animal control program creates jobs and decreases potential threats to public health and safety—it's good for both animals and New Yorkers. Please help us seize this opportunity to help New York City's animals!
What You Can Do
Please ask your City councilmember to support and cosponsor Intro. 655. Visit the ASPCA Advocacy Center online, where we've provided a letter of support for NYC Intro. 655 that you can copy, edit to your liking and email to your councilmember. If you prefer, you may also print out the letter and mail to your councilmember. 

Why do I have a problem with this, Ed Sayres and the ASPCA? Let me count the ways...

1 - The main problem that animal advocates have with the "deal" is that it eliminates the law passed by the City Council in 2000 mandating shelters in Queens and the Bronx (two boroughs so large they would be in the top ten largest cities in the U.S. if they were cities)...and yet, nary a mention of this in the ASPCA's email blast. Reading the above statement makes it sound like you're an idiot if you are against it - Because they left out the downside (and boy, what a downside it is)

2 - In his Op-Ed piece, where Ed does mention the loss of the new promised shelters, he says, "...Let me be clear -- of course, I want the city to build animal shelters in the boroughs that currently do not have them. But the reality is that the city does not have to do this based on a recent appellate court's ruling (in re Stray from the Heart, Inc. v. Dep't of Health and Mental Hygiene of the City of New York, April 19, 2011) that a rescue group did not have standing to challenge the City's failure to open animal shelters in Queens and in the Bronx."

Bullshit! 

Who exactly does he think he's kidding? The whole "What can lil' ol' us do?" ain't fooling anyone who knows anything about the animal rescue business. The ASPCA has a LOT of pull, thanks to a huge and well-funded PR department (They helped kill Oreo's Law, for example) And just as they helped negotiate this deal behind the scenes, they can get together with their buddies at Maddie's Fund, Best Friends, and whom ever else (maybe talk to Hemsley's dog), and get these needed shelters financed. 

OR

3. They quoted the Stray from the Heart lawsuit... If the ASPCA agrees that the shelters are necessary, then why didn't THEY take up the lawsuit. With their powers, couldn't they do an inspection, and conclude that the existing shelters are dangerously insufficient? I would think that even the threat of such a lawsuit from the highly respected ASPCA would force NYC to do something to fix the situation.

OR

4. Just as they helped facilitate this backroom deal, they can do another, basically threatening NYC that they will expose the freaking nightmare that is the NYC shelter system (and believe me, they know that it is a disaster) if they don't do something more drastic to help the animals (like, you know, build another shelter or two). All he'd have to do is get his buddies together and threaten to drop their funding if something isn't done. Heck, it wont be hard to Maddie's fund to threaten it, as the ACC routinely breaks their agreement not to kill for space.

5 - His statement that the problems are due to a "simple matter of insufficient funding from the city" is bullshit as well. Horrendous mismanagement (8 ED's in 8 years? 'nuf said) and a BOD that exists only to serve Bloomberg's interests are the real problem. Is the ACC underfunded? Yes, ridiculously so... but it wont be adequately funded until the main problem is fixed, and that's breaking off the ACC from the DOH (as Mr. Stringer suggests). 

6 - Sayres isn't an idiot. He KNOWS what's going on between the walls at the ACC to the poor animals (Even Wikipedia knows). The question becomes why doesn't the ASPCA use their powers of enforcement to bring the real situation to light and maybe make revolutionary change rather than keep spinning the usual politically tinged pr about things getting better?

I think if they actually went in and documented what was going on, they'd have no choice but to take over... something they desperately wouldn't want to do (they had a miserable time running it thru 1995).

Anyway, I'm tired. 

Long story short (I know, too late!), the ASPCA and Sayres are accomplices to this "deal" and the maintenance of the status quo (i.e. DOH oversight), which, as long as it remains, means death to way too many of NYC's animals.

Harris Bloom

Mayor Bloomberg and City Council Speaker Christine Quinn Are Horrible People

First of all, sorry I am late to writing about this, but I was busy dealing with kidney stones, and lemmee tell ya...holy crap are those painful! I wouldn't wish those on anyone...okay, maybe a couple of people.

So... this came out last week -

City grants cash-strapped animal shelters $10 million over next three years

My guess is that the first take on that headline for most people who aren't familiar with the history and current situation of the city shelter is, "Gee, how awesome!"

Of course, those of us who are privy to such things thought, "Hmmm... I smell a rat."

And, as expected, we were correct. The devil is in the details (or, in this case Gracie Mansion)....

To those who want to hear why with agreement sucks but don't really need to hear a long-winded numbers heavy (hey, I'm a numbers guy!), lemmee tell ya with a hypothetical situation....

What if a group of people set fire to building, knowing there were 100 people in there. Then, while the fire was raging, they ran in and saved three people, with the rest dying. When the news cameras arrived, they were interviewed, and congratulated each other on saving those three lives.

THAT is what is happening here. Again, not gonna get into details, but the budget this year, which has been slashed several times in previous years, is the SAME as it was 16 years ago! And it was considered too low then! The point being - They are "cash-strapped" because they the city doesn't grant them any money! And now, they dare claim to be coming to the rescue?!?

btw - I wish I were making this up.

So, now, Bloomberg, Quinn, the ASPCA, and The Mayor's Alliance are falling over each other with congratulations for taking a step in the right direction. At least they are doing that, right? Stepping in the right direction?

Um, no. Not even close.

Here's the key sentence in their press release (which laughably includes the phrase "agreement to enhance services for shelter animals.")...

With the agreement, the Health Department will no longer have a legal obligation to build and maintain full-service shelters in every borough, only to maintain the existing shelters in Staten Island, Manhattan and Brooklyn.

Yup, the devil in the details...

But seriously, they've gotta be shittin' me!

In 2000, The City Council passed a law requiring the city to build shelters in two boroughs which didn't have shelters (The Bronx and Queens) - The city, under animal hater Mike Bloomberg, managed to defy said law for the past ten years, and now, has gotten animal hater Christine Quinn to help change the law (The fact that animals don't vote prolly has a lot do with this, which makes them horrible people), with an assist from The Mayor's Alliance and the ASPCA (nice work guys! btw - as a side note, any time the big boys get together on anything, assume the worst - I'm surprised the Humane Society hasn't come out with a big thumbs-up for this "deal" as well)

So, thanks to this backroom "deal," the largest two boroughs in NY, which, if cities, would both be in the top ten in the United States in population, will have no city-run animal shelters.

Congratulations are definitely in order!

Rock On,

Harris Bloom

http://www.stewietotherescue.org/

The Verrazano Bridge Kitten

I dunno if you you heard about this news item last week - the kitten that was thrown from a car on the Verrazano Bridge - Even Whoopi Goldberg has weighed in. A terrific story, that kitten has no idea how lucky he is to be alive. For more reasons than you think....

First, lets watch this video of Executive Director Julie Bank discussing said kitty....



Watched it? Excellent!

Now, let's discuss what she did right in this, and why I sometimes hate knowing too much (this sounds egotistical, but it's not, you'll see...)

What Julie did right....

1 - The said the "most important thing" to take from this is that if you don't want your pet, bring them to a shelter - Though I do realize that the person who did this may've not wanted to rid themselves of this kitten as much as wanted to commit a crime, I'm sure there are others out there who just leave their pets in the "wild" - Heck, that's how I found our second dog.

2 - She asks for anyone who has info about who may've done this to come forward. I dont' know if they will, but, knowing that this kind of cruelty will lead to serious consequences may make some think twice about it.

3 - She asks for donations. You would think this is a no-brainer, but it isn't, given Animal Care & Control's (ACC) history.

4 - She asks for fosters to step forward. Part of the problem at ACC is that there is no room (let's forget that a lot of that is due to the ACC/DOH/NYC) for now...it is what it is - for now). A call for fosters will only help (I'm sure many don't even realize they can foster dogs or cats - Three years ago, I didn't).

So, I'm sure you don't hear this often (well, other than from the BOD when you cut staff/services and phone lines to balance the budget), but good job on those counts, Julie Bank!

Now, here's why it sucks knowing so damn much...

Julie mentions not once, but twice, how the ACC staffer who happened to see the incident was "at the right place at the right time." While I don't think she did that on purpose, I do think even she realizes what would've happened to that cat if the staffer didn't see the person throw the cat from the car.

UPDATE - Thanks to a comment I read (see first comment), I think it may be possible that by saying this staffer was "at the right place at the right time," Julie was attempting to minimize Mr. Ocasio's contribution, which would make sense given that she seems to feel that all staffers/volunteers are expendable (even given the shortage of said staffers/volunteers)

Assuming the poor kitten made it off the bridge alive, she would have probably been killed, whether she came in as a stray, or God forbid, an owner surrender.


1 - If that kitten had been an ordinary stray (i.e. someone found her and brought her into the ACC), it would be treated like any other orphan kitten. The moment it entered a shelter it would be exposed to, among other things, a cold virus, and probably gotten an upper respiratory infection. If it has to be bottle fed, they can't do that at the shelter. No staff no volunteers. The kitten would have to be held for three days in case an owner shows up. If no owner comes, then she probably would be killed since she'd be sick and/or starving.

2 - If the cat had been surrendered, she may've been killed the day after she was surrendered. The ACC has decreed that as long as the animal appears on the "kill list" for one night, it reserves the right to kill the animal the next day. There is no hold period because there's no doubt about who the owner is.

(In the old days, shelter managers could have owner surrenders killed right away.Two and on-half years ago, volunteers convinced management that every animal to be killed should appear on a kill list sent to rescuers.The kill lists go out at 5 PM every day.)

If an animal arrives on day 1 and is included on the evening euth list, it can be killed the next morning.

Couple of other points about her speech - She said that they were able to give the kitty "some good food ....some good water...love" - Good thing this didn't occur last year when the ACC almost ran out of food and had to go public with donation requests! Also, I'm curious how much love the other strays get, given that she's hellbent on firing all the volunteers who care.

Rock On,

Harris
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/

Your Choice...

Your wealthy uncle has passed away (sorry!).

He has made you executor of his estate, and has left you with a ridiculous decision to make, the kind only imagined by Presidents of animal rescues and comedians -

ANYWAY, you can either give $1 million dollars to the ACC OR $500,000 to your favorite animal rescue/shelter. Which will it be?

This may be a leading question but would your answer be different if the ACC weren't an extension of the City's Department of Health?

Rock On,

Harris
http://www.stewietotherescue.org/