.
Boks has refused to respond to many requests for public records over the last year from multiple persons. Many have been submitted by Brad Jensen and two by me about Mason's cats.
Soon I am going to send a letter to the City Attorney about Boks' noncompliance. If that accomplishes nothing, I am going to call my old acquaintance and now State Attorney General Jerry Brown (who will run for governor soon) and send him a letter saying not only did LAAS not comply, but the City Attorney did nothing either. I was Jerry's operations manager during his presidential run in 1992 (for a few weeks until I was fired for managerial incompetence by the campaign manager).
Then, I plan on suing the City after I find out if any financial penalties are involved for the department's (and Boks') non-compliance with these requests. A lawsuit only costs $110.
I am telling you all this just to pique your interest and give Ed notice and time to provide the records I requested.
If Boks and the department can get away with refusing requests, he is free to do what he wants to anyone he wants at the peon level as are we, especially with his personal police force.
.
14 comments:
Ed,
Are you saying you think Boks is one of your most faithful readers because he's so paranoid and so borderline-aware of his own unparalleled incompetence and the resulting contempt in which he is held by all right-thinking people that he feels it only strategic to keep tabs on what the latest truths are that are being told about him?
Pshaw! No one's that big of a freak...
P.S. I've been wondering if Brown was ever going to show an interest in this. I mean, how many times can one guy break the law (i.e. the Hayden Act 1,155 times in 2006) before a State Attorney General notices?
Yes, Jerry told me 6 years ago he'd be running for gov again and to keep my old bumper stickers dry (the ones that don't say Brown for Pres). Now its all over the newspapers as Villaraigosa's main challenge. But as Attorney General, I'm sure he will at least hear me out.
Boks definitely reads the blogs. He responds to them and ADL in his blog. Boks is so worried about what people think about him which is why he blogs, writes articles and releases news about himself all the time. He's his biggest fan.
Boks, people who know don't think too highly of you. You're just a pathological liar and a sociopath, willing to make any lie, break any law that you like. Things are finally catching up to you. You can't just get fired/quit and run to another city. Everyone now knows your dirty little secrets.
This is why Boks has been able to get away with his scam for years. Cities hire him to do positive spin press. Soon after they realize he's a frackup.
They have to cover for him because they don't want to be embarrassed. They won't release documents that could prove his failure. They continue to cover up for him until they've had it. Then Boks "quits" to take a "better job" in a different city all the way across the country. He leaves a wake of destruction in his path. Notice, he has no friends in Arizona or New York. When he leaves here he won't have any friends in LA either. He burns everyone. Only people who don't really know him think he's a "nokill" type of shelter director.
Re comment #4.
The other problem is that opponents of No-Kill use him as an example. It happened really fast when the story on rising shelter deaths came out. Crazies IMMEDIATELY started posting comments that this story illustrated what's wrong with No-Kill.
The fact that Boks does all this damage while CALLING himself No-Kill is causing a lot of harm to the movement. I know Winograd has taken Boks on to a limited extent, but he needs to be tougher. Boks takes all the jargon and buzzwords he can find and flings them into the air to distract from the facts. But people who want to say No-Kill can't be achieved are equally cynically pretending that he actually represents it.
The truth about No-Kill and its real results when the whole strategy is adopted need to be made more visible and believeable than Boks.
It just galls me that the city of LA is paying people to neglect the animals in the shelters to the point that some animals die in their cages. It is abuse. It is criminal. Why hasn't the attorney general done anything? Surely the attorney general knows the Hayden law is being violated.
Actually, I think that one thing that none of you realize is that your world is very small. Nobody outside of the world of "animal rights, watch, pals, nutz, etc." has a clue who any of you are. 90% of the city of Los Angeles couldn't name the GM of LAAS if you asked them. They think ADL is the anti-defamation league.
Then maybe, each in our own way, we should tell our friends, coworkers, and neighbors who and what Boks is.
RE RE Comment #4
I agree with you. Boks is not a "nokill" director. He does not practice nokill. He just tells everyone that he's doing all the programs when he is not. He himself is even saying that his failure is due to "nokill." "More animals are dying because of nokill."
One, he is not "nokill." Two, his failure is because he's not practicing "nokill." Nokill doesn't mean overcrowding, warehousing, not caring for animals properly. The employees are not properly caring for animals because Boks overloaded them with extra work. He should realize this and not overcrowd because the employees won't be changing their behavior. He is now blaming the employees for the deaths. He needs to blame himself.
For instance, Boks just SAYS that his bottle baby program is saving kittens. Fewer kittens are being euth'd because (1) he is refusing kittens, (2) he is turning kittens into cats by saying they are two months old when they're really 2-7 weeks of age and (3) more are dying of neglect and lack of care. It has nothing to do with the bottle baby program which we had before he got here.
Another example, he says he has a lot of volunteers. No, he doesn't. He has a lot of names on the volunteer list but most just showed up for the volunteer class then never actually volunteered. Those that did volunteer volunteered once. They generally left the shelters crying after seeing how horrible things are. A very small percentage of volunteers actively volunteer.
I'd put the real number at 50 not 600 or whatever he said. 50 real volunteers in a city of 4,000,000 people with 56,000 animals coming into 7 locations a year. That's nothing. The few volunteers that are active are treated very poorly by shelter staff and admin. The employees assume they're all ADL spies when they're not. After being treated like shit the volunteers THEN give info to ADL because complaining to the Department gets you nothing but fired.
Another problem with the volunteer program is the use of high school seniors. High school seniors in LA must do so many hours of community time. You get kids that sign up, do their community time then they quit after they realize how horrible the shelters are. Another program they do is allow convicted criminals to do their mandatory community hours at the shelter. You get some rotten juvie criminals in there. The ones that actually do something taunt the dogs, the others just sit in the employee lounge and do nothing. Boks includes those people in his list of volunteers.
Yes, only a very small group of people know the truth about Boks. Most people just read his lying pretty press releases and believe the city is already nokill. That's how Boks gets away with his scam. Anyone who doesn't support him he labels a "terrorist" or "insane" or an "exlover." Eventually though the city will realize just how bad he is, and they'll get rid of him. His two years ended Jan 3. Time to start packing his bags.
Last comment is correct about volunteering. I get emails, so I know I'm being counted as a volunteer. But I stopped going maybe three months ago because there was really nothing for me to do, and almost no one who would give me something to do..
The more I read Winograd's book the sadder I get about LAAS. I thought I was being unreasonable to think that their hours are too restrictive for adult volunteers who have 9 to 5 jobs. But Winograd talks about how shelters should be open hours people can actually come. On top of which, there's no reason why a volunteer shouldn't be able to walk a dog before the shelter opens on a weekend. The dog would show a lot better if it had had a walk.
But you can't walk a dog until you take a dogwalking class, which they won't give. Meanwhile, the dogs are going cage crazy, then being killed for it.
"But you can't walk a dog until you take a dogwalking class..."
Is this required or can it be waived if the person can demonstrate proof that they have had previous experience in dog walking or has had training elsewhere?
Brad Jensen
Cypress,CA
If you take the test and are certified as a dog walker in California, it just a simple permit process to practice dogwalking in six other states.
Post a Comment