Do you notice the remarkable difference between the selection process for LA's Animal Services GM as compared to the selection and vetting process for the Supreme Court?
Already a dozen names suggested as on Obama's "short list" have been mentioned, commented on, pilloried, glorified, and discussed. Soon we'll know every decision ever made by the final chosen candidate.
But the GM candidates? Not so much. The "transparency" is about the same as all other department GM selections--not so much.
Why can't the City provide the same level of transparency as a Secretary of State or a Supreme Court Justice?
After the Mayor selects his GM, there will be a pro forma vetting and confirmation by Council, with maybe one or two councilmembers voicing some objections if the candidate is guaranteed to be bland.
As Jerry Greenwalt said, there was only one criteria absolutely required of the new Animal Services GM: Don't embarrass the Mayor, which means Antonio and the selection process as a whole, will be directed towards selecting safety and predictability, not performance.
Everyone I talk to at Animal Services says the department is better run than when Boks was GM, and most, three years ago said the department under Boks was better run than before Boks came.
The department may be better run, more efficient, whatever, but the numbers do not reflect a reality of a better run LAAS. Isn't this how we measure the success or failure of the department and any new GM--has the killing gone down significantly? The Mayor defines success differently. Has the GM caused him any problems?
Also, notice, no one talks about goals for the department anymore. The strategic plan does not define No-Kill, nor does it affix benchmarks or milestones to attaining it.
Several well known candidates have already received their rejection slips, including Laura Beth Heisen, and Dr. Conrad, the vet who pushed through anti-declaw legislation is several municipalities. No reason was given for the rejection naturally. She feels it was due to lack of shelter experience.
Should any of the other candidates also want to contact me about their experience, I welcome it.
Also, I understand that Kathy Davis who vowed she was not interested in the job, changed her mind and has applied for it, but submitted her application after the deadline. I also here this allegation is untrue.