It appears Zine and Cardenas have heard the unending litany of public complaints regarding Boks' poor performance in every way, except his unparalleled ability to spin.
It also appears that Council wants to set Ed straight as to what his, and LAAS' priorities should be: saving lives. Reducing euthanasia should be Boks' primary goal, not reforming a dysfunctional department. Council will call for a review and a plan to reduce euthanasia.
Jim Bickhart long told me that getting an eight cylinder department to operate on ever 4 cylinders has been hard and time-consuming. Now that we are working on 4 cylinders, why hasn't there been improvement, not even 1%?
We did not bring Boks here to spend 2 years reforming the department in order to improve the euthanasia rate by zero percent after 15 months. According to Boks' recent projection, we will have gone backwards during 2006-2007. This is unacceptable after reviewing the successful efforts of multiple shelters across the country to radically reduce euthanasia and increase lives saved.
The LAAS annual report states the department is still moving backwards regarding live-saves. In fact, they now save fewer animals than during 2005.
It is quite clear Boks has no idea regarding what he is doing to implement progress towards No-Kill. I see no improvement in the near future. The City is not paying LAAS $20 million to decrease the live save rate when other cities have, with 1/8 the employees and budget and have made rapid progress during the past few years.
Philly went from 88% kill in 2004 to 53% in 2006 and looks like it will overtake LA this year on 1/7 the budget with 1/7 the number of employees. This is despite having to perform all "processing" in one large shelter than in six more publicly accessible shelters across the city as in LA. It is a lot easier for the public to travel a short distance to a shelter rather than long. Ditto field impounds. Logistics of handling animals improves, even though logistics of supplies, vehicles, etc. becomes slightly more difficult.
Bickhart continues to be a Boks' apologist long after I ceased my identical activities. I made a mistake. I also wish Bickhart would put the animals first over keeping his job. Both he and Boks better be looking for employment elsewhere.
I'm beginning to think a lawsuit is in order. Of course, if Boks were removed and replaced with a competent no kill advocate then that action would not be necessary.
Post a Comment