Boks' Response to Winograd

From Boks' blog:

Recently there has been a little buzz in the animal welfare community about a relatively new “No Kill Equation” for local government animal care and control agencies. This prescription claims to be a revolutionary formula for achieving "no-kill." In fact, the "No-Kill Equation" is neither new nor revolutionary but is actually comprised of ten common sense, long-standing practices embraced and implemented by LA Animal Services to one degree or another.

Over the coming couple of weeks I will share one No-Kill Equation recommendation followed by an outside perspective on how LA Animal Services has been addressing the same issue for, in some cases, many years.

The Ten "No-Kill Equation" Recommendations are:1. Feral Cat TNR Program2. High Volume/Low-Cost Spay/Neuter3. Rescue Groups4. Foster Care5. Comprehensive Adoption Program6. Pet Retention7. Medical and Behavioral Rehabilitation8. Public Relations/Community Involvement9. Volunteers10. A Compassionate Director.


Ed's right you know. Winograd's prescription is old news in terms of its recommended programs, and LAAS has purportedly engaged in many of these programs over the years and has continued. In fact, Nathan lauds LA's spay/neuter programs in the 70s and 80s.

Currently it appears that at least 8,000 spay/neuters will be done in-house this coming calendar year between Rao and the ever so expensive Eric, the Millionaire, Jones. There are still the almost 40,000 spay/neuter certificates to be given out as last year. LA has been no slouch when it comes to a spay/neuter program.

But Boks has failed miserably in his volunteer program, and while foster care has improved, it is only because it went from nothing to a bit of something. The foster program does not compare to San Francisco or Philly where they save over 85% of the neonatal kittens.

The LAAS adoption program is pretty good but lacks any permanent off site adoption facility and I am sure he will tell us why that didn't happen such as permit problems or other bureaucratic crap--and it may be true. I don't know. I just know they are not there and he said there would be--to me.

His relationship with rescue groups can't be that good because for the last 2 years, rescues have taken out fewer animals than the year before he came.

I think most of the problem arises from a staff that hates the public, fosters, volunteers and Boks himself, and whose hostile attitude is supported by the unions. But Ed has not found a way to change that attitude or get rid of the deadbeats.

He has failed at enlisting community involvement and instead has raised the wrath of that community because of his arrogance, obtuseness and grandiosity. There is no room in LAAS for anyone except Ed and his ideas.

Lastly is Nathan's rule that you need a compassionate director. Perhaps by some extreme stretch Ed can be called compassionate, but Winograd forgot to say "competent" director. It is not that Ed does not know what to do, but he has failed to actually do it, mostly because of personality problems and the union and the people who work for the shelters. One person I know who has worked in the shelters for years says there are some very, very bad people working there.

I do not think Winogard has anything new to offer LA in terms of programs. Ed is trying to do them but has not succeeded to the degree we will reach no kill by 2038. I think what Winograd can do is inspire the community and get a director who can actually motivate and energize the community and thereby sweep even the worst deadbeats to get with the program or be ostracized by the employees and volunteers who embrace it. Ed is not a leader, it is not in his personality structure--just as I do not have leadership qualities in my make up. I am more of a loner, media and research type. But Ed is an entertainer; LAAS needs leadership.

What I have heard are disturbing rumors that kittens go straight from intake to the bump room and are never given impound numbers. This is a fear I have had since the kitten neonatal impound numbers took an unprecedented and dramatic decline in May through November that saved Boks' bacon so to speak and helped his numbers immensely.

I wish I could prove this right or wrong. It is just hard to believe Ed would do this for his numbers. How could anyone?


Anonymous said...

What Boks did with the kittens isn't that bad. They would have been killed anyway. When fosters were full, Boks took in some kittens, had the people sign an owner requested euthanasia form, then just killed them and didn't count them, same thing he did in New York. Of course, owner requested euthanasia is illegal here in California. It's also against Department regulations. Since when has that stopped Boks.He will do as he pleases. He refused some kittens as well.

We had a foster program before Boks. It just wasn't included in the numbers. Notice that Boks got rid of the released to foster category. Now we have no idea if the fostered animals are being saved or not. They can go to foster then be returned and killed. Sneaky Boks.

Anonymous said...

Boks knows what to do. Everyone knows what to do, even me. Boks just doesn't know how to get these things done. You can't just send out an email and tell the employees and City to do things. If it were that simple, we would have been nokill years ago.

He is not a leader. His only skills are releasing misleading numbers and press. That's it. He has horrible people skills. He shares confidential emails and phone calls, with everyone. He pits people against each other. He makes the employees hate the volunteers and the volunteers hate the employees. He puts down the volunteers and the employees to each other. That's not how you build a team. That's how you start wars. I wouldn't even want Boks to direct cub scouts let alone Animal Control Officers.

Anonymous said...

You want to know why the employees hate the volunteers and the volunteers hate the employees? When Boks arrived he asked volunteers about their issues with employees. He told them he would keep all information confidential. Volunteers sent in concerns and issues they had with certain employees. Boks then gave those emails to the employees! He incited the employees to commit acts against the volunteers!

How do I know? Volunteers requested copies of their volunteer folders. Guess what was in there? The emails sent to Boks about the employees and the employees written responses to said emails! I can't imagine a worst Director.

Another thing he does is reprimand employees in public in front of volunteers and the public. How does that make the employees feel? They feel hatred toward Boks and the volunteers. They then attack the volunteers when Boks isn't looking. Then they intentionally do an even worse job to spite Boks for reprimanding them in public. What idiot reprimands employees in public? Someone missed their management 101 class. Perhaps because he never went to college.

Anonymous said...

You could give Boks the best plan in the world and he still couldn't make LA nokill. He doesn't have what it takes. Remember this quote below? He failed to make NY nokill so he blamed his own failure on NY. He will soon blame his failure here on LA, activists and probably even kittens.Yes, kittens failed his programs. Damn them.

"So what happened? Animal workers unanimously point to former Animal Care and Control director Ed Boks, who served from 2003 to ’05. One alliance member snipes, “Boks’s programs had catchy names, but they had no substance and weren’t sustainable.” “It’s unfortunate that in the animal-welfare arena, it’s so easy to throw stones rather than take responsibility,” says Boks. “The problem isn’t that the programs failed but that the city failed the programs.” The city declined to renew Boks’s 2006 contract.