PROVIDING INFORMATION AND ANALYSES OF ANIMAL ISSUES IN LOS ANGELES
No need to bring a noose. Boks has been making his own for the past almost three years. Hmm, he was head of Marcipopa for three years, New York for 2.5 years and now almost three years here in LA. Yep, his time is up. Wonder where he goes from here? Who cares.
You asked me for the truth.I told you the truth before and you didn't like it.Regardless of who is GM, the residents of Los Angeles turn in animals all day and all night at all the shelters. By far, fewer animals are adopted. Adult pit bulls and cats have very limited chances for adoption.You call me a naysayer, but the real situation on the ground is if you don't euthanize, you warehouse.Regardless of who is general manager, the shelter managers and supervisors are responsible for the care of the animals while they are being warehoused. Civil service prevents poor performance being corrected and the animals suffer. Lazy supervisors permit lazy workers.The next GM must make the managers make the kennel supervisors push the workers to care more for the animals. Cutting back the hours the shelter is open to the public might help. Hiring more employees and making a Marine Corps drill instructor the Director of Shelter Operations would help
You keep saying that mantra of failure over and over as if repetition makes it true; but it is not true.You assume that adopotions, rescues and return to owners can never reach the 90% which is the accepted percentage for no kill even when many medium and smaller public shelters are approaching or exceed that number already. I have listed these municipal shelters over and over.Even LAAS with all its imperfections is only 18% away from no kill for dogs despite all the pit bulls and other bull-types, when they were killing 55% six years ago.With your assumption that adoptions + rescues + RTO can never =90%, of course you are right, because you are assuming, but not proving, no kill is impossible and calling it truth.Then you give instructions that you say "will help." Will help what, reduce killing? Of course you are right, everyone says exactly the same thing. Everyone accepts the steps you offer as the way to go. There is nothing new in what you offer.
Poster 2,I don't believe it's euthanize or warehouse. How about just trying to reduce intake through spay and neuter, pet retention programs, and increase outcomes with adoptions, grooming, training, incentives. The problem here is not "lazy" employees who refuse to work as Boks likes to say. It's not about kennel managers "wanting to kill" animals. That's ridiculous. The problem is Boks has not given the shelter managers tools to reduce intake and increase outcomes. He's doing the same programs as his predecessors. Of course euthanasia won't continue to go down if you don't do something new. He's just blaming the employees for his own short comings. The only thing the employees can do right now if feed, clean, medicate the animals. They don't have the power to reduce euthanasia. That's the job of the GM.Anyone taking bets on when Boks will be fired? Or will he resign, quit, retire, get promoted, take a stress leave or whatever else you want to call it.
Does anyone know if Boks will be there?
So many anonymous comments. Now is the time to show where you stand. Any retaliation will be met with an ugly backlash. Stand up and ID yourself, at least with a catchy nickname...Even though it is well known that Ed Boks is no friend of mine (or my dogs for that matter). Over a year ago (longer?), I publicly submitted 17 sincere and inexpensive suggestions on how to improve adoption numbers through public outreach.Recently I have looked back on the minutes of old meetings. Especially around the 2005/2006 transition from GS to EB and when Tariq Khero first came aboard (no pun intended). He really seemed to want more public awareness for LAAS. As we all know Khero has done nothing and become a rubber stamping ass-coverer.A truly effective motivator and innovator who can assemble a great team (plenty of money to go around, it seems with even with the City cutting spending everywhere except in EB's wallet) CAN make a real difference. Who that would be, I don't know. Seems like $181K per year would attract someone with no political aspirations. But alas. I have engaged in naive fantasies before.If anything good has come of this most recent spotlight on old EB, it is that retaliatory acts seem to have lessened.Please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm making a scrapbook! :) See you on October 7.BTW...kudos to Keith Kramer and all other employees who have come to see the light and are no longer afraid to speak. Gutsy.
Post a Comment