.
Carla Hall, who everyone thought could only write fluff pieces about LAAS and Boks, I guess decided the blood was so thick now that she was safe in finally reporting what hundreds of people have been telling her for WELL over a year and a half.
Carla and her ilk, and a pathetic lack of courage by the LA Times to alienate Mayor Tony by printing anything bad about one of his primo appointees about whom he has lavished praise for month after month for two years, finally came to her senses.
Why? She was not leading the charge against Boks as, for example, has Dana Bartholomew, but actually was only bringing up the rear guard---safe, safe, safe, and pathetic.
Her piece in the Times:
L.A. animal shelter workers voice complaints about agency chief
Staffers tell councilmen at a special meeting that the department is a rudderless ship and that general manager Ed Boks has not told them how to carry out his goal of creating a 'no kill' policy.
.
By Carla Hall, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
October 8, 2008
.
Dozens of frustrated Los Angeles city shelter workers, as well as many volunteer animal welfare advocates, brought their complaints about the shelter system's general manager, Ed Boks, to a public hearing at Van Nuys City Hall on Tuesday night.
"I realize the department is often controversial," said Linda Gordon, a staffer of L.A. Animal Services, the agency that runs the city's municipal shelters.
"We're trouble for you," she told Councilmen Dennis Zine and Tony Cardenas. "But we're here tonight -- workers, volunteers, the humane community. . . . How can anyone expect us to move the department forward if we have no confidence or trust in the general manager?"
At leas t 150 people -- including about 60 employees of Animal Services -- attended the hearing, which was called by the City Council's Personnel Committee. The hearing was convened in the wake of a petition that at least half the staff of Animal Services signed earlier this year stating they had "no confidence" in Boks. The employees and their union leaders first took the petition to the mayor's office. Then, dissatisfied with what they said was a lack of response, they presented it to the City Council. Boks, as head of a city agency, answers only to the mayor. The City Council cannot fire him.
Zine, who chairs the Personnel Committee, listened intently to the speakers. He and Cardenas peppered them with questions. When many employees said they worried about retaliation for speaking against Boks, Zine assured them that he had all their names and he would make sure they did not suffer any adverse action on their jobs for attending the hearing.
One by one, staffers portrayed Animal Services as a rudderless ship. They faulted th e general manager for failing to tell them how to carry out his goal of creating a "no kill" policy for the shelters. They said he gave conflicting directives and was more interested in photo ops than caring for the animals.
"We can't make heads or tails of just about any policy in this department," said Jacob Miller, a shelter worker.
"We don't need a general manager who says to employees, 'If you want to know what's going on in the department, read my blog,' " said Gordon, referring to Boks' blog on the Animal Services website.
Employees and some animal welfare advocates also complained that Boks exaggerated the extent to which the department was headed toward his no-kill goal -- which would mean no healthy animals were euthanized. Employees said Bok got around this by classifying many shelter animals as either sick or behaviorally unsuitable.
Employees also complained that, in an effort to meet the no-kill goal, shelters were becoming overcrowded warehouses where animals fought with each other, endangering themselves and shelter workers.
Animal control officer Stacey Dancy -- in a statement read by a colleague to the council members -- mentioned that Boks had declared last month that only he, an assistant general manager and an Animal Services captain were qualified to assess whether an animal had a behavior problem that would allow euthanization.
"I beg to differ with this utterly ridiculous and pompous statement," Dancy said in her statement. She took no i ssue with the caption but said that neither Boks nor his deputy "impound, house, feed, clean or medicate animals, move animals from crowded cage to crowded cage, break up fights."
"I think the problem is a lack of a business-like strategy," said Laura Beth Heisen, a former commissioner on the board that oversees Animal Services (but has little power over the agency).
Being general manager of a large municipal shelter -- grappling with overcrowding as well as the desire to euthanize as little as possible -- can be a challenge. Boks has been under fire from animal welfare advocates -- and now his employees -- during much of his nearly three-year tenure here. In a letter he sent to Zine Monday he said he had been hired to make changes in the shelter system.
"I can be hard to get along with, demanding, sometimes exasperating and often in a hurry to get things done," he wrote. "That can create an uncomfortable situation for veterans who were comfortable with their jobs as they existed before I arrived. . . . That is what it sometimes means to be a 'change agent.' "
carla.hall@latimes.com
.
GOING, GOING....PART I
From Mayor Sam:
Villaraigosa Cornered after Strong-Arming City Councilmen
Did Mayor Villaraigosa try to strong-arm Councilmembers Tony Cardenas, Bernard Parks and Dennis Zine into not holding a meeting of hundreds of city employees and animal rescuers last night?
You betcha.
Did it work? No sir!
According to those in attendance, nearly 200 people composed of animal shelter employees, union officials, rescuers, and media attended the special evening Personnel Committee meeting at Van Nuys City Hall to demand the termination of Edwin M. Boks, the Animal Services general manager and Linda Barth, his hand-picked assistant general manager.
Villaraigosa’s office also ordered Boks’ rubber-stamping Animal Services commissioners to not attend the event, although two (Archibald J. Quincey and president Glen Brown) disregarded those directives.
The Los Angeles Times and the Los Angeles Daily News have stories about this today, but both missed the most shocking testimony of the evening, which was confirmed by several people in attendance.
Former chief veterinarian of the Department of Animal Services, Kathy Rainey, said Mr. Boks ordered her to “conduct certain veterinary practices with infectious diseases without regard for public safety, including allowing public access to a rabies isolation area, even though such jurisdiction is a county function once rabies is diagnosed."
Mr. Boks, she said, told her that the worst that could happen is that she would receive "just a slap on the wrist and that the California Veterinary Board should not be in our business."
The vet also said that Mr. Boks allowed other medical decisions to b e made by another Assistant GM, even though she has no background in veterinary medicine, causing six other veterinarians to leave the city to practice elsewhere.
After detailing other shocking behavior from Mr. Boks and/or Ms. Barth, Dr. Rainey said that as a public health official, she resigned because if she acted as Mr. Boks directed her to, the California Veterinary Board could have revoked her license.
The veterinarian advised that if such practices were ever reported to the state, and proven to be true, it could cost the city its own state license to run animal shelters.
A 29 year department employee, Kathy Mooney, said she is retiring early due to Mr. Boks' intimidation, said she felt like she is "hanging herself" by coming to the meeting, told how in her job as the keeper-of-department-kill-statistics, Mr. Boks creates ever-vaguer statistics so that Mr. Boks can make false claims that the city is "95% No Kill," even though it kills tens of thousands of animals per year.
Victor Gordo, a union representative, told of the threats, intimidation and unfair labor practices employed by Mr. Boks and Ms. Barth. Mr. Brown (the Animal Services commission president) publicly denied that these wide-scale employee concerns were ever brought to the commission’s attention. That could be because20Mr. Brown appears to have missed at least 10 commission meetings during his two year tenure. (His claims were publicly disputed by Maria Atake, another former commissioner who told about her experiences with Mr. Boks.)
Other problems addressed include a complete lack of training, policies & procedures, and emergency preparedness.
At one point, Dennis Zine asked, "Is there anyone in the room who has anything positive to say about Mr. Boks or Ms. Barth?" One employee got up and said, "Yes, they have united everyone in this room against them!"
The meeting ran so long that, after a full 4 hours of testimony, the Councilmembers still had dozens of speaker cards that had yet to be called, so the Council members told the crowd that the meeting would be reconvened within a few days.
Going back to the original point: Why did Mayor Villaraigosa try to strong-arm the City Councilmembers into not having the meeting?
That answer is embarrassment. For years, the Mayor has stayed with Mr. Boks because, to admit that he made yet another hiring mistake would be to arm future political opponents with proof of Villaraigosa’s incompetence. But now, with numerous TV and video cameras recording last night’s meeting, the Mayor can no longer claim he didn’t know.
All the Mayor can do is try to strong-arm the City Council, again, wh ich, this time, it appears won’t be enough.
The Mayor is meeting on Thursday with Union officials to discuss the future of Mr. Boks’ and Ms. Barth's employment with the city.
As Paul Harvey says, then there’s “the other side of the story.” There is a money trail to someone who has been influencing the mayor to keep Mr. Boks. If anyone has more information about this, please write to us. Be prepared to help us name names.
EMPLOYEES BLAST BOKS
.
Did you hear the Zine meeting. Unbelievable! They confirmed Boks was worse than even I thought. I especially enjoyed Linda Gordon's remarks.
Dana Bartholomew writes:
Workers, activists join against animal services chief
By Dana Bartholomew, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 10/07/2008 09:13:51 PM PDT
Animal shelter workers joined activists Tuesday to renew calls for the resignation of city animal control manager Ed Boks. During a special city meeting, employees for the Los Angeles Department of Animal Services called for the heads of general manager Ed
Boks, and his assistant, Linda Barth.
Last month, half the department had filed a petition of no confidence, citing mismanagement, intimidation, retaliation and a disregard for workers, animals and public safety.
"This is unprecedented for this many members of animal services to stand up and say, 'We've had it, ... We can't bear to see animals the way they're being treated because of management policies and procedures,'" said Victor Gordo, a union representative for LAAS middle management.
"The citizens of Los Angeles are not getting the services they have paid for."
An estimated 200 animal shelter workers, activists and concerned residents packed the Tuesday evening Personnel Committee meeting at Van Nuys City Hall.
The public forum was called by Councilman Dennis Zine, chairman of the committee, in response to workers' concerns. The committee includes council members Tony Cardenas and Bernard C. Parks. Parks did not attend Tuesday's meeting.
"We just are trying to get to the bottom line of what's happening in this department," Zine said after the meeting.
Boks is scheduled Thursday to meet with officials from the Mayor's Office and shelter worker unions to plan how to address the employees' concerns. In a letter to employees Monday, Boks said he values employee input.
"It is important to me that we identify problems, confirm facts and resolve whatever differences may exist among us - and that we continue to work as a team," wrote Boks, who didn't attend the meeting.
Boks also wrote Zine that being a "change agent" can be difficult while making Los Angeles the first large "no-kill" city in the nation.
Critics, including unions for shelter managers and officers, contend the city's top animal control regulator has warehoused too many pets at the city's expanded city shelter system.
As a result, they say dogs and cats attack one another, get sick and must ultimately be put down. This year, euthanasia is up 37 percent in Los Angeles.
In addition, they blasted Boks with a litany of complaints, from a lack of viable adoption programs to no-leash law enforcement by too few animal control officers on the street.
Meanwhile, city officials have asked why six of the eight spay-neuter clinics have sat vacant.
Linda Gordon, a senior management analyst and 30-year veteran of animal services, said the department has no confidence in Boks. "We are not whiners. We work hard every day. We're the ones who scoop the poop," Gordon said. "We are the ones who must hold the animal when they are killed."
dana.bartholomew@dailynews.com
818-713-3730
Did you hear the Zine meeting. Unbelievable! They confirmed Boks was worse than even I thought. I especially enjoyed Linda Gordon's remarks.
Dana Bartholomew writes:
Workers, activists join against animal services chief
By Dana Bartholomew, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 10/07/2008 09:13:51 PM PDT
Animal shelter workers joined activists Tuesday to renew calls for the resignation of city animal control manager Ed Boks. During a special city meeting, employees for the Los Angeles Department of Animal Services called for the heads of general manager Ed
Boks, and his assistant, Linda Barth.
Last month, half the department had filed a petition of no confidence, citing mismanagement, intimidation, retaliation and a disregard for workers, animals and public safety.
"This is unprecedented for this many members of animal services to stand up and say, 'We've had it, ... We can't bear to see animals the way they're being treated because of management policies and procedures,'" said Victor Gordo, a union representative for LAAS middle management.
"The citizens of Los Angeles are not getting the services they have paid for."
An estimated 200 animal shelter workers, activists and concerned residents packed the Tuesday evening Personnel Committee meeting at Van Nuys City Hall.
The public forum was called by Councilman Dennis Zine, chairman of the committee, in response to workers' concerns. The committee includes council members Tony Cardenas and Bernard C. Parks. Parks did not attend Tuesday's meeting.
"We just are trying to get to the bottom line of what's happening in this department," Zine said after the meeting.
Boks is scheduled Thursday to meet with officials from the Mayor's Office and shelter worker unions to plan how to address the employees' concerns. In a letter to employees Monday, Boks said he values employee input.
"It is important to me that we identify problems, confirm facts and resolve whatever differences may exist among us - and that we continue to work as a team," wrote Boks, who didn't attend the meeting.
Boks also wrote Zine that being a "change agent" can be difficult while making Los Angeles the first large "no-kill" city in the nation.
Critics, including unions for shelter managers and officers, contend the city's top animal control regulator has warehoused too many pets at the city's expanded city shelter system.
As a result, they say dogs and cats attack one another, get sick and must ultimately be put down. This year, euthanasia is up 37 percent in Los Angeles.
In addition, they blasted Boks with a litany of complaints, from a lack of viable adoption programs to no-leash law enforcement by too few animal control officers on the street.
Meanwhile, city officials have asked why six of the eight spay-neuter clinics have sat vacant.
Linda Gordon, a senior management analyst and 30-year veteran of animal services, said the department has no confidence in Boks. "We are not whiners. We work hard every day. We're the ones who scoop the poop," Gordon said. "We are the ones who must hold the animal when they are killed."
dana.bartholomew@dailynews.com
818-713-3730
28 Reasons Why Boks Should be Fired
.
I yesterday's post, I applauded the work on anonymous writer Madison Barkley.
But before Madison, there was Animal Friend and I. I must say Friend was probably far more attacked, slandered and generally destroyed than I by Boks.
Anyway, someone sent in a long comment to a previous post that outlines Boks shenanigans, lies, boasts, political bloopers, etc., in the most pithy way that the whole 2.8 years can be captured, and from an insiders viewpoint--an insider who has written documentation to prove all allegations below. I too have many of Boks' emails that confirm the allegations below.
Here are the 28 points below:
Reasons why Boks should be fired:
1. Boks was fired from New York. That should be enough. In deposition for the above mentioned NY lawsuit, it turns out that Boks slept with the commissioner who oversees him. He went over budget and couldn't make payroll so he decided on his own to take out a loan with a bank, with no authority or approval. He is reprimanded, again. The Mayors office in NY hated Boks, which he admits in his own affidavit.
2. November 2005 right before Boks was fired from New York, he and the City are sued for unlawful termination. Seems Boks fired a black employee with years of experience so he could hire his white friend who had no experience but did have a criminal conviction in his past. Status: pending but City will lose.
3. Seniors 4 Seniors: The program was not approved yet Boks started it any way. He gets in trouble with Public Safety committee. Weiss, Zine yell at Boks telling him he must follow procedure. Boks takes the program down off the web. It would be two years until it was approved. His response, "easier to ask for forgiveness than permission."
4. Pit Bull Academy: Again, Boks starts a program with no approval. He has ex-cons working in the shelters for two weeks with dangerous pit bulls and releases news of his program, which is indeed news to personnel and city council. He is forced to end the program firing the ex-cons. The program was never approved due to major liability issues.
5. Kapparot: Boks states that the Jewish ritual kapparot is barbaric and loathsome. The ritual itself is fine. The only part that is barbaric is if they kill chickens in the ritual. Most Jews don't use chickens.
His original comment to the media was as follows:
In a message dated 9/28/2006 9:25:17 AM Pacific Daylight Time, edboks@hotmail.com writes:
"Some of our nation's healthiest animal husbandry practices and laws originated in the ancient traditions of the Torah. Nowhere is the barbaric practice of Kapparot even mentioned in the Torah. It is a loathsome pagan tradition that has been muddled into the sacred religious practices of a small Jewish sect. Kapparot should have no place in a civilized 21st Century Los Angeles community."
[Should I make a] Couple small changes? Any suggested edits? "
A rescuer replied: maybe get rid of barbaric and loathsome?
Later when Boks gets in trouble with the anti defamation league he lies and tells people that he never said that. He says that same employee made that up. Then he lies and says he fired the employee in response. No one was fired because no one wrote it but Boks.
6. Boks orders an employee to start a blog for him, laanimalfriends at eponym. In this blog Boks attacks rescuers, employees, councilmembers, activists and anyone who doesn't kiss his rear end. He releases bogus numbers, press releases and flat out lies. The Mayor's office tells him to stop the blog, yet he refuses. Ultimately even though he provided all content, direction and most of the text, he blames someone else for it.
7. Hooters for Neuters: He posted a provocative photo of a woman in a bikini top. When asked to change the flyer he flat out refused. He told insiders "the more fuss they make, the better!" Finally, days later he is forced to cancel the event, all because he wouldn't tone down a flyer. He told his friends "how about we write girls gone wild across her chest!" Laura Chick states that it demeans women. He counters with "she's just jealous because she has no boobs." Chick had a double mastectomy because of breast cancer.
8. After being fired from New York, Boks helps an activist sue the Department revealing confidential City information and defaming the Mayor, Commissioners and employees. He blames his failures in NY on everyone but himself. He had the exact same problems there, i.e. overcrowding, dying animals, fudged numbers, lying.
9. Boks faked his resume. He said he made Maricopa "nokill." He did not. When questioned he said he made one shelter nokill. He did not. There were only two shelters and an adoption only center. He finally admits that only the adoption only was nokill. It was not. They would take animals from that center back to the shelter, then kill them.
10. Boks dated many female rescuers in LA during all of 2006. He would promise them jobs if they just went out with him. Some went out with him and got jobs. Some refused him and instead were harassed and defamed.
11. He gave his ex-girlfriend, Pia Salk a $20,000 consulting gig which no one has seen and was never implemented.
12. He gave another friend a $30,000 volunteer dept consulting gig which was never utilized. The report basically told everyone what they already knew, i.e. volunteers are treated poorly and disrespected. The volunteer consultant then causes a few more volunteers to quit.
13. Boks and the City were sued for sexual harassment, unlawful termination and assault July 2007. Case is still pending.
14. Boks and the City were sued for what looks like a car accident in a City car. Case is still pending. Was alcohol involved? Boks is a known alcoholic.
15. Euthanasia has not gone down since Boks arrived. In fact it's gone up 37% even though they have new larger shelters, more money and more employees than ever before. This is the first time ever than euthanasia has not gone down. All previous shelter managers reduced euthanasia.
16. Animals dying on their own from illness and injury is up over 300% since he arrived from overcrowding even though intake is down.
17. 2.5x as many animals are dying in cage fights from overcrowding.
18. Twice as many animals are dead on arrival when intake overall is down. [My comment: Something fishy here, such as live animals come in, die and are marked DOA?]
19. Last year Boks refused unneutered feral cats and kittens to make his numbers look better. Most cats euthanized are feral or kittens. This year we have been over run by kittens, which are being killed in record numbers. Boks blames this on foreclosures even though it was from refusing unneutered animals which had babies.
20. Boks continues to release totally false news items such as "LA Animal Services is the largest adoption agency in the world!" It's not even the largest in Southern California. That would be LA County.
21. Boks makes up his statistics and numbers himself. Euthansia did not go down the first year here in LA. Then Boks took over the numbers duty from an employee. Amazingly, euthansia started to go down instantly. Even more amazingly it seems that kitten intake went down by over 30% instantly which is exactly equal to the reduction in euthanasia. Amazing coincidences. Not.
22. Councilmembers are concerned about these events and make motions to address them. Boks doesn't bother to respond to their motions.
23. Boks stated he would increase spay neuter surgeries from 56,000 to 150,000. [My comment: Ed told me that LAAS would do 20,000 S/N at each shelter by the end of 2008] Yes, he said that. In fact surgeries went from 44,000 (yes, he lied about the current number of surgeries) to just over 48,000.
24. Boks tells City Council LA will be nokill by 2008. Hello, it's almost 2009 and we're killing more than before.
25. February 2006 Boks swears he will increase dog licensing. Licensing has gone down not up.
26. Boks gathers a bunch of volunteers and employees to go vandalize the home of protestors who are picketing his house, Pam Ferdin, Jerry Vlasak, Tiffany Krog and Annette Stark. He asks the volunteers to make posters making these people look stupid and silly. Fortunately the employees refused to do it yet he made these requests in writing. [My comment: I can attest to this. I was in on the planning process. We were trying to find out where these people lived. It was at this point Boks was warned to back off bya City Attorney, and suddenly I became a fallguy.]
27. Boks asks an employee to get someone to beat up one of his detractors. Fortunately they refused but he also made this request in writing.
28. Boks asks a few women out. Some say yes, some say no. He decides to retaliate against the ones that said no by harassing and defaming them, in writing.
I yesterday's post, I applauded the work on anonymous writer Madison Barkley.
But before Madison, there was Animal Friend and I. I must say Friend was probably far more attacked, slandered and generally destroyed than I by Boks.
Anyway, someone sent in a long comment to a previous post that outlines Boks shenanigans, lies, boasts, political bloopers, etc., in the most pithy way that the whole 2.8 years can be captured, and from an insiders viewpoint--an insider who has written documentation to prove all allegations below. I too have many of Boks' emails that confirm the allegations below.
Here are the 28 points below:
Reasons why Boks should be fired:
1. Boks was fired from New York. That should be enough. In deposition for the above mentioned NY lawsuit, it turns out that Boks slept with the commissioner who oversees him. He went over budget and couldn't make payroll so he decided on his own to take out a loan with a bank, with no authority or approval. He is reprimanded, again. The Mayors office in NY hated Boks, which he admits in his own affidavit.
2. November 2005 right before Boks was fired from New York, he and the City are sued for unlawful termination. Seems Boks fired a black employee with years of experience so he could hire his white friend who had no experience but did have a criminal conviction in his past. Status: pending but City will lose.
3. Seniors 4 Seniors: The program was not approved yet Boks started it any way. He gets in trouble with Public Safety committee. Weiss, Zine yell at Boks telling him he must follow procedure. Boks takes the program down off the web. It would be two years until it was approved. His response, "easier to ask for forgiveness than permission."
4. Pit Bull Academy: Again, Boks starts a program with no approval. He has ex-cons working in the shelters for two weeks with dangerous pit bulls and releases news of his program, which is indeed news to personnel and city council. He is forced to end the program firing the ex-cons. The program was never approved due to major liability issues.
5. Kapparot: Boks states that the Jewish ritual kapparot is barbaric and loathsome. The ritual itself is fine. The only part that is barbaric is if they kill chickens in the ritual. Most Jews don't use chickens.
His original comment to the media was as follows:
In a message dated 9/28/2006 9:25:17 AM Pacific Daylight Time, edboks@hotmail.com writes:
"Some of our nation's healthiest animal husbandry practices and laws originated in the ancient traditions of the Torah. Nowhere is the barbaric practice of Kapparot even mentioned in the Torah. It is a loathsome pagan tradition that has been muddled into the sacred religious practices of a small Jewish sect. Kapparot should have no place in a civilized 21st Century Los Angeles community."
[Should I make a] Couple small changes? Any suggested edits? "
A rescuer replied: maybe get rid of barbaric and loathsome?
Later when Boks gets in trouble with the anti defamation league he lies and tells people that he never said that. He says that same employee made that up. Then he lies and says he fired the employee in response. No one was fired because no one wrote it but Boks.
6. Boks orders an employee to start a blog for him, laanimalfriends at eponym. In this blog Boks attacks rescuers, employees, councilmembers, activists and anyone who doesn't kiss his rear end. He releases bogus numbers, press releases and flat out lies. The Mayor's office tells him to stop the blog, yet he refuses. Ultimately even though he provided all content, direction and most of the text, he blames someone else for it.
7. Hooters for Neuters: He posted a provocative photo of a woman in a bikini top. When asked to change the flyer he flat out refused. He told insiders "the more fuss they make, the better!" Finally, days later he is forced to cancel the event, all because he wouldn't tone down a flyer. He told his friends "how about we write girls gone wild across her chest!" Laura Chick states that it demeans women. He counters with "she's just jealous because she has no boobs." Chick had a double mastectomy because of breast cancer.
8. After being fired from New York, Boks helps an activist sue the Department revealing confidential City information and defaming the Mayor, Commissioners and employees. He blames his failures in NY on everyone but himself. He had the exact same problems there, i.e. overcrowding, dying animals, fudged numbers, lying.
9. Boks faked his resume. He said he made Maricopa "nokill." He did not. When questioned he said he made one shelter nokill. He did not. There were only two shelters and an adoption only center. He finally admits that only the adoption only was nokill. It was not. They would take animals from that center back to the shelter, then kill them.
10. Boks dated many female rescuers in LA during all of 2006. He would promise them jobs if they just went out with him. Some went out with him and got jobs. Some refused him and instead were harassed and defamed.
11. He gave his ex-girlfriend, Pia Salk a $20,000 consulting gig which no one has seen and was never implemented.
12. He gave another friend a $30,000 volunteer dept consulting gig which was never utilized. The report basically told everyone what they already knew, i.e. volunteers are treated poorly and disrespected. The volunteer consultant then causes a few more volunteers to quit.
13. Boks and the City were sued for sexual harassment, unlawful termination and assault July 2007. Case is still pending.
14. Boks and the City were sued for what looks like a car accident in a City car. Case is still pending. Was alcohol involved? Boks is a known alcoholic.
15. Euthanasia has not gone down since Boks arrived. In fact it's gone up 37% even though they have new larger shelters, more money and more employees than ever before. This is the first time ever than euthanasia has not gone down. All previous shelter managers reduced euthanasia.
16. Animals dying on their own from illness and injury is up over 300% since he arrived from overcrowding even though intake is down.
17. 2.5x as many animals are dying in cage fights from overcrowding.
18. Twice as many animals are dead on arrival when intake overall is down. [My comment: Something fishy here, such as live animals come in, die and are marked DOA?]
19. Last year Boks refused unneutered feral cats and kittens to make his numbers look better. Most cats euthanized are feral or kittens. This year we have been over run by kittens, which are being killed in record numbers. Boks blames this on foreclosures even though it was from refusing unneutered animals which had babies.
20. Boks continues to release totally false news items such as "LA Animal Services is the largest adoption agency in the world!" It's not even the largest in Southern California. That would be LA County.
21. Boks makes up his statistics and numbers himself. Euthansia did not go down the first year here in LA. Then Boks took over the numbers duty from an employee. Amazingly, euthansia started to go down instantly. Even more amazingly it seems that kitten intake went down by over 30% instantly which is exactly equal to the reduction in euthanasia. Amazing coincidences. Not.
22. Councilmembers are concerned about these events and make motions to address them. Boks doesn't bother to respond to their motions.
23. Boks stated he would increase spay neuter surgeries from 56,000 to 150,000. [My comment: Ed told me that LAAS would do 20,000 S/N at each shelter by the end of 2008] Yes, he said that. In fact surgeries went from 44,000 (yes, he lied about the current number of surgeries) to just over 48,000.
24. Boks tells City Council LA will be nokill by 2008. Hello, it's almost 2009 and we're killing more than before.
25. February 2006 Boks swears he will increase dog licensing. Licensing has gone down not up.
26. Boks gathers a bunch of volunteers and employees to go vandalize the home of protestors who are picketing his house, Pam Ferdin, Jerry Vlasak, Tiffany Krog and Annette Stark. He asks the volunteers to make posters making these people look stupid and silly. Fortunately the employees refused to do it yet he made these requests in writing. [My comment: I can attest to this. I was in on the planning process. We were trying to find out where these people lived. It was at this point Boks was warned to back off bya City Attorney, and suddenly I became a fallguy.]
27. Boks asks an employee to get someone to beat up one of his detractors. Fortunately they refused but he also made this request in writing.
28. Boks asks a few women out. Some say yes, some say no. He decides to retaliate against the ones that said no by harassing and defaming them, in writing.
The Collected Works of Madison Barkley
.
Finally there is another public voice speaking up against Boks.
I know many, many of you out there share my desire to get rid of Ed to give the animals a chance.
The ADL has been magnificent regarding its exposes of Boks, as was a former blogger.
Now someone new has come a long with yet another PUBLIC but still anonymous voice. Guess Madison realized that being public is not the best thing for your reputation.
Anyway, thanks Madison, whoever you are.
http://www.sheltertrak.com/news_madisonbarkley.html#MB14
Finally there is another public voice speaking up against Boks.
I know many, many of you out there share my desire to get rid of Ed to give the animals a chance.
The ADL has been magnificent regarding its exposes of Boks, as was a former blogger.
Now someone new has come a long with yet another PUBLIC but still anonymous voice. Guess Madison realized that being public is not the best thing for your reputation.
Anyway, thanks Madison, whoever you are.
http://www.sheltertrak.com/news_madisonbarkley.html#MB14
Lets Turn the Old WLA Shelter Over to Non-Profit Hands
My in-shelter contacts tell me that the West LA old location may be open for single or multiple rescue organizations to take over operations there.
It is perfect for that purpose as that is what that location has been doing for years.
Remember, Winograd's favored model is having the Muni shelters to work hand in hand with private non-profits.
This is the model that worked in San Francisco and now in Reno, where not only do they have multiple rescue groups, they also have a large non-profit shelter. Ditto Ithaca N.Y.
I sent out an email to many regarding the above.
I received an email stating the Mayor wants to sell all excess property to balance the budget and Councilman Rosendahl wants it for low cost housing. The response also said the zoning would not permit the usage of the animal shelter as an animal shelter!
This assumes that the grandfathered zoning usage has a time limit to the duration of LAAS tenancy. It also assumes no variance is possible even though that has been its usage for many years. It also assumes that the kennel permit will not be granted by the Dept. which has the option to do so, as they set the conditions.
The location for the private groups that would operate the shelter is perfect. It is a dynamite location that is known for exactly the same purpose, the sheltering and adopting of animals.
It would be the case of publicly funded operation turned over to private group, who in turn could contract to BH or Culver, and thus have mixed public/private operation and funding.
With private funding, it would add essentially a seventh shelter (since the Mission shelter is not open to the public) with no public (LA City) expense, which is essential now given the recent, dramatic increase in City impounds.
This could decrease the burden on the City system by 10% or better, at no City expense, and would allow New Hope partners to adopt out hundreds or thousands more pets that otherwise would be killed.
There may be space available at other locations in the City, but none better than a venue already dedicated to the same usage with the infrastructure a new operation would require.
CDOC Suing City Re The Spay/Neuter Ordinance
.
On September 9th, attorneys acting for Concerned Dog Owners of California and funded through CDOC ACTION filed for a preliminary injunction against the City of Los Angeles asking that the City be enjoined from Enforcing any and all provisions of Los Angeles City Ordinance mandating the spay/neuter of any and all owned dogs and cats within Los Angeles City.
CDOC is suing the City of Los Angeles in Superior Court. In its filing the brief points out that the City Controller's own numbers, which assumes a much lower rate of dog ownership than the national average, says there are 500,000 unlicensed dogs in Los Angeles which would be subject to immediate sterilization on 10/1/08. Animal Services own records show that in 2007 there were 580 adoptable dogs euthanized in the City of Los Angeles, a city of 3,800,000 people. While we are all working toward a time when no adoptable dogs are euthanized, that number hardly justifies the wholesale sterilization of the dogs in the City of Los Angeles.
CDOC are using Ed's own words about so few adoptable dogs being euthanized, they are claiming the ordinance is too sweeping when essentially there is no problem.
Good going Ed. Unintended consequences of spin.
http://www.cdocaction.org/Ordinance.html
The hearing will be on Thursday, October 2.
On September 9th, attorneys acting for Concerned Dog Owners of California and funded through CDOC ACTION filed for a preliminary injunction against the City of Los Angeles asking that the City be enjoined from Enforcing any and all provisions of Los Angeles City Ordinance mandating the spay/neuter of any and all owned dogs and cats within Los Angeles City.
CDOC is suing the City of Los Angeles in Superior Court. In its filing the brief points out that the City Controller's own numbers, which assumes a much lower rate of dog ownership than the national average, says there are 500,000 unlicensed dogs in Los Angeles which would be subject to immediate sterilization on 10/1/08. Animal Services own records show that in 2007 there were 580 adoptable dogs euthanized in the City of Los Angeles, a city of 3,800,000 people. While we are all working toward a time when no adoptable dogs are euthanized, that number hardly justifies the wholesale sterilization of the dogs in the City of Los Angeles.
CDOC are using Ed's own words about so few adoptable dogs being euthanized, they are claiming the ordinance is too sweeping when essentially there is no problem.
Good going Ed. Unintended consequences of spin.
http://www.cdocaction.org/Ordinance.html
The hearing will be on Thursday, October 2.
Today's News
.
In case you missed it, Dow Jones dropped 778 points today, losing 1.1 TRILLION dollars, five major banks failed in the US and England, and depositors are beginning to make runs on their savings in the banks. So many people have fled stocks to government securities money market funds, that the interest rate on Fed 3 month notes is close to zero.
Duke University finance Prof. Campbell Harvey predicts there could be 750 to 1,000 bank failures over the next six months.
Scarce credit also threatens other types of companies that are already struggling and desperately need capital, such as the Detroit automakers and some of the airlines.
Some have opined that the FDIC may not be able to honor their guaranteed insurance of $100,000 per customer per bank, and a new government agency may need to be created to keep it liquid.
Campbell Soup is the only stock that went up today, suggesting soup lines may open soon.
Don't expect too much attention will be paid to the Boks' Trial. Bring a noose anyway.
.
In case you missed it, Dow Jones dropped 778 points today, losing 1.1 TRILLION dollars, five major banks failed in the US and England, and depositors are beginning to make runs on their savings in the banks. So many people have fled stocks to government securities money market funds, that the interest rate on Fed 3 month notes is close to zero.
Duke University finance Prof. Campbell Harvey predicts there could be 750 to 1,000 bank failures over the next six months.
Scarce credit also threatens other types of companies that are already struggling and desperately need capital, such as the Detroit automakers and some of the airlines.
Some have opined that the FDIC may not be able to honor their guaranteed insurance of $100,000 per customer per bank, and a new government agency may need to be created to keep it liquid.
Campbell Soup is the only stock that went up today, suggesting soup lines may open soon.
The Republicans are blaming Obama and the Democrats for not passing the bill, even though 62% of the House Republicans voted against it and 60% of Democrats voted for it.
Lastly, the Chinese poisoned milk scare has spread to the chocolate industry. Cadbury is recalling its products with Chinese ingredients.Don't expect too much attention will be paid to the Boks' Trial. Bring a noose anyway.
.
Boks "Trial" on October 7
.
Zine's called Personnel Committee meeting regarding a review of Ed Boks' tenure as Animal Services GM will be on October 7, at 6 p.m. at the Van Nuys Civic Center.
Bring cameras, popcorn, nooses.
Zine's called Personnel Committee meeting regarding a review of Ed Boks' tenure as Animal Services GM will be on October 7, at 6 p.m. at the Van Nuys Civic Center.
Bring cameras, popcorn, nooses.
Chinese Now Buying American
.
The Chinese know. Chinese corruption and tainted products are so wide spread that after the latest milk contamination scandal, the Chinese themselves are looking for products NOT made in China!
What a creepy country.
.
The Chinese know. Chinese corruption and tainted products are so wide spread that after the latest milk contamination scandal, the Chinese themselves are looking for products NOT made in China!
What a creepy country.
.
LAAS Report of the Pierce College Investigation
.
I have not forgotten about the Request for Public Records from Pierce about the 2005 ACTF investigation of alleged farm animal neglect. I have not. Dancy, Shapiro and the others think they are off the hook. They are not.
Ross Pool of LAAS promises me they will respond soon. At that time I will let the president of the Community College system know what is going on, including the results of the LAAS investigation and Pierce's absolutely ignoring my two requests.
Ryan Olshan has already contacted the Attorney General of California--Jerry Brown--about Mayeda's deep sixing his requests. I will do the same once Ross sends me more info regarding his investigation.
.
I have not forgotten about the Request for Public Records from Pierce about the 2005 ACTF investigation of alleged farm animal neglect. I have not. Dancy, Shapiro and the others think they are off the hook. They are not.
Ross Pool of LAAS promises me they will respond soon. At that time I will let the president of the Community College system know what is going on, including the results of the LAAS investigation and Pierce's absolutely ignoring my two requests.
Ryan Olshan has already contacted the Attorney General of California--Jerry Brown--about Mayeda's deep sixing his requests. I will do the same once Ross sends me more info regarding his investigation.
.
My Letter to the Editor re Prop 2
.
Your editorial asking readers to vote "no" on Prop 2 is logically faulty. Even you are not willing to stand by your proposition. You cite one study that indicates caged eggs are 25% cheaper than range eggs, and Prop 2 “would likely bolster the market for cheaper out-of-state eggs.” Likely?
This is speculation. Have you checked on what happened to the price of pigs and veal in Arizona, Oregon and Colorado after their laws were passed? Did pig and veal farmers go out of business? Did these farmers relocate to California or Kansas? You don’t have the slightest idea, do you?
You also speculate that the demand for free range eggs will not increase from 5% to 20% or even 50% if more readily available and marketed, for example, as “California Cageless, Guilt Free Eggs.” Consumers do not always choose the cheapest similar product; they already pay a premium for green power and green vehicles and the demand for both is increasing because marketing and conscience made green the way to go.
You outline how terribly chickens are treated, opine Prop 2 is not the way to go, but do not offer an alternative to stop the brutality. Not all laws should be judged on finances and jobs. There are often far more important reasons to support a bill, as in this case as a matter of conscience.
.
Your editorial asking readers to vote "no" on Prop 2 is logically faulty. Even you are not willing to stand by your proposition. You cite one study that indicates caged eggs are 25% cheaper than range eggs, and Prop 2 “would likely bolster the market for cheaper out-of-state eggs.” Likely?
This is speculation. Have you checked on what happened to the price of pigs and veal in Arizona, Oregon and Colorado after their laws were passed? Did pig and veal farmers go out of business? Did these farmers relocate to California or Kansas? You don’t have the slightest idea, do you?
You also speculate that the demand for free range eggs will not increase from 5% to 20% or even 50% if more readily available and marketed, for example, as “California Cageless, Guilt Free Eggs.” Consumers do not always choose the cheapest similar product; they already pay a premium for green power and green vehicles and the demand for both is increasing because marketing and conscience made green the way to go.
You outline how terribly chickens are treated, opine Prop 2 is not the way to go, but do not offer an alternative to stop the brutality. Not all laws should be judged on finances and jobs. There are often far more important reasons to support a bill, as in this case as a matter of conscience.
.
ADL Menaced By Armed Neighbors of Mayor Aid
ADL, while picketing Daniel Grunfeld, who they claim is Villaraigosa's second in command, were menaced by two neighbors who brandished loaded weapons and threatened picketers.
Police detained the picketers and did nothing to the armed moron above and the other handgun armed moron at this link below.
Guess what would have happened to the picketers if they brandished loaded firearms?
.
LA Times Says No on Prop 2
.
A Times editorial today starts by talking about the terrible conditions at current California egg farms, says the animals deserve better, then opines we should vote no on Prop 2.
The Times editorial says getting rid of tight cages will drive the price of California eggs up causing California egg farmers to leave the state and caged chicken eggs with be brought in from nearby states and nothing will be accomplished.
The editorial says several "nearby" states have passed similar measures regulating treatment of pigs and calves in Arizona, Colorado, Florida and Oregon, but eggs are different because the CA egg business is over $300,000,000 while the veal and pork industries are small.
It is pure speculation that the CA egg industry will be destroyed by Prop 2. The editorial gives what they believe as plausible reasons that it would happen, but no proof of any kind.
The Times says the animals deserve more, but Prop 2 is not the answer.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-2prop25-2008sep25,0,4887554.story
Please flood the Times with letters to the editor.
letters@latimes.com
THE EDITORIAL
Though admirable, Proposition 2's ban on tight cages for hens could drive the egg business out of state.
The egg industry is rife with cruelty to animals. Millions of hens in California are kept in cages so small that every natural instinct is thwarted: They cannot perch, walk or spread their wings. On some farms, cages are stacked and hens on the bottom live in waste.
All creatures, even those bred to provide food, deserve to be treated humanely. That's the appeal of Proposition 2. It would require farmers to give chickens, pigs and veal calves room to turn around, walk or, in the case of chickens, stretch their wings. Over six years it phases out gestation crates for pigs -- contraptions that do not allow sows to stand -- and crates for veal calves. But California's pork industry is fairly small and the veal industry even smaller, so in practical terms, this ballot measure is really about the state's $337-million chicken business.
Similar measures regulating treatment of pigs and calves have passed in Arizona, Colorado, Florida and Oregon, but California is the test case for the provisions on hens. The Humane Society of America, which is sponsoring Proposition 2, argues that if Californians pass it, other states will follow. As much as we support the decent treatment of animals, we doubt that passage of the measure would start a national trend. In fact, we fear that it would have an unintended consequence: Because it only regulates eggs produced in California and not eggs that are sold here, it would likely bolster the market for cheaper out-of-state eggs produced where farmers have no similar bans on cages.
According to a University of California Agricultural Issues Center report, cage-free eggs are about 20% more expensive to produce and cost about 25% more to buy. There is a growing demand, but it is still small -- about 5% of all eggs nationally are produced by cage-free hens. So California eggs would become more expensive, and many consumers would simply buy the cheaper eggs laid by hens living in cramped conditions in neighboring states or in Mexico. As a result, we fear the result of Proposition 2's passage would not be better treatment of hens but merely the export of their mistreatment. We recommend a no vote.
Although Proposition 2 isn't the answer, the egg industry is due for an overhaul, and chicken farmers should take heed. Polls indicate that this measure has wide support. If it passes, that will be in part because the egg industry either has been oblivious to consumer concerns or recalcitrant about coming up with its own solutions. Proposition 2 is proof that if farmers insist on mistreating animals, people will act.
A Times editorial today starts by talking about the terrible conditions at current California egg farms, says the animals deserve better, then opines we should vote no on Prop 2.
The Times editorial says getting rid of tight cages will drive the price of California eggs up causing California egg farmers to leave the state and caged chicken eggs with be brought in from nearby states and nothing will be accomplished.
The editorial says several "nearby" states have passed similar measures regulating treatment of pigs and calves in Arizona, Colorado, Florida and Oregon, but eggs are different because the CA egg business is over $300,000,000 while the veal and pork industries are small.
It is pure speculation that the CA egg industry will be destroyed by Prop 2. The editorial gives what they believe as plausible reasons that it would happen, but no proof of any kind.
The Times says the animals deserve more, but Prop 2 is not the answer.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-2prop25-2008sep25,0,4887554.story
Please flood the Times with letters to the editor.
letters@latimes.com
THE EDITORIAL
Though admirable, Proposition 2's ban on tight cages for hens could drive the egg business out of state.
The egg industry is rife with cruelty to animals. Millions of hens in California are kept in cages so small that every natural instinct is thwarted: They cannot perch, walk or spread their wings. On some farms, cages are stacked and hens on the bottom live in waste.
All creatures, even those bred to provide food, deserve to be treated humanely. That's the appeal of Proposition 2. It would require farmers to give chickens, pigs and veal calves room to turn around, walk or, in the case of chickens, stretch their wings. Over six years it phases out gestation crates for pigs -- contraptions that do not allow sows to stand -- and crates for veal calves. But California's pork industry is fairly small and the veal industry even smaller, so in practical terms, this ballot measure is really about the state's $337-million chicken business.
Similar measures regulating treatment of pigs and calves have passed in Arizona, Colorado, Florida and Oregon, but California is the test case for the provisions on hens. The Humane Society of America, which is sponsoring Proposition 2, argues that if Californians pass it, other states will follow. As much as we support the decent treatment of animals, we doubt that passage of the measure would start a national trend. In fact, we fear that it would have an unintended consequence: Because it only regulates eggs produced in California and not eggs that are sold here, it would likely bolster the market for cheaper out-of-state eggs produced where farmers have no similar bans on cages.
According to a University of California Agricultural Issues Center report, cage-free eggs are about 20% more expensive to produce and cost about 25% more to buy. There is a growing demand, but it is still small -- about 5% of all eggs nationally are produced by cage-free hens. So California eggs would become more expensive, and many consumers would simply buy the cheaper eggs laid by hens living in cramped conditions in neighboring states or in Mexico. As a result, we fear the result of Proposition 2's passage would not be better treatment of hens but merely the export of their mistreatment. We recommend a no vote.
Although Proposition 2 isn't the answer, the egg industry is due for an overhaul, and chicken farmers should take heed. Polls indicate that this measure has wide support. If it passes, that will be in part because the egg industry either has been oblivious to consumer concerns or recalcitrant about coming up with its own solutions. Proposition 2 is proof that if farmers insist on mistreating animals, people will act.
Rich Mc Lellan on Paul Koretz
.
In the past, The League of Humane Voters has never asked for you to donate to the organization. Then as now, we have always asked you to write checks directly to animal friendly candidates who are running for office.
It is as clear as today’s news that elections make a tremendous difference in what happens as regards policy for the next four years. Money you donate today, if permitting the election of an animal friend, reverberates for good for an entire term of office. It permits full time staff paid for by the taxpayers to work on our issues and to frame our arguments. It gives us all a door and a voice in decision making. Our powerful opponents donate before elections for very simple reasons. It is effective in getting them what they want.
There is a committed advocate of the animals with a history going back of more that 20 years, first in West Hollywood and then in Sacramento, of writing and passing animal friendly legislation. And yet his lack of adequate money today may make it more difficult for him to win for the Los Angeles City Council next March. His name is Paul Koretz and he has an animal friendly resume that covers the prohibition of cat declawing to attempts to mandate spay and neuter of all pets sold in by pet stores.
I am asking everyone who receives this letter to dip into your bank account before the 30th of September and write a check to Paul Koretz for City Council. Small checks are as important as large ones. You can send that check directly to me (834 ¼ Tularosa Dr. LA 90026) or you can send it directly to Paul at (107 Kings Rd. LA CA 90048) . The advantage of sending it to me is that when I forward any checks I receive as a “bundle”, Paul he knows it comes from people looking for him to advance protections for the animals of Los Angeles. If you send it to me, it must arrive by September 29th so I can forward it on the 30th when it must be reported by his campaign. To lose an experienced legislator because he did not have enough early funds to garner other donors from outside our community would be a tragedy. Paul has stood up, often to ridicule on behalf of the animals. Now it is out turn to stand up for him.
There are times when donations I have made and time I have spent in campaigns has had disappointing results--that is not true of the support I have given Paul. His door has always been open to our ideas and our goals.
This is early, this seems inconsequential, when we are working so hard to pass Prop. 2 and make an impact upon a national election. But, believe me. There is nothing that you can do in the next four years that will have as big an impact on the lives of the dogs and cats inLos Angeles as helping elect Paul Koretz to City Council . The department, spay neuter programs, TNR, the LA Zoo, budget monies all are the purview of the LA City Council.
Our weak representation as players has often given us disappointing results. When we have had success in the past it has been because we have connected with members of the City Council. These are serious times that require wise, frugal and efficient decisions. Please give what you can. The maximum is $500 per person. There is no minimum.
Rich Mc Lellan MD,
Director,
League of Humane Voters
California Chapter
Paul’s website is www.PaulKoretz.com
In the past, The League of Humane Voters has never asked for you to donate to the organization. Then as now, we have always asked you to write checks directly to animal friendly candidates who are running for office.
It is as clear as today’s news that elections make a tremendous difference in what happens as regards policy for the next four years. Money you donate today, if permitting the election of an animal friend, reverberates for good for an entire term of office. It permits full time staff paid for by the taxpayers to work on our issues and to frame our arguments. It gives us all a door and a voice in decision making. Our powerful opponents donate before elections for very simple reasons. It is effective in getting them what they want.
There is a committed advocate of the animals with a history going back of more that 20 years, first in West Hollywood and then in Sacramento, of writing and passing animal friendly legislation. And yet his lack of adequate money today may make it more difficult for him to win for the Los Angeles City Council next March. His name is Paul Koretz and he has an animal friendly resume that covers the prohibition of cat declawing to attempts to mandate spay and neuter of all pets sold in by pet stores.
I am asking everyone who receives this letter to dip into your bank account before the 30th of September and write a check to Paul Koretz for City Council. Small checks are as important as large ones. You can send that check directly to me (834 ¼ Tularosa Dr. LA 90026) or you can send it directly to Paul at (107 Kings Rd. LA CA 90048) . The advantage of sending it to me is that when I forward any checks I receive as a “bundle”, Paul he knows it comes from people looking for him to advance protections for the animals of Los Angeles. If you send it to me, it must arrive by September 29th so I can forward it on the 30th when it must be reported by his campaign. To lose an experienced legislator because he did not have enough early funds to garner other donors from outside our community would be a tragedy. Paul has stood up, often to ridicule on behalf of the animals. Now it is out turn to stand up for him.
There are times when donations I have made and time I have spent in campaigns has had disappointing results--that is not true of the support I have given Paul. His door has always been open to our ideas and our goals.
This is early, this seems inconsequential, when we are working so hard to pass Prop. 2 and make an impact upon a national election. But, believe me. There is nothing that you can do in the next four years that will have as big an impact on the lives of the dogs and cats inLos Angeles as helping elect Paul Koretz to City Council . The department, spay neuter programs, TNR, the LA Zoo, budget monies all are the purview of the LA City Council.
Our weak representation as players has often given us disappointing results. When we have had success in the past it has been because we have connected with members of the City Council. These are serious times that require wise, frugal and efficient decisions. Please give what you can. The maximum is $500 per person. There is no minimum.
Rich Mc Lellan MD,
Director,
League of Humane Voters
California Chapter
Paul’s website is www.PaulKoretz.com
Paul Koretz for Council
.
I think we have found the LA animal community dream politician for Council then Mayor.
I recently received and email from Rich McClellan and Mike Bell supporting Paul Koretz for Council’s 5th District. I emailed Paul as follows:
1. I am an animal rescuer and rights activist. I am a single issue guy when it comes to Council--getting our shelters to No-Kill and getting rid of the current GM, Ed Boks, who is failing miserably.
Rich McClellan has recommended you as well--I see- as my friends Ken Genser and Kevin McKeown. Therefore I know you are a solid Democrat.
Let me ask you. Do you have any pets? How have you supported animals either at the state or City level previously? What is your view--if you know about it--the concept of no-kill shelters? With the resources LA gives the shelters, we should have done it last year--or close, yet it is slipping away. Can you make getting LA to no kill a campaign priority?
Most politicians shy away from this sort of commitment when on campaign > for fear of being branded as an animal nut, or some such.
Council Candidate Paul Koretz’s Response:
I have been branded as an animal nut for many years--my supporters back me either because of it or in spite it. I'll attach a list of some of the things I've done over last 20 years or so for animals. I have two rescue cats currently.I tried to create a no-kill shelter for Beverly Hills/West Hollywood. I got elected to the State Assembly and left the West Hollywood City Council-- I may have been able to make it happen otherwise. I certainly would lead the charge in Los Angeles.
The Council has already done some good things without anyone who really cares deeply about animals, like the spay/neuter ordinance. Imagine if they had someone who was really focused on animal issues.
I have represented half the Council District in the State Legislature, so I have a slight advantage of name identification. And I have several strong constituencies, like labor unions and environmentalists. But I have several opponents who are better financed and better-connected in the district's large Jewish community. This election may be close enough that if the animal welfare community raised money for me, spread the word to their friends (both those who care about animals and those that don't) and put together lists of pro-animal people in the district to mail to about my background, that could easily be the difference.
There have been very few elections where the animal vote decided the election. This could easily be the one.Anything you could do to help would be greatly appreciated.
Me Again:
I have not finished checking Paul out, but he appears to be exactly who the animal community needs to champion our interests and those of the animals. In the next post I will post a list of his background and animal related activities. It is quite impressive.
People, this appears to be your chance to back a highly animal friendly candidate for Council. Not that we don’t have animal friendly Councilmembers already, such as Cardenas, Zine and Rosendahl, but it appears in Koretz we may have a super champion.
Paul KoretzCandidate, LA City Council 5th District323-966-5942Please visit my website: paulkoretz.com
.
I think we have found the LA animal community dream politician for Council then Mayor.
I recently received and email from Rich McClellan and Mike Bell supporting Paul Koretz for Council’s 5th District. I emailed Paul as follows:
1. I am an animal rescuer and rights activist. I am a single issue guy when it comes to Council--getting our shelters to No-Kill and getting rid of the current GM, Ed Boks, who is failing miserably.
Rich McClellan has recommended you as well--I see- as my friends Ken Genser and Kevin McKeown. Therefore I know you are a solid Democrat.
Let me ask you. Do you have any pets? How have you supported animals either at the state or City level previously? What is your view--if you know about it--the concept of no-kill shelters? With the resources LA gives the shelters, we should have done it last year--or close, yet it is slipping away. Can you make getting LA to no kill a campaign priority?
Most politicians shy away from this sort of commitment when on campaign > for fear of being branded as an animal nut, or some such.
Council Candidate Paul Koretz’s Response:
I have been branded as an animal nut for many years--my supporters back me either because of it or in spite it. I'll attach a list of some of the things I've done over last 20 years or so for animals. I have two rescue cats currently.I tried to create a no-kill shelter for Beverly Hills/West Hollywood. I got elected to the State Assembly and left the West Hollywood City Council-- I may have been able to make it happen otherwise. I certainly would lead the charge in Los Angeles.
The Council has already done some good things without anyone who really cares deeply about animals, like the spay/neuter ordinance. Imagine if they had someone who was really focused on animal issues.
I have represented half the Council District in the State Legislature, so I have a slight advantage of name identification. And I have several strong constituencies, like labor unions and environmentalists. But I have several opponents who are better financed and better-connected in the district's large Jewish community. This election may be close enough that if the animal welfare community raised money for me, spread the word to their friends (both those who care about animals and those that don't) and put together lists of pro-animal people in the district to mail to about my background, that could easily be the difference.
There have been very few elections where the animal vote decided the election. This could easily be the one.Anything you could do to help would be greatly appreciated.
Me Again:
I have not finished checking Paul out, but he appears to be exactly who the animal community needs to champion our interests and those of the animals. In the next post I will post a list of his background and animal related activities. It is quite impressive.
People, this appears to be your chance to back a highly animal friendly candidate for Council. Not that we don’t have animal friendly Councilmembers already, such as Cardenas, Zine and Rosendahl, but it appears in Koretz we may have a super champion.
Paul KoretzCandidate, LA City Council 5th District323-966-5942Please visit my website: paulkoretz.com
.
Boks Hypocrisy: TNR in an Atmosphere of Terror?
.
Ed Boks supposedly champions a citywide offical acceptance of TNR as City policy as the best way to compassionately deal with the feral and homeless cat population.
That policy is supposed to give colony managers what? Peace of mind and freedom from harassment? City help with S/N above and beyond what they get now? Insulation from complaining neighbors, where the LAAS will tell the complainants to stuff themselves, that it is City policy to do nothing?
Under that plan, colonies and their managers would become identified, and hence, accountable if a neighbor complains about cats, whether or not from that colony (there is no burden of proof-ever when it comes to cats), pooping on their lawn or elsewhere.
I have even had one good-hearted neighbor threaten to sue the city (Santa Monica) because they stated their daughter was alergic to fleas, and thus a public menace. The City caved and came after me despite the fact that I used Advantage on all but 2 of the 8 cats (I told them they all got it).
Under the proposed LA plan, the identified manager could be held responsible for every cat within 1/2 block, for every cat turd, fly, flea, rodent and dead bird in the area.
When there are complaints--and there always are complaints by someone in the neighborhood--the colony and its manager will be held responsible, and the manager subject to official demands such as recently made by Sergio Rios of the 84 year old woman: abandon the colony, stop feeding, stop providing medical care, just abandon them. They will be fine thank you.
Why in the world would any sane colony manager allow themself to be so identified by the City, which can and will come down hard on them at any time when it is the known policy of the department not to help, but terrorize or jail colony managers?
Lori Golden addressed that issue directly and indirectly to Boks several issues ago in Pet Press. I don't think Boks ever responded. Maybe she should ask again, or ask in an email and cc to everyone in the cat rescue community who are most impacted by present policy and future legislation.
Who are now always in the most trouble when it comes to cats? People who have feral cats on their property. They are identified; they can be given citations and given "immoral" and illegal demands to essentially ABANDON THE ANIMALS OF WHOM THEY HAVE BECOME LEGAL CARETAKERS.
Does Boks think we are nuts? At any time, given any neighbor complaint, a colony and its manager are at risk. Nothing Boks has said addresses the issue of what protections or services would colonies and colony managers gain under a policy of legalized, city-wide TNR that they are not getting now being anonymous?
Ed, we are not nuts.
.
Ed Boks supposedly champions a citywide offical acceptance of TNR as City policy as the best way to compassionately deal with the feral and homeless cat population.
That policy is supposed to give colony managers what? Peace of mind and freedom from harassment? City help with S/N above and beyond what they get now? Insulation from complaining neighbors, where the LAAS will tell the complainants to stuff themselves, that it is City policy to do nothing?
Under that plan, colonies and their managers would become identified, and hence, accountable if a neighbor complains about cats, whether or not from that colony (there is no burden of proof-ever when it comes to cats), pooping on their lawn or elsewhere.
I have even had one good-hearted neighbor threaten to sue the city (Santa Monica) because they stated their daughter was alergic to fleas, and thus a public menace. The City caved and came after me despite the fact that I used Advantage on all but 2 of the 8 cats (I told them they all got it).
Under the proposed LA plan, the identified manager could be held responsible for every cat within 1/2 block, for every cat turd, fly, flea, rodent and dead bird in the area.
When there are complaints--and there always are complaints by someone in the neighborhood--the colony and its manager will be held responsible, and the manager subject to official demands such as recently made by Sergio Rios of the 84 year old woman: abandon the colony, stop feeding, stop providing medical care, just abandon them. They will be fine thank you.
Why in the world would any sane colony manager allow themself to be so identified by the City, which can and will come down hard on them at any time when it is the known policy of the department not to help, but terrorize or jail colony managers?
Lori Golden addressed that issue directly and indirectly to Boks several issues ago in Pet Press. I don't think Boks ever responded. Maybe she should ask again, or ask in an email and cc to everyone in the cat rescue community who are most impacted by present policy and future legislation.
Who are now always in the most trouble when it comes to cats? People who have feral cats on their property. They are identified; they can be given citations and given "immoral" and illegal demands to essentially ABANDON THE ANIMALS OF WHOM THEY HAVE BECOME LEGAL CARETAKERS.
Does Boks think we are nuts? At any time, given any neighbor complaint, a colony and its manager are at risk. Nothing Boks has said addresses the issue of what protections or services would colonies and colony managers gain under a policy of legalized, city-wide TNR that they are not getting now being anonymous?
Ed, we are not nuts.
.
No Vet Tech Program in Phoenix
.
Communication between Anthem/High Tech and myself re Vet Tech Program in Phoenix--It is disappearing. No wonder no one wanted to talk to me.
EMAIL FROM ANTHEM/HIGH TECH IN PHOENIX:
Thank you for contacting High-Tech Institute. Your email was forwarded to an HTI staff member and answered below. If you need additional information about the Schools and Colleges of High-Tech Institute, please visit us online at www.hightechinstitute.edu. For enrollment information, you may phone us toll-free at: 1-866-502-2627, and speak to a representative from our Admissions Department.
YOUR QUESTION
-------------
I understand you have a veterinary technology program, but I caanot find any information on your website.
I also called 602 279-9700 and was told no literature was available, nor the names of instructors or of clases.
I was told to leave my name and someone would contact me.
I asked for specifics about the program and was told you were not enrolling and therefore there was nothing to tell me.
I am quite confused therefore about the overview of the program you are offering. It is not listed on your website.
OUR ANSWER
-------------
Dear Ed,
I received your email request from our Website. At this time we are no longer enrolling into our Veterinary Technology Program, that is why no information is available.
Sincerely,
Kit Bigelow,
High-Tech Institute, Inc
.
Communication between Anthem/High Tech and myself re Vet Tech Program in Phoenix--It is disappearing. No wonder no one wanted to talk to me.
EMAIL FROM ANTHEM/HIGH TECH IN PHOENIX:
Thank you for contacting High-Tech Institute. Your email was forwarded to an HTI staff member and answered below. If you need additional information about the Schools and Colleges of High-Tech Institute, please visit us online at www.hightechinstitute.edu. For enrollment information, you may phone us toll-free at: 1-866-502-2627, and speak to a representative from our Admissions Department.
YOUR QUESTION
-------------
I understand you have a veterinary technology program, but I caanot find any information on your website.
I also called 602 279-9700 and was told no literature was available, nor the names of instructors or of clases.
I was told to leave my name and someone would contact me.
I asked for specifics about the program and was told you were not enrolling and therefore there was nothing to tell me.
I am quite confused therefore about the overview of the program you are offering. It is not listed on your website.
OUR ANSWER
-------------
Dear Ed,
I received your email request from our Website. At this time we are no longer enrolling into our Veterinary Technology Program, that is why no information is available.
Sincerely,
Kit Bigelow,
High-Tech Institute, Inc
.
Jeremy Prupas Responds
.
Hi Ed,
This will serve as my one and only comment to your wildly inaccurate accusations (I will answer any questions you might have).
I owned All Care Cat Hospital from 5/98-9/07. In about July of '06 we made the difficult decision to sell the practice due to personal family issues (absolutely nothing to do with the practice---also absolutely none of your business). We also decided to move to Phoenix, in part due to those issues as well as my finding a job at Anthem College (which at that time was called High Tech Institute).
Unfortunately it took us an entire year to sell the hospital, during which time I was working in Phoenix part of the week and then at the hospital the rest of the week.
At points during that year, I also had relief vets working for me...each worse than the next. After an extremely hard year, I managed to sell the practice. That is why the letter to the clients is dated 9/07.
From 9/07-9/08 I worked full-time at the school. I can assure you that there really is a school, with 4 CVT instructors, 53 students (as of 9/12/08) and a great facility. The first students enrolled in 3/06. To date we have had 20 graduates. I am not sure who you talked to (or if in fact you actually even called the school), but maybe the confusion is over the fact that the school is not presently enrolling new students and won't be until the new year.
The memorandum with Maricopa shelter was signed in order for us to be able to have them bring some animals to the school to be spayed/neutered and have their teeth cleaned. Dr. Rodrigo Silva is the director of the shelter and over the past two years he and I did become friends.
Please note that Dr. Silva does NOT care for Ed Boks and actually tried to dissuade me from accepting the position here. I had NO prior knowledge of who Ed Boks was until I met him for the first time at my interview.
I have no idea why the other Dr's were not chosen for the position. To be honest I don't care. I am here now. I know what my strengths are and I know that I can be a force for positive change here. I will do my utmost to help this community and this department have the finest municipal animal care system it possibly can.
Lastly, you note that there are decidedly mixed reviews of me. While I am sure that there are some people who may not think highly of me, I am willing to bet my house that many, many, more thought highly of me and my wife. Please make sure that those negative views were of us and not the prior vet (Dr. Doss) or the relief vets.
I look forward to a time when this community will be able to put away its pettiness, immaturity and callous nature and start working together to help those that we all care about...the animals.
As I said, I will try to answer any questions you might have.
Sincerely,
Jeremy Prupas, VMD
Thank you Jeremey for the clarification. The woman I called and spoke to at length said there were no classes or instructors listed. There was no brochure about the vet tech program that could be mailed to me, only a generic one about the college. You were still listed as the director, but no faculty. She said Anthem may start enrolling in two months, but as of now there was no program or instructors. One other person claimed they called the same number without response.
If you look at Anthem college's website there is no mention of a vet tech or other vet program. Nada.
If you look at the AVMA site, it only points to the college site, which has no information.
As I said, I have no vet expertise and can't tell a good one from a bad one except over a period of time. Bad reviews or good by clients mean almost nothing unless there are a lot of them. The only reviews I saw were of you and Middleton.
My whole life is cats, caring for them, loving them, managing colonies, TNR, etc., and LAAS has a horrible record in saving them. Some shelters, even large shelters, are saving 80% or more. They have better adoption and foster programs. The director of the San Francisco AC&C says they lose very few neonatals, that they have a large foster base.
All this stuff is analyzed as infinitum in 739 previous posts over the past 2.7 years.
You might note that I was a staunch defender of Boks the first year until I found out that the live save rate was down compared to the year before and that he has a very strained relation to truth, but a close one to spin.
Then there is the Mason case where Ed attacked a "hoarder" claiming his cats had distemper and they killed 25 kittens. Antech lab results came back negative but positive for garden varieties of URI. The cats were seized without legal process in front of TV cameras and dozens of City and County officials. Ed pilloried him calling him mentally ill. The cats were impounded for three months until a bunch of us help Mason get the cats adopted. Many were killed.
As I stated above, if you can do the job I'll stand by you 100% and then even more.
About when we will put away our pettiness, immaturity and callous nature, it sounds like you are putting it all on the rescue/humane community, when you have not taken a look at the sociopath who hired you and the constant lies we have heard over the past 2.7 years about what enormous success LAAS has in adoptions, his background, his successes, etc., even when the numbers didn't compute.
In March of 2007 Boks announced LAAS had its first No-Kill month ever, and in the same announcement said 700 cats and dogs had been euthanized.
A week ago over 100 employees, maybe more than that said Boks had to go. Not only employees, but there were many rescue community and volunteers also.
So I don't know who you are addressing your complaint towards but be aware of Boks, Jim Blackman, and our sleazy mayor who, despite over 2 years of complaints, made no effort to reign Boks in.
Take a look at the link to the video of the dozens of complainants that appeared before Council, but apparently only 4 or 5 were allowed to speak.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icMenNjCs6Q
You have entered a community where there is a war and you are now part of it.
Thank you for replying. It was not necessary for you to reply, but thank you. I am inclined to believe you and I will call again and see if I can talk to anyone else. She (had a difficult name to remember) could not/did not refer me to anyone else to better comment on the program.
My "wild" speculations are based on the fact Boks never responds to my questioning. LAAS is a black box and you have to rattle it to get a response or even a defense.
Hi Ed,
This will serve as my one and only comment to your wildly inaccurate accusations (I will answer any questions you might have).
I owned All Care Cat Hospital from 5/98-9/07. In about July of '06 we made the difficult decision to sell the practice due to personal family issues (absolutely nothing to do with the practice---also absolutely none of your business). We also decided to move to Phoenix, in part due to those issues as well as my finding a job at Anthem College (which at that time was called High Tech Institute).
Unfortunately it took us an entire year to sell the hospital, during which time I was working in Phoenix part of the week and then at the hospital the rest of the week.
At points during that year, I also had relief vets working for me...each worse than the next. After an extremely hard year, I managed to sell the practice. That is why the letter to the clients is dated 9/07.
From 9/07-9/08 I worked full-time at the school. I can assure you that there really is a school, with 4 CVT instructors, 53 students (as of 9/12/08) and a great facility. The first students enrolled in 3/06. To date we have had 20 graduates. I am not sure who you talked to (or if in fact you actually even called the school), but maybe the confusion is over the fact that the school is not presently enrolling new students and won't be until the new year.
The memorandum with Maricopa shelter was signed in order for us to be able to have them bring some animals to the school to be spayed/neutered and have their teeth cleaned. Dr. Rodrigo Silva is the director of the shelter and over the past two years he and I did become friends.
Please note that Dr. Silva does NOT care for Ed Boks and actually tried to dissuade me from accepting the position here. I had NO prior knowledge of who Ed Boks was until I met him for the first time at my interview.
I have no idea why the other Dr's were not chosen for the position. To be honest I don't care. I am here now. I know what my strengths are and I know that I can be a force for positive change here. I will do my utmost to help this community and this department have the finest municipal animal care system it possibly can.
Lastly, you note that there are decidedly mixed reviews of me. While I am sure that there are some people who may not think highly of me, I am willing to bet my house that many, many, more thought highly of me and my wife. Please make sure that those negative views were of us and not the prior vet (Dr. Doss) or the relief vets.
I look forward to a time when this community will be able to put away its pettiness, immaturity and callous nature and start working together to help those that we all care about...the animals.
As I said, I will try to answer any questions you might have.
Sincerely,
Jeremy Prupas, VMD
Thank you Jeremey for the clarification. The woman I called and spoke to at length said there were no classes or instructors listed. There was no brochure about the vet tech program that could be mailed to me, only a generic one about the college. You were still listed as the director, but no faculty. She said Anthem may start enrolling in two months, but as of now there was no program or instructors. One other person claimed they called the same number without response.
If you look at Anthem college's website there is no mention of a vet tech or other vet program. Nada.
If you look at the AVMA site, it only points to the college site, which has no information.
As I said, I have no vet expertise and can't tell a good one from a bad one except over a period of time. Bad reviews or good by clients mean almost nothing unless there are a lot of them. The only reviews I saw were of you and Middleton.
My whole life is cats, caring for them, loving them, managing colonies, TNR, etc., and LAAS has a horrible record in saving them. Some shelters, even large shelters, are saving 80% or more. They have better adoption and foster programs. The director of the San Francisco AC&C says they lose very few neonatals, that they have a large foster base.
All this stuff is analyzed as infinitum in 739 previous posts over the past 2.7 years.
You might note that I was a staunch defender of Boks the first year until I found out that the live save rate was down compared to the year before and that he has a very strained relation to truth, but a close one to spin.
Then there is the Mason case where Ed attacked a "hoarder" claiming his cats had distemper and they killed 25 kittens. Antech lab results came back negative but positive for garden varieties of URI. The cats were seized without legal process in front of TV cameras and dozens of City and County officials. Ed pilloried him calling him mentally ill. The cats were impounded for three months until a bunch of us help Mason get the cats adopted. Many were killed.
As I stated above, if you can do the job I'll stand by you 100% and then even more.
About when we will put away our pettiness, immaturity and callous nature, it sounds like you are putting it all on the rescue/humane community, when you have not taken a look at the sociopath who hired you and the constant lies we have heard over the past 2.7 years about what enormous success LAAS has in adoptions, his background, his successes, etc., even when the numbers didn't compute.
In March of 2007 Boks announced LAAS had its first No-Kill month ever, and in the same announcement said 700 cats and dogs had been euthanized.
A week ago over 100 employees, maybe more than that said Boks had to go. Not only employees, but there were many rescue community and volunteers also.
So I don't know who you are addressing your complaint towards but be aware of Boks, Jim Blackman, and our sleazy mayor who, despite over 2 years of complaints, made no effort to reign Boks in.
Take a look at the link to the video of the dozens of complainants that appeared before Council, but apparently only 4 or 5 were allowed to speak.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icMenNjCs6Q
You have entered a community where there is a war and you are now part of it.
Thank you for replying. It was not necessary for you to reply, but thank you. I am inclined to believe you and I will call again and see if I can talk to anyone else. She (had a difficult name to remember) could not/did not refer me to anyone else to better comment on the program.
My "wild" speculations are based on the fact Boks never responds to my questioning. LAAS is a black box and you have to rattle it to get a response or even a defense.
Did Boks Get a $16,000 raise?
.
It appears that Ed Boks has got another raise:
From a 98 page, September 5, 2008 City Inter-departmental report:
http://www.lacity.org/cao/MOUs/ClassTitleSalaryTable.pdf
Edward Boks; code 9245; General Manager Department of Animal Services; $137,307 - $205,877; incumbent $181,071
So, Ed got a $16,000 raise? Why? Combat pay?
.
It appears that Ed Boks has got another raise:
From a 98 page, September 5, 2008 City Inter-departmental report:
http://www.lacity.org/cao/MOUs/ClassTitleSalaryTable.pdf
Edward Boks; code 9245; General Manager Department of Animal Services; $137,307 - $205,877; incumbent $181,071
So, Ed got a $16,000 raise? Why? Combat pay?
.
More on Anthem College and the Accreditation of a Non-Existent Vet Program
If you do a google on the exact name of the school Boks said Prupas was the director (“Anthem College School of Veterinary Technology”) of, only one link comes up, and that is to an agreement between Maricopa County and the school. This is dated March 29, 2008:
43. MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT FOR PROVIDING HAND-ON ANIMAL EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES – APPROVED
Approve Memorandum of Agreement between Anthem College School of Veterinary Technology and Maricopa County Animal Care and Control, for the purpose of providing hand-on animal educational opportunities and related facilities needed for training while under the supervision of school faculty.
This is the ONLY mention of the school with that exact name on the Internet.
I already mentioned what come up when the name of the school without quotes. Then there are many indirect and direct references to www.anthem.com and nothing is mentioned there because it is not an operational program.
I called their phone # this AM. 602-279-9700
It has no classes, no instructor, no students. The first students are supposed to be enrolling in 2 months or so, apparently after they find an instructor.
Prupas is listed as the director, but apparently of a non-existent program.
Therefore, what is the worth of an AVMA provisional accreditation of a non-existence program? What does that say about AVMA’s accreditation process?
Remember Boks said Prupas had spent the last 2 years guiding the school through accreditation, but Prupas’ goodbye letter to his clients in San Diego is dated September 28, 2007, which is less than a year.
Look at the AVMA listing for Anthem.
Anthem College
1515 E. Indian School Road
Phoenix, AZ 85014
602-279-9700
www.anthem.edu
(Jeremy Prupas, DVM - Director)
Associate in Science
Initial Accreditation-March 3, 2008
PROVISIONAL ACCREDITATION
What is the value an an AVMA accreditation of a non-existent program? Since the MOA is dated March 29, 2008 and the provisional accreditation is dated March 3, 2008, it appears AVMA may have been influenced by MCACC agreement to provide educational opportunities for Anthem students once the program exists.
What kind of accrediting group would give accreditation to a non-existent program?
They have a provisional accreditation for a non-existent program.
I would like someone to interview Prupas. He may be the greatest cat vet in California, but I would like independent verification. I would love to sign onto his team. But my question remains, why did Boks lie about his appointment? Why did not Boks select one the 5-6 vets in-house as Chief vet as opposed to finding one associated with Boks’ old employer, the Maricopa County Animal Care and Control?
43. MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT FOR PROVIDING HAND-ON ANIMAL EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES – APPROVED
Approve Memorandum of Agreement between Anthem College School of Veterinary Technology and Maricopa County Animal Care and Control, for the purpose of providing hand-on animal educational opportunities and related facilities needed for training while under the supervision of school faculty.
This is the ONLY mention of the school with that exact name on the Internet.
I already mentioned what come up when the name of the school without quotes. Then there are many indirect and direct references to www.anthem.com and nothing is mentioned there because it is not an operational program.
I called their phone # this AM. 602-279-9700
It has no classes, no instructor, no students. The first students are supposed to be enrolling in 2 months or so, apparently after they find an instructor.
Prupas is listed as the director, but apparently of a non-existent program.
Therefore, what is the worth of an AVMA provisional accreditation of a non-existence program? What does that say about AVMA’s accreditation process?
Remember Boks said Prupas had spent the last 2 years guiding the school through accreditation, but Prupas’ goodbye letter to his clients in San Diego is dated September 28, 2007, which is less than a year.
Look at the AVMA listing for Anthem.
Anthem College
1515 E. Indian School Road
Phoenix, AZ 85014
602-279-9700
www.anthem.edu
(Jeremy Prupas, DVM - Director)
Associate in Science
Initial Accreditation-March 3, 2008
PROVISIONAL ACCREDITATION
What is the value an an AVMA accreditation of a non-existent program? Since the MOA is dated March 29, 2008 and the provisional accreditation is dated March 3, 2008, it appears AVMA may have been influenced by MCACC agreement to provide educational opportunities for Anthem students once the program exists.
What kind of accrediting group would give accreditation to a non-existent program?
They have a provisional accreditation for a non-existent program.
I would like someone to interview Prupas. He may be the greatest cat vet in California, but I would like independent verification. I would love to sign onto his team. But my question remains, why did Boks lie about his appointment? Why did not Boks select one the 5-6 vets in-house as Chief vet as opposed to finding one associated with Boks’ old employer, the Maricopa County Animal Care and Control?
Zine To Investigate the Prupas Hiring
.
I just got an email from Councilmember Zine stating the Prupas hiring will be investigated. I told Zine that the most important thing is not Boks' made up history and whatever led to that deception, but whether Prupas is indeed a great vet who can "help the department to go to the next step."
If Prupas has the capability to make very substantial changes, he should be given a green light. However, the apparent irregularities in his hiring present a credibility problem hanging over his appointment.
Viewing client evaluations of vets rated on the Internet is usually not helpful. However, one review did state he did perform a successful feline kidney transplant. Other reviews were either glowing or critical. People usually don't comment unless they are very pleased or displeased.
.
I just got an email from Councilmember Zine stating the Prupas hiring will be investigated. I told Zine that the most important thing is not Boks' made up history and whatever led to that deception, but whether Prupas is indeed a great vet who can "help the department to go to the next step."
If Prupas has the capability to make very substantial changes, he should be given a green light. However, the apparent irregularities in his hiring present a credibility problem hanging over his appointment.
Viewing client evaluations of vets rated on the Internet is usually not helpful. However, one review did state he did perform a successful feline kidney transplant. Other reviews were either glowing or critical. People usually don't comment unless they are very pleased or displeased.
.
Who is the New Chief Veterinarian?
.
According to Boks' press release about the New Chief Vet, Jeremy Prupas:
"For the past 2 years, Dr. Prupas served as Program Director for Anthem College School of Veterinary Technology in Phoenix, AZ, where he took over a troubled program and successfully guided it through AVMA accreditation."
www.laanimalservices.com/PDF/pressrelease/2008/Press%20Release%20-%20New%20Chief%20Vet.pdf
However, doing a google on Anthem College School of Veterinary Technology produces almost nothing. There are a total of seven non-repeating references and these all point to Anthem's website, which says nothing about a veterinary program, classes, instructors, etc. It appears to be non-existent school except as a website.
www.anthem.edu
So who or what did Prupas guide through an accreditation process?
Doing an advanced google search on Anthem's own website finds no mention of veterinary or veterinarian. Anthem appears to be part of a conglomeration of vocational schools, apparently under one parent organization, that appear to be start-up online colleges. No facilities are mentioned, no classes.
One Internet reference provides the following review:
Anthem College Online offers online Associate's and Bachelor's Degrees in: Business and Management; Criminal Justice; Technology; Healthcare
Anthem's online platform is an engaging interactive, multimedia learning environment that incorporates text, video, sound, imagery and instructional narration. It is designed to accommodate the personal learning styles of every student in order to enhance participation, understanding and retention.
Programs are structured to allow working adults to incorporate online learning into their busy schedules. Students can log on at any hour, stop a session and pick up where they left off.
Each student at Anthem College Online is assigned a team of advisers committed to their personal academic and career success.
http://www.earnmydegree.com/online-education/online-college/anthem-college.html
This sounds surprisingly like Pierce College's barely existent vet program that offers AA programs for pre-vets, but lacking Pierce's actual physical presence and campus, and instructors that actually teach a class here and their.
The organization that "accredited" Anthem is a relatively unknown group, AVMA, not like the Western Regional that did UCLA and all other schools regarded as accredited. In fact, AVMA (www.avma.org) seems to focus on vet tech programs, not veterinarians.
If the Anthem program exists at all, it has a "Provisional Accreditation," defind by AVMA as:
Provisional Accreditation – Provisional accreditation is granted to new programs in veterinary technology where students have not completed the entire curriculum and/or the programs have not produced sufficient numbers of graduates to adequately assess outcomes. Programs may remain on provisional accreditation for a period not to exceed five years.
That is, there are no graduating students from that program.
Apparently Prupas left San Diego under a cloud, at least according to his own private practice website still up on the Internet:
http://www.allcarecathospital.net/index.html
Also, according to the Cal State vet board he is not licensed to practice in CA. Maybe let his license here lapse and can gett it reinstated immediately.
My Comment: Many prominent professionals in their own fields have almost no Internet presence. Laking an Internet identity only means you don't have much of a paper trail, and is no reflection on competence or compassion.
I just wonder why Boks chose Prupas over the other 5-6 vets already here.
.
According to Boks' press release about the New Chief Vet, Jeremy Prupas:
"For the past 2 years, Dr. Prupas served as Program Director for Anthem College School of Veterinary Technology in Phoenix, AZ, where he took over a troubled program and successfully guided it through AVMA accreditation."
www.laanimalservices.com/PDF/pressrelease/2008/Press%20Release%20-%20New%20Chief%20Vet.pdf
However, doing a google on Anthem College School of Veterinary Technology produces almost nothing. There are a total of seven non-repeating references and these all point to Anthem's website, which says nothing about a veterinary program, classes, instructors, etc. It appears to be non-existent school except as a website.
www.anthem.edu
So who or what did Prupas guide through an accreditation process?
Doing an advanced google search on Anthem's own website finds no mention of veterinary or veterinarian. Anthem appears to be part of a conglomeration of vocational schools, apparently under one parent organization, that appear to be start-up online colleges. No facilities are mentioned, no classes.
One Internet reference provides the following review:
Anthem College Online offers online Associate's and Bachelor's Degrees in: Business and Management; Criminal Justice; Technology; Healthcare
Anthem's online platform is an engaging interactive, multimedia learning environment that incorporates text, video, sound, imagery and instructional narration. It is designed to accommodate the personal learning styles of every student in order to enhance participation, understanding and retention.
Programs are structured to allow working adults to incorporate online learning into their busy schedules. Students can log on at any hour, stop a session and pick up where they left off.
Each student at Anthem College Online is assigned a team of advisers committed to their personal academic and career success.
http://www.earnmydegree.com/online-education/online-college/anthem-college.html
This sounds surprisingly like Pierce College's barely existent vet program that offers AA programs for pre-vets, but lacking Pierce's actual physical presence and campus, and instructors that actually teach a class here and their.
The organization that "accredited" Anthem is a relatively unknown group, AVMA, not like the Western Regional that did UCLA and all other schools regarded as accredited. In fact, AVMA (www.avma.org) seems to focus on vet tech programs, not veterinarians.
If the Anthem program exists at all, it has a "Provisional Accreditation," defind by AVMA as:
Provisional Accreditation – Provisional accreditation is granted to new programs in veterinary technology where students have not completed the entire curriculum and/or the programs have not produced sufficient numbers of graduates to adequately assess outcomes. Programs may remain on provisional accreditation for a period not to exceed five years.
That is, there are no graduating students from that program.
Apparently Prupas left San Diego under a cloud, at least according to his own private practice website still up on the Internet:
http://www.allcarecathospital.net/index.html
Also, according to the Cal State vet board he is not licensed to practice in CA. Maybe let his license here lapse and can gett it reinstated immediately.
My Comment: Many prominent professionals in their own fields have almost no Internet presence. Laking an Internet identity only means you don't have much of a paper trail, and is no reflection on competence or compassion.
I just wonder why Boks chose Prupas over the other 5-6 vets already here.
I am hoping Prupas is a good-guy and highly competent feline-oriented veterinary who can bring more cats out alive from isolation. If he does, I will be his greatest supporter.
And I hope his wife--if they are still together--can get a good job with some vet local practice.
Hopefully it will not be one with whom LAAS contracts, which would be Palin-like cronyism.
Jeremy: Please be good. We need a good cat vet, smart and with compassion..
New York Times; Palin Nasty and Corrupt
.
New York Times Article on Palin:
Once Elected, Palin Hired Friends and Lashed Foes
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&em&adxnnlx=1221498192-UhRQQqjl5HQGoEE2PI7aSw
This article is by Jo Becker, Peter S. Goodman and Michael Powell.
WASILLA, Alaska — Gov. Sarah Palin lives by the maxim that all politics is local, not to mention personal.
So when there was a vacancy at the top of the State Division of Agriculture, she appointed a high school classmate, Franci Havemeister, to the $95,000-a-year directorship. A former real estate agent, Ms. Havemeister cited her childhood love of cows as a qualification for running the roughly $2 million agency.
Ms. Havemeister was one of at least five schoolmates Ms. Palin hired, often at salaries far exceeding their private sector wages.
When Ms. Palin had to cut her first state budget, she avoided the legion of frustrated legislators and mayors. Instead, she huddled with her budget director and her husband, Todd, an oil field worker who is not a state employee, and vetoed millions of dollars of legislative projects.
And four months ago, a Wasilla blogger, Sherry Whitstine, who chronicles the governor’s career with an astringent eye, answered her phone to hear an assistant to the governor on the line, she said.
“You should be ashamed!” Ivy Frye, the assistant, told her. “Stop blogging. Stop blogging right now!”
Ms. Palin walks the national stage as a small-town foe of “good old boy” politics and a champion of ethics reform. The charismatic 44-year-old governor draws enthusiastic audiences and high approval ratings. And as the Republican vice-presidential nominee, she points to her management experience while deriding her Democratic rivals, Senators Barack Obama and Joseph R. Biden Jr., as speechmakers who never have run anything.
But an examination of her swift rise and record as mayor of Wasilla and then governor finds that her visceral style and penchant for attacking critics — she sometimes calls local opponents “haters” — contrasts with her carefully crafted public image.
Throughout her political career, she has pursued vendettas, fired officials who crossed her and sometimes blurred the line between government and personal grievance, according to a review of public records and interviews with 60 Republican and Democratic legislators and local officials.
Still, Ms. Palin has many supporters. As a two-term mayor she paved roads and built an ice rink, and as governor she has pushed through higher taxes on the oil companies that dominate one-third of the state’s economy. She stirs deep emotions. In Wasilla, many residents display unflagging affection, cheering “our Sarah” and hissing at her critics.
“She is bright and has unfailing political instincts,” said Steve Haycox, a history professor at the University of Alaska. “She taps very directly into anxieties about the economic future.”
“But,” he added, “her governing style raises a lot of hard questions.”
Ms. Palin declined to grant an interview for this article. The McCain-Palin campaign responded to some questions on her behalf and that of her husband, while referring others to the governor’s spokespeople, who did not respond.
Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell said Ms. Palin had conducted an accessible and effective administration in the public’s interest. “Everything she does is for the ordinary working people of Alaska,” he said.
In Wasilla, a builder said he complained to Mayor Palin when the city attorney put a stop-work order on his housing project. She responded, he said, by engineering the attorney’s firing.
Interviews show that Ms. Palin runs an administration that puts a premium on loyalty and secrecy. The governor and her top officials sometimes use personal e-mail accounts for state business; dozens of e-mail messages obtained by The New York Times show that her staff members studied whether that could allow them to circumvent subpoenas seeking public records.
Rick Steiner, a University of Alaska professor, sought the e-mail messages of state scientists who had examined the effect of global warming on polar bears. (Ms. Palin said the scientists had found no ill effects, and she has sued the federal government to block the listing of the bears as endangered.) An administration official told Mr. Steiner that his request would cost $468,784 to process.
When Mr. Steiner finally obtained the e-mail messages — through a federal records request — he discovered that state scientists had in fact agreed that the bears were in danger, records show.
“Their secrecy is off the charts,” Mr. Steiner said.
State legislators are investigating accusations that Ms. Palin and her husband pressured officials to fire a state trooper who had gone through a messy divorce with her sister, charges that she denies. But interviews make clear that the Palins draw few distinctions between the personal and the political.
Last summer State Representative John Harris, the Republican speaker of the House, picked up his phone and heard Mr. Palin’s voice. The governor’s husband sounded edgy. He said he was unhappy that Mr. Harris had hired John Bitney as his chief of staff, the speaker recalled. Mr. Bitney was a high school classmate of the Palins and had worked for Ms. Palin. But she fired Mr. Bitney after learning that he had fallen in love with another longtime friend.
“I understood from the call that Todd wasn’t happy with me hiring John and he’d like to see him not there,” Mr. Harris said.
“The Palin family gets upset at personal issues,” he added. “And at our level, they want to strike back.”
Through a campaign spokesman, Mr. Palin said he “did not recall” referring to Mr. Bitney in the conversation.
Hometown Mayor
Laura Chase, the campaign manager during Ms. Palin’s first run for mayor in 1996, recalled the night the two women chatted about her ambitions.
“I said, ‘You know, Sarah, within 10 years you could be governor,’ ” Ms. Chase recalled. “She replied, ‘I want to be president.’ ”
Ms. Palin grew up in Wasilla, an old fur trader’s outpost and now a fast-growing exurb of Anchorage. The town sits in the Matanuska-Susitna Valley, edged by jagged mountains and birch forests. In the 1930s, the Roosevelt administration took farmers from the Dust Bowl area and resettled them here; their Democratic allegiances defined the valley for half a century.
In the past three decades, socially conservative Oklahomans and Texans have flocked north to the oil fields of Alaska. They filled evangelical churches around Wasilla and revived the Republican Party. Many of these working-class residents formed the electoral backbone for Ms. Palin, who ran for mayor on a platform of gun rights, opposition to abortion and the ouster of the “complacent” old guard.
After winning the mayoral election in 1996, Ms. Palin presided over a city rapidly outgrowing itself. Septic tanks had begun to pollute lakes, and residential lots were carved willy-nilly out of the woods. She passed road and sewer bonds, cut property taxes but raised the sales tax.
And, her supporters say, she cleaned out the municipal closet, firing veteran officials to make way for her own team. “She had an agenda for change and for doing things differently,” said Judy Patrick, a City Council member at the time.
But careers were turned upside down. The mayor quickly fired the town’s museum director, John Cooper. Later, she sent an aide to the museum to talk to the three remaining employees. “He told us they only wanted two,” recalled Esther West, one of the three, “and we had to pick who was going to be laid off.” The three quit as one.
Ms. Palin cited budget difficulties for the museum cuts. Mr. Cooper thought differently, saying the museum had become a microcosm of class and cultural conflicts in town. “It represented that the town was becoming more progressive, and they didn’t want that,” he said.
Days later, Mr. Cooper recalled, a vocal conservative, Steve Stoll, sidled up to him. Mr. Stoll had supported Ms. Palin and had a long-running feud with Mr. Cooper. “He said: ‘Gotcha, Cooper,’ ” Mr. Cooper said.
Mr. Stoll did not recall that conversation, although he said he supported Ms. Palin’s campaign and was pleased when she fired Mr. Cooper.
In 1997, Ms. Palin fired the longtime city attorney, Richard Deuser, after he issued the stop-work order on a home being built by Don Showers, another of her campaign supporters.
Your attorney, Mr. Showers told Ms. Palin, is costing me lots of money.
“She told me she’d like to see him fired,” Mr. Showers recalled. “But she couldn’t do it herself because the City Council hires the city attorney.” Ms. Palin told him to write the council members to complain.
Meanwhile, Ms. Palin pushed the issue from the inside. “She started the ball rolling,” said Ms. Patrick, who also favored the firing. Mr. Deuser was soon replaced by Ken Jacobus, then the State Republican Party’s general counsel.
“Professionals were either forced out or fired,” Mr. Deuser said.
Ms. Palin ordered city employees not to talk to the press. And she used city money to buy a white Suburban for the mayor’s use — employees sarcastically called it the mayor-mobile.
The new mayor also tended carefully to her evangelical base. She appointed a pastor to the town planning board. And she began to eye the library. For years, social conservatives had pressed the library director to remove books they considered immoral.
Ms. Palin chose Talis Colberg, a borough assemblyman from the Matanuska valley, as her attorney general, provoking a bewildered question from the legal community: “Who?” Mr. Colberg, who did not return calls, moved from a one-room building in the valley to one of the most powerful offices in the state, supervising some 500 people.
“I called him and asked, ‘Do you know how to supervise people?’ ” said a family friend, Kathy Wells. “He said, ‘No, but I think I’ll get some help.’ ”
The Wasilla High School yearbook archive now doubles as a veritable directory of state government. Ms. Palin appointed Mr. Bitney, her former junior high school band-mate, as her legislative director and chose another classmate, Joe Austerman, to manage the economic development office for $82,908 a year. Mr. Austerman had established an Alaska franchise for Mailboxes Etc.
To her supporters — and with an 80 percent approval rating, she has plenty — Ms. Palin has lifted Alaska out of a mire of corruption. She gained the passage of a bill that tightens the rules covering lobbyists. And she rewrote the tax code to capture a greater share of oil and gas sale proceeds.
“Does anybody doubt that she’s a tough negotiator?” said State Representative Carl Gatto, Republican of Palmer.
Yet recent controversy has marred Ms. Palin’s reform credentials. In addition to the trooper investigation, lawmakers in April accused her of improperly culling thousands of e-mail addresses from a state database for a mass mailing to rally support for a policy initiative.
While Ms. Palin took office promising a more open government, her administration has battled to keep information secret. Her inner circle discussed the benefit of using private e-mail addresses. An assistant told her it appeared that such e-mail messages sent to a private address on a “personal device” like a BlackBerry “would be confidential and not subject to subpoena.”
THERE IS MUCH MORE, BUT TOO MUCH FOR THIS BLOG. GO TO THE N.Y. TIMES BLOG LINK AT THE TOP OF THIS POST.
New York Times Article on Palin:
Once Elected, Palin Hired Friends and Lashed Foes
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&em&adxnnlx=1221498192-UhRQQqjl5HQGoEE2PI7aSw
This article is by Jo Becker, Peter S. Goodman and Michael Powell.
WASILLA, Alaska — Gov. Sarah Palin lives by the maxim that all politics is local, not to mention personal.
So when there was a vacancy at the top of the State Division of Agriculture, she appointed a high school classmate, Franci Havemeister, to the $95,000-a-year directorship. A former real estate agent, Ms. Havemeister cited her childhood love of cows as a qualification for running the roughly $2 million agency.
Ms. Havemeister was one of at least five schoolmates Ms. Palin hired, often at salaries far exceeding their private sector wages.
When Ms. Palin had to cut her first state budget, she avoided the legion of frustrated legislators and mayors. Instead, she huddled with her budget director and her husband, Todd, an oil field worker who is not a state employee, and vetoed millions of dollars of legislative projects.
And four months ago, a Wasilla blogger, Sherry Whitstine, who chronicles the governor’s career with an astringent eye, answered her phone to hear an assistant to the governor on the line, she said.
“You should be ashamed!” Ivy Frye, the assistant, told her. “Stop blogging. Stop blogging right now!”
Ms. Palin walks the national stage as a small-town foe of “good old boy” politics and a champion of ethics reform. The charismatic 44-year-old governor draws enthusiastic audiences and high approval ratings. And as the Republican vice-presidential nominee, she points to her management experience while deriding her Democratic rivals, Senators Barack Obama and Joseph R. Biden Jr., as speechmakers who never have run anything.
But an examination of her swift rise and record as mayor of Wasilla and then governor finds that her visceral style and penchant for attacking critics — she sometimes calls local opponents “haters” — contrasts with her carefully crafted public image.
Throughout her political career, she has pursued vendettas, fired officials who crossed her and sometimes blurred the line between government and personal grievance, according to a review of public records and interviews with 60 Republican and Democratic legislators and local officials.
Still, Ms. Palin has many supporters. As a two-term mayor she paved roads and built an ice rink, and as governor she has pushed through higher taxes on the oil companies that dominate one-third of the state’s economy. She stirs deep emotions. In Wasilla, many residents display unflagging affection, cheering “our Sarah” and hissing at her critics.
“She is bright and has unfailing political instincts,” said Steve Haycox, a history professor at the University of Alaska. “She taps very directly into anxieties about the economic future.”
“But,” he added, “her governing style raises a lot of hard questions.”
Ms. Palin declined to grant an interview for this article. The McCain-Palin campaign responded to some questions on her behalf and that of her husband, while referring others to the governor’s spokespeople, who did not respond.
Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell said Ms. Palin had conducted an accessible and effective administration in the public’s interest. “Everything she does is for the ordinary working people of Alaska,” he said.
In Wasilla, a builder said he complained to Mayor Palin when the city attorney put a stop-work order on his housing project. She responded, he said, by engineering the attorney’s firing.
Interviews show that Ms. Palin runs an administration that puts a premium on loyalty and secrecy. The governor and her top officials sometimes use personal e-mail accounts for state business; dozens of e-mail messages obtained by The New York Times show that her staff members studied whether that could allow them to circumvent subpoenas seeking public records.
Rick Steiner, a University of Alaska professor, sought the e-mail messages of state scientists who had examined the effect of global warming on polar bears. (Ms. Palin said the scientists had found no ill effects, and she has sued the federal government to block the listing of the bears as endangered.) An administration official told Mr. Steiner that his request would cost $468,784 to process.
When Mr. Steiner finally obtained the e-mail messages — through a federal records request — he discovered that state scientists had in fact agreed that the bears were in danger, records show.
“Their secrecy is off the charts,” Mr. Steiner said.
State legislators are investigating accusations that Ms. Palin and her husband pressured officials to fire a state trooper who had gone through a messy divorce with her sister, charges that she denies. But interviews make clear that the Palins draw few distinctions between the personal and the political.
Last summer State Representative John Harris, the Republican speaker of the House, picked up his phone and heard Mr. Palin’s voice. The governor’s husband sounded edgy. He said he was unhappy that Mr. Harris had hired John Bitney as his chief of staff, the speaker recalled. Mr. Bitney was a high school classmate of the Palins and had worked for Ms. Palin. But she fired Mr. Bitney after learning that he had fallen in love with another longtime friend.
“I understood from the call that Todd wasn’t happy with me hiring John and he’d like to see him not there,” Mr. Harris said.
“The Palin family gets upset at personal issues,” he added. “And at our level, they want to strike back.”
Through a campaign spokesman, Mr. Palin said he “did not recall” referring to Mr. Bitney in the conversation.
Hometown Mayor
Laura Chase, the campaign manager during Ms. Palin’s first run for mayor in 1996, recalled the night the two women chatted about her ambitions.
“I said, ‘You know, Sarah, within 10 years you could be governor,’ ” Ms. Chase recalled. “She replied, ‘I want to be president.’ ”
Ms. Palin grew up in Wasilla, an old fur trader’s outpost and now a fast-growing exurb of Anchorage. The town sits in the Matanuska-Susitna Valley, edged by jagged mountains and birch forests. In the 1930s, the Roosevelt administration took farmers from the Dust Bowl area and resettled them here; their Democratic allegiances defined the valley for half a century.
In the past three decades, socially conservative Oklahomans and Texans have flocked north to the oil fields of Alaska. They filled evangelical churches around Wasilla and revived the Republican Party. Many of these working-class residents formed the electoral backbone for Ms. Palin, who ran for mayor on a platform of gun rights, opposition to abortion and the ouster of the “complacent” old guard.
After winning the mayoral election in 1996, Ms. Palin presided over a city rapidly outgrowing itself. Septic tanks had begun to pollute lakes, and residential lots were carved willy-nilly out of the woods. She passed road and sewer bonds, cut property taxes but raised the sales tax.
And, her supporters say, she cleaned out the municipal closet, firing veteran officials to make way for her own team. “She had an agenda for change and for doing things differently,” said Judy Patrick, a City Council member at the time.
But careers were turned upside down. The mayor quickly fired the town’s museum director, John Cooper. Later, she sent an aide to the museum to talk to the three remaining employees. “He told us they only wanted two,” recalled Esther West, one of the three, “and we had to pick who was going to be laid off.” The three quit as one.
Ms. Palin cited budget difficulties for the museum cuts. Mr. Cooper thought differently, saying the museum had become a microcosm of class and cultural conflicts in town. “It represented that the town was becoming more progressive, and they didn’t want that,” he said.
Days later, Mr. Cooper recalled, a vocal conservative, Steve Stoll, sidled up to him. Mr. Stoll had supported Ms. Palin and had a long-running feud with Mr. Cooper. “He said: ‘Gotcha, Cooper,’ ” Mr. Cooper said.
Mr. Stoll did not recall that conversation, although he said he supported Ms. Palin’s campaign and was pleased when she fired Mr. Cooper.
In 1997, Ms. Palin fired the longtime city attorney, Richard Deuser, after he issued the stop-work order on a home being built by Don Showers, another of her campaign supporters.
Your attorney, Mr. Showers told Ms. Palin, is costing me lots of money.
“She told me she’d like to see him fired,” Mr. Showers recalled. “But she couldn’t do it herself because the City Council hires the city attorney.” Ms. Palin told him to write the council members to complain.
Meanwhile, Ms. Palin pushed the issue from the inside. “She started the ball rolling,” said Ms. Patrick, who also favored the firing. Mr. Deuser was soon replaced by Ken Jacobus, then the State Republican Party’s general counsel.
“Professionals were either forced out or fired,” Mr. Deuser said.
Ms. Palin ordered city employees not to talk to the press. And she used city money to buy a white Suburban for the mayor’s use — employees sarcastically called it the mayor-mobile.
The new mayor also tended carefully to her evangelical base. She appointed a pastor to the town planning board. And she began to eye the library. For years, social conservatives had pressed the library director to remove books they considered immoral.
Ms. Palin chose Talis Colberg, a borough assemblyman from the Matanuska valley, as her attorney general, provoking a bewildered question from the legal community: “Who?” Mr. Colberg, who did not return calls, moved from a one-room building in the valley to one of the most powerful offices in the state, supervising some 500 people.
“I called him and asked, ‘Do you know how to supervise people?’ ” said a family friend, Kathy Wells. “He said, ‘No, but I think I’ll get some help.’ ”
The Wasilla High School yearbook archive now doubles as a veritable directory of state government. Ms. Palin appointed Mr. Bitney, her former junior high school band-mate, as her legislative director and chose another classmate, Joe Austerman, to manage the economic development office for $82,908 a year. Mr. Austerman had established an Alaska franchise for Mailboxes Etc.
To her supporters — and with an 80 percent approval rating, she has plenty — Ms. Palin has lifted Alaska out of a mire of corruption. She gained the passage of a bill that tightens the rules covering lobbyists. And she rewrote the tax code to capture a greater share of oil and gas sale proceeds.
“Does anybody doubt that she’s a tough negotiator?” said State Representative Carl Gatto, Republican of Palmer.
Yet recent controversy has marred Ms. Palin’s reform credentials. In addition to the trooper investigation, lawmakers in April accused her of improperly culling thousands of e-mail addresses from a state database for a mass mailing to rally support for a policy initiative.
While Ms. Palin took office promising a more open government, her administration has battled to keep information secret. Her inner circle discussed the benefit of using private e-mail addresses. An assistant told her it appeared that such e-mail messages sent to a private address on a “personal device” like a BlackBerry “would be confidential and not subject to subpoena.”
THERE IS MUCH MORE, BUT TOO MUCH FOR THIS BLOG. GO TO THE N.Y. TIMES BLOG LINK AT THE TOP OF THIS POST.
All About Sarah Palin
I once thought that if we had to have a Republican president, McCain would have been better than Bush.
I have changed my mind. There has been a quantum leap in his lying recently, and then, just for the sake of becoming president, he chooses Palin to be the V.P., with a good chance of becoming the president.` He knows Palin has no business even visiting Washignton, let alone working in the White House.
I have changed my mind. There has been a quantum leap in his lying recently, and then, just for the sake of becoming president, he chooses Palin to be the V.P., with a good chance of becoming the president.` He knows Palin has no business even visiting Washignton, let alone working in the White House.
Palin is worse than even cynical I thought. Take a look at this link and then email everyone, everyone you know, especially in Ohio, Colorado and the forsaken states in the middle of our country, about Palin.
Look at the photo of her parents (if not made up) in their home with the walls covered with dead animals. Take a look at her "barbarian" friends who think they are Leaf Erickson and Thor.
It is obvious the photo was made in fun, but if you read about Palin and her friends, you realize this is who they truly think thay are.
It is obvious the photo was made in fun, but if you read about Palin and her friends, you realize this is who they truly think thay are.
These people are right out of 6th Century Viking comic books.
Be afraid; be very afraid.
Maybe we can emigrate to Canada or Ireland, or France, or...
.
Be afraid; be very afraid.
Maybe we can emigrate to Canada or Ireland, or France, or...
.
From a No-Kill Consultant Re Boks
.
I am dismayed by the total blinders that Ed is using to focus his efforts to achieve no kill. He does not see or care about the offers of effort and expertise by contributers who are waiting to help him in the L.A. community. He seems to be doing work within a fear management style. Not trusting anyone. My contacts with him have been stopped, by him, so I have no insight as to what is going on or if LAAS' is targeting problem areas as I suggested.
I was going to send a scathing email to Ed Boks about his response to his comments by an anonymous complainant regarding a rescue seminar, but I realize he only hears himself.
I will not communicate with him unless he outlines a positive process for achieving concise and consistent communications that will have results. After I voiced my willingness to help, I thought he was intent on doing the right thing for the animals. I now realize that he is only interested in Ed Boks, not the animals and people who work for him that can do the most about stopping the killing of unwanted animals.
Ed, I will always be totally committed to stopping the killing of animals in animal shelters. I have done my best to offer assistance to LAAS, but unless the attitude, which we have all noted as being the problem, changes nothing will change. The staff seems ready to make the change, but Boks management style is now clearly in the way.
I am dismayed by the total blinders that Ed is using to focus his efforts to achieve no kill. He does not see or care about the offers of effort and expertise by contributers who are waiting to help him in the L.A. community. He seems to be doing work within a fear management style. Not trusting anyone. My contacts with him have been stopped, by him, so I have no insight as to what is going on or if LAAS' is targeting problem areas as I suggested.
I was going to send a scathing email to Ed Boks about his response to his comments by an anonymous complainant regarding a rescue seminar, but I realize he only hears himself.
I will not communicate with him unless he outlines a positive process for achieving concise and consistent communications that will have results. After I voiced my willingness to help, I thought he was intent on doing the right thing for the animals. I now realize that he is only interested in Ed Boks, not the animals and people who work for him that can do the most about stopping the killing of unwanted animals.
Ed, I will always be totally committed to stopping the killing of animals in animal shelters. I have done my best to offer assistance to LAAS, but unless the attitude, which we have all noted as being the problem, changes nothing will change. The staff seems ready to make the change, but Boks management style is now clearly in the way.
----------------------------------------------------------
Well, I can understand Boks fear management style.
Well, I can understand Boks fear management style.
It is not just paranoia, EVERYONE really is out to get him.
.
Why Are Impounds, Adoptions and Killing All Up?
.
Boks blames foreclosures as the cause for the increase in impounds. Many of us doubt that is the reason. In NYC there has been only a very slight increase in impounds, and that is only with dogs. Beside that, euthanasia is down.
I talked to an undisclosed member of the rescue community who wanted to remain anonymous for some reason, when impounds were beginning to climb. His response was that when you open new shelters, you expand capacity, and all the numbers will increase: impounds, adoptions and killing.
At the time I did not believe him, but it seems obvious it is true. People see the new, bright buildings, Boks talks about being the biggest adoption agency in the known universe, so naturally people feel less guilty relinquishing (abandoning) an animal to the shelter. Having more animals with a larger number of employees, in spic and span new facilities generates more adoptions. However, even if adoptions increase in the same percentage as before, more animals will be killed for space.
The only short term solution is to massively increase the rate of adoptions to offset the 20-30% increase in impounds.
To give you an idea of what I am talking about, let us say a system impounds annually 10,000 animals and adopts out 6,000, and kills 4,000.
Suppose then you double the size of the system and impounds rise to 20,000. If you adopt out the same percentage, 60%, 12,000 will leave alive and killing will increase to 8,000.
That is, killing doubled and so did adoptions. This makes the shelter look bad because killing has doubled. No one looks at adoptions.
To just hold even with the kill numbers, the shelter would have to adopt out an extra 4,000 animals, or 80% adoptions. An adoption rate of 80% is approaching No-kill, yet we are killing as many animals as before the new shelter was built.
That is, if you build new shelters, they will come, both abandoners and adopters.
.
Boks blames foreclosures as the cause for the increase in impounds. Many of us doubt that is the reason. In NYC there has been only a very slight increase in impounds, and that is only with dogs. Beside that, euthanasia is down.
I talked to an undisclosed member of the rescue community who wanted to remain anonymous for some reason, when impounds were beginning to climb. His response was that when you open new shelters, you expand capacity, and all the numbers will increase: impounds, adoptions and killing.
At the time I did not believe him, but it seems obvious it is true. People see the new, bright buildings, Boks talks about being the biggest adoption agency in the known universe, so naturally people feel less guilty relinquishing (abandoning) an animal to the shelter. Having more animals with a larger number of employees, in spic and span new facilities generates more adoptions. However, even if adoptions increase in the same percentage as before, more animals will be killed for space.
The only short term solution is to massively increase the rate of adoptions to offset the 20-30% increase in impounds.
To give you an idea of what I am talking about, let us say a system impounds annually 10,000 animals and adopts out 6,000, and kills 4,000.
Suppose then you double the size of the system and impounds rise to 20,000. If you adopt out the same percentage, 60%, 12,000 will leave alive and killing will increase to 8,000.
That is, killing doubled and so did adoptions. This makes the shelter look bad because killing has doubled. No one looks at adoptions.
To just hold even with the kill numbers, the shelter would have to adopt out an extra 4,000 animals, or 80% adoptions. An adoption rate of 80% is approaching No-kill, yet we are killing as many animals as before the new shelter was built.
That is, if you build new shelters, they will come, both abandoners and adopters.
.
New Chief Vet Starts Monday
.
Boks press release:
Dr. Jeremy Prupas, VMD has accepted the position of Chief Veterinarian for the Department and is scheduled to start Monday, September 15th.
Following veterinary school, Dr. Prupas served as an associate veterinarian in Stamford, CT before moving to San Diego where he owned and operated his own practice. For the past 2 years, Dr. Prupas served as Program Director for Anthem College School of Veterinary Technology in Phoenix, AZ, where he took over a troubled program and successfully guided it through AVMA accreditation.
Dr. Prupas will replace Dr. Steven Feldman, DVM, who has served as Acting Chief Veterinarian for over a year. Dr. Feldman recently promoted to a Veterinarian III position and will serve as Dr. Prupas’s second in command.
“Dr. Feldman helped rebuild the Department’s medical program over the past year,” said Ed Boks, general manager of the Department, “making it the finest municipal veterinary shelter program in the United States. Our anticipation is that under the capable leadership of Dr. Prupas and Dr. Feldman, with the support of our extraordinary team of veterinarians, we will now be able to take the program to the next level.”
Boks press release:
Dr. Jeremy Prupas, VMD has accepted the position of Chief Veterinarian for the Department and is scheduled to start Monday, September 15th.
Following veterinary school, Dr. Prupas served as an associate veterinarian in Stamford, CT before moving to San Diego where he owned and operated his own practice. For the past 2 years, Dr. Prupas served as Program Director for Anthem College School of Veterinary Technology in Phoenix, AZ, where he took over a troubled program and successfully guided it through AVMA accreditation.
Dr. Prupas will replace Dr. Steven Feldman, DVM, who has served as Acting Chief Veterinarian for over a year. Dr. Feldman recently promoted to a Veterinarian III position and will serve as Dr. Prupas’s second in command.
“Dr. Feldman helped rebuild the Department’s medical program over the past year,” said Ed Boks, general manager of the Department, “making it the finest municipal veterinary shelter program in the United States. Our anticipation is that under the capable leadership of Dr. Prupas and Dr. Feldman, with the support of our extraordinary team of veterinarians, we will now be able to take the program to the next level.”
-----------------------
This guy sounds very capable, and he specialized in cats. I love him already. Also, his San Diego practice was located about a mile from where I used to live in La Jolla. Why on earth would any rational human being leave the land of endless Spring to move to Phoenix?
A reality check. Boks says Feldman served as Acting Chief Vet for over a year. That is true to an extent, but it also true that until this appointment Dr. Feldman was the actual Chief Vet according to various documents I listed in my August 22 and 25 posts.
Far be it from me to defend Dr. Feldman just because he used to be my own vet, but Boks says: "Dr. Feldman helped rebuild the Department’s medical program over the past year, making it the finest municipal veterinary shelter program in the United States."
One would want to know why Boks replaced someone who made LAAS "the finest municipal veterinary program in the United States."
We'll see. I hope for the best. We'll watch what happens to the Died in Shelter and euth numbers. I truly hope to see the cat euth figures go down.
Prupas' San Diego practice website:
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)