|
WHAT'S COOKING AT THE ACC?
|
|
| ACC Executive Director Risa Weinstock |
Disease is cookin', that's what.
ACC Executive Director Risa Weinstock was unusually subdued as she delivered her State of the ACC report to the ACC Board on June 24
th. The ACC has a revolt on its hands.
Rescue groups are up in arms about staggering vet bills bills and the deaths of ACC animals from increasingly serious shelter diseases.
With the encouragement of
Uncaged New York, for the first time a number of
rescue groups are publicly airing their concerns.
This is a seismic change for the ACC. Until now it's always relied on rescuers to keep quiet about their concerns.
Weinstock assured the audience that reports of pneumonia among ACC animals "is not anything different than what we've seen in past years and it is not anything we see as a epidemic." She explained that disease is endemic to all large shelters. So far, there have been only 43 pneumonia deaths ... "that we've been told of," she added. (She didn't include the number of animals dying of pneumonia INSIDE the ACC.) Weinstock acknowledged that ACC rescuers are spending "many, many dollars" to bring ACC animals back to health. The important thing, however, is that the ACC is "saving" more lives than ever before ... due in large measure to rescuers, Weinstock readily acknowledged. Thank you, rescuers. Rescuers weren't so easily mollified. Before turning to their concerns, we'll report on some news that on its face appears to be positive. TWO NEW ACC BOARD MEMBERS It's taken the ACC Board six months to select the 2 additional "independent" directors. The first is Caren Fleit who said she's volunteered with rescue organizations and the Catskill Animal Shelter. She's a headhunter with the firm of Korn Ferry. The second is Linda Chinn. According to Chairman Patrick Nolan, Chinn is also on the ACC's Fundraising Committee and has raised "tens of thousands of dollars" for the ACC. Chinn wasn't present at the meeting. (Nor were two other "independent" directors: Hollander and Cohen.) Will these 2 new members (1) challenge the party line ("the Department of Health is our friend"), (2) identify what's needed to make the ACC a truly independent and progressive shelter system; and (3) attract the needed resources to make those changes? Or will they just be filling seats? We'll have to wait 'n see. NEW FUNDRAISING COMMITTEE Weinstock didn't highlight the ACC's Fundraising Committee, which is surprising. It now includes non-board members, such as Georgina Bloomberg. See back page of the ACC's 2014 "Progress Report") for a list of members. Wouldn't it be swell if the Fundraising Committee also had a real estate developer who could identify locations to build the missing Bronx and Queens shelters? (More about that later.) REDUCING THE NUMBER OF OWNER-SURRENDERS Weinstock reported that the Admissions Department prevented over 1600 animals from entering the ACC last year. Pet owners are counseled on alternatives to surrendering their animals. Good job. Really. Good job. ....... Okay, now for the not-so-positive news. THE RESCUERS' REVOLT Rescue group after rescue group challenged the ACC's complacency. Treasured K9s (which rescues Korean Jindo dogs from shelters (large and small) up and down the East Coast and even Canada, told the ACC Board: We have noticed that while upper respiratory infection (URI) is common among all shelters, the strains coming out of the NYC AC&C system are far worse than we've seen from other shelters. ... This statement is not a criticism of the NYC AC&C system but a true comparison from our firsthand experience with the dogs. Stray From the Heart, a founding member of the Mayor's Alliance, reminded the Board how in 2009 SFTH sued the City and the Department of Health for failing to build shelters for the Bronx and Queens as required by the Shelters Law of 2000. The overcrowded existing shelters were breeding disease and making their animals sick. "The more animals we pulled form the ACC the deeper into debt we went," stated SFTH. The DOH wiggled out of SFTH's lawsuit by having the Shelters Law repealed, thereby making the lawsuit moot. SFTH stopped pulling ACC animals. They simply couldn't afford the vet bills any longer.
"Anyone in this room
who
says that shelters aren't urgently needed in the Bronx and Queens are wrong, misguided or disingenuous,"
said SFTH to a round of applause.
Phyllis Taiano of
4 Paws Sake rescue described how in recent weeks, 4 different rescue groups have closed up shop in response to staggering vet bills. "You have an epidemic on your hands," she told the ACC. "What would happen if 200+ rescue groups [ACC's rescue partners] could no longer help you with your placements?,"
she asked.
Adelia Harrison of Uncaged New York noted:
Try as you may, and we acknowledge that you do, the ACC cannot protect its animals from disease in these terrible buildings. Since the ACC opened its doors to rescuers 13 years ago, the ACC has looked to rescue groups to do the heavy lifting. That's not a proper business model.
Rescuers weren't the only ones speaking up. For example, ACC volunteer, Mayor's Alliance transport driver, and former ACC employee Deborah Proos described the "tragic trajectory to death" of 3 ACC dogs while inside the ACC. (Here's a video of Proos' speech.) THE DIRTY SECRET BEHIND THE ACC'S "LIVE RELEASE RATE" Weinstock reported that for the first 5 full months of 2015 the ACC's "Live Release Rate" exceeded 90% (meaning, it killed no more than 10% of its animals). [NOTE: According to a popular definition of "no kill," if the ACC keeps up this pace for a full year, they can declare themselves "no kill."] ACC Chairman Patrick Nolan added that when the City created the ACC 20 years ago, the kill rate was 80+%. So, a Live Release Rate of 90%+ shows great progress. Ordinarily those statistics should be cause for celebration. The ACC is killing far fewer of its animals. But the "Live Release Rate" doesn't reflect how many of animals leaving the ACC are just barely alive or will fall seriously ill (some dying) in a short span of time. Nor does the LRR reflect that rescue groups are bearing the financial brunt of ACC's "life saving." Accountant Tom Scopac noted that ACC numbers reveal it is "ever more reliant on rescuers" as well as "At Risk List" pulls to achieve this life saving. PROMISED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS: DON'T HOLD YOUR BREATH ACC Management never criticizes the DOH or challenges the veracity of DOH promises. They don't dare. So, we will. Let's begin with the fact that the ACC operates its shelters in old, cramped, and disease-ridden buildings that the DOH provides. What improvements has the DOH promised for those buildings? . DOH representative (and ACC Board member) Daniel Kass reported that the DOH's promised capital improvements (an Adoptions Center and a new HVAC system) will take time ... like all capital projects do, he explained. ACC Chairman Patrick Nolan was far more candid. The DOH's promised capital improvements are "years away." If the DOH's past history is any indication, those capital improvements are many years away. THE MISSING BRONX AND QUEENS SHELTERS ... WILL STAY MISSING Speaking of capital improvements, Esther Koslow of Shelter Reform Action Committee asked DOH rep Kass to describe the DOH's current position on full service shelters for the Bronx and Queens. Koslow reminded Kass that 4 months earlier he testified that more shelters weren't needed. Kass responded: "We are working on a plan, uh, to basically acquire property [pause] to find the right suite of services. [Pause.] What the size and scale will be, those are difficult things to manage. The property will dictate capacity." Kass said that anyone who has followed -- "in an honest and sincere way" -- the DOH's past efforts to locate shelter sites knows it has encountered "neighborhood opposition." [NOTE: Speaking of being "honest and sincere," neighborhood opposition is the excuse the DOH offered for eleven (11) straight years for failing to build new shelters even when the law required those shelters.]
From Kass' response, you might believe the DOH now supports having more shelters and is looking high and low for proper locations. If that's what you believe, you would be wrong. A political insider subsequently explained to a group of animal advocates that full service shelters aren't in the cards for the Bronx and Queens. According to the insider, the reasons are twofold:
(2) FUNDING: The insider said that even if the City Council allocated $50 million, it wouldn't be enough to build state-of-the-art shelters. (No explanation was offered for that claim.)
So, the insider said, current thinking is that full service shelters aren't the answer. Instead, Bronx and Queens residents should receive different kinds of services (as yet unspecified) in different neighborhoods.
NO FULL SERVICE SHELTERS .... EVER ... FOR THE BRONX AND QUEENS This current thinking echoes what Dan Kass told the City Council Health Committee 4 months ago. That's when Kass insisted the ACC can provide services that would more than make up for full service shelters. Kass didn't identify what those services would be. Kass was similarly tight-lipped when SRAC's Koslow tried to pry that information out from him last week. What does all this mean? The fix is in. The DOH has no intention or fear of having to spend a penny on more shelters. Any promises made about building new shelters are just to placate animal advocates. DOES THIS MAKE YOU MAD? It should. Damn mad. How long do New Yorkers have to put up with career bureaucrats at the Department of Health who don't give a damn about animals? How long do New Yorkers have to put up with Health Commissioner after Health Commissioner with no background or interest in animal welfare? Finally, how long do New Yorkers have to wait until Mayor de Blasio makes good on his campaign promise to free the ACC from DOH control and to get those Bronx and Queens shelters built? |
