Monday, July 12, 2010
Public Silent--Council Committee Approves Brenda Barnette for Full Council Vote
Listen to the hearing at http://lacity.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=103&clip_id=8081
With no speaker cards for public comment received--although Zine said "the critics are here"--the hearing was brief and breezy; and without Tony Cardenas --who has always been very outspoken and knowledgeable about LAAS, the questions were pretty tame and general. Zine and Smith reminded Barnette of the "crumbling environment" state of the department is suffering from due to bad morale since the Boks fiasco and the fact that there is no money for the Department.Smith: "We have acutally shrunk the Department" and are offering "fewer services." Brenda Barnette, speaking with a measured tone and a slight Virginia accent stated that she would spend time in the shelters and let everyone speak their mind and "be respectful."
Jan Perry's main concern was the prevalence of the "dumping" of "pit bulls and Rottweilers and those type of dogs" and asked how Barnette felt about free spay neuter programs ( which we have, but not enough of them). Perry said she wants to be first on Barnette's list for "outreach" for spay neuter service to lower income residents.
Zine: We have no money. How are you gonna turn the department around? How will you lift morale?
Barnette: I'm a fundrasier and will be in the shelter working with people.
Barnette said that her Sunday "meet and greet" --which she referred to as a "Town Hall Meeting"-- was productive. She stated that if she can get the cooperation of 70-80% of the staff and community, then she intends to achieve an 80% save rate within 5 years and be very close to that in 3 years.
Chairman Smith noted that "amazingly" there were no comments from the public. The Committee moved to send Barnette's appointment to full Council and the motion was passed. Barnette's appointment confirmation will move to the full council for a vote on Tues. Because a public hearing was already held, NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY will be heard at the Council Meeting. It was concluded and stated by Zine, that "Somebody has to run this Department" and they all wished her luck. So, lot's of internet hoopla for and against Barnette...but nobody showed to speak up....as usual.
Best of luck, Ms. Barnette. We're with you...just tell us what you want to do.
Thursday, July 8, 2010
The Brenda Barnette "APPROVED" Train Marches On!
I have (the) utmost respect for Michael Bell, and for good reason.
That being said, do we need more positive endorsements (for Barnette) with the ADL-LA still slamming-home their recent reincarnation to "friend of the Mayor?"
It seems to me that the purpose of this avalanche of "APPROVED" stamps only serves one purpose (because, hey...she's in, okay?): Discredit all detractors and skeptics.
It's really too bad that Barnette will have to depend on one "staffer" to "train" her in the ways of the Department, the Council and the City --the other "staffer" will fade back into the woodwork where she quietly collected her enormous pay before--and it's even more too bad that the former "staffer" will be her most "trusted" adviser.
If Ms. Barnett is as savvy as she appears (read: able to politic with the best of them), she will make a big media splash, be the nice lady on TV with the cute little animals (read: NOT PIT BULLS) and watch and listen closely to what is available to her.
Then, after we're all cozy-- someone should get the axe and move on to yet another City Department--or not. Only then, will Barnette have a real chance to make a difference..if that is possible.
None of her SHS (Seattle Humane Society) policies will work here. Not the selective intake policy, nor the pit bull policy, nor the temperament test policy. Will this Board, who has forever forbade temperament testing give in (to Bickhart) and allow these "un-adoptable" dogs to be labeled to death? That's one way to bring up your save rate numbers....but that kind of sounds like Ed Boks-style tactics... which fooled quite a few people before. We can only wait and see.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Pam Ferdin and ADL LA Give Official Blessing for Brenda Barnette's Appointment!
Yes, it is snowing in the Matrix. There are some interesting insights on Phyllis Daugherty's negative campaign against Brenda Barnette as pick for the new G.M. of Los Angeles Animal Services; and also some thoughts about emails supposedly being circulated by "a candidate" who was not chosen. Not positive who that is so no names from BW either (except for the one we know).
For the overwhelming most part, ADL says Barnette is absolutely the right pick. We are encouraged to compliment the Mayor's team and ...(well, that part I can't participate in).... and join together to rally around Barnette. Okay. If the harshest critic of this Department says "go"...I will go...and be observant, yet hopeful.
As I've said many times although skeptically...I want Barnette to be "the One." Here's hoping.
From ADL-LA:
Friday, July 3, 2009
Ed Boks Turns in His Badge...and unveils 5-year Strategic Plan

Ed seems to think that now is a good time to unveil his plans for the Los Angeles Department of Animal Services..on his way out the door. It may make you wonder whether this was part of his exit deal and reminds us of the $50,000 which was paid to the last GM, Guerdon Stuckey, for few pages of drivel.
http://laanimalservices.com/
No doubt, the Board knows nothing about this new plan for its department. None of them are credited in its "list of contributors." The plan has replaced the Annual Report which is now absent. Also, Boks is still blogging http://laanimalservices.
Ed Boks refuses to be forgotten, just like the narcissist he is.Now he's calling himself "laptopdog." Get it? he's still "top dog."
Go way, Mr. Boks.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Groundswell of Disgust Grows Over Delgadillo's 4 Year Persecution of a Dog.

Will Carmen Trutanich put an end to misery for a man and his dog which Delgadillo's attorneys have perpetuated for 4 years?
If you would like to urge City Attorney Elect Carmen Trutanich to take immediate action to stop this madness as soon as he takes office on July 1, write, call and fax him at:
| |
Trutanich Mitchell, LLP 180 East Ocean Boulevard | |
Long Beach CA 90802-4079 Tel: 562) 216-4444 Fax: (562) 216-4445 | |
| |
| |
|
Kinship Circle organizes and facilitates public support for animal welfare causes. KC's most recent
Action Alert regarding Stu's case can be viewed at Change.org or at KC's own blog.
Examiner.com has published a terrific article by Kate Woodviolet on the "Stu, the Dog" case. At our publishing time, 48 comments have been registered AGAINST actions of the City of Los Angeles--the most comments ever lodged in any of Woodviolet's articles on pet issues in Los Angeles. The recently updated piece appears in its entirety:
Playing political games with a dog's life
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-1779-LA-Pet-Rescue-Examiner~y2009m6d17-Playing-political-games-with-a-dogs-lifeBy Kate Woodviolet
UPDATED After sitting in what amounts to dog jail for almost four years, a dog named Stu could be put to death soon; or he could finally go home to an owner who's been fighting for his life since 2005.
Rescued from the streets in 2000 by Jeff de la Rosa, for five years Stu lived peacefully with de la Rosa and his two other dogs. In August of 2005 de la Rosa was called out of town by a family emergency. He left the dogs in the care of an assistant who knew them. Following an uncharacteristic scuffle between Stu and one of the other dogs during which Stu's ear was torn, the assistant, in an attempt to take Stu to the vet, approached the wounded dog and tried to put a harness on him, over his injured ear (pet care experts always recommend using extreme caution, even a muzzle, when dealing with injured pets, because often even a normally friendly pet can lash out when fearful and in pain). During her attempt to harness him, a frightened Stu bit the assistant twice on the arm.
De la Rosa offered to pay the assistant's medical bills and says she initially told him she "didn't want to get Stu in trouble." He says when she went to the hospital she told emergency room staff that she didn't know the dog who had bitten her. She didn't call the police or L.A. Animal Services.+/- Read more...
According to de la Rosa, three weeks after the incident, without warning, he was served with a lawsuit. Ten days later he came home to find Stu missing from a locked outdoor kennel, and the gate on his fence pried open from the outside. He received a call from Animal Services that Stu had been "found and brought in by an unidentified private citizen." When de la Rosa arrived to retrieve his dog, Animal Services staff told him they had just received a bite report, one month after the incident, and they refused to release Stu.
The assistant, by that time represented by a law firm specializing in wresting large dog-bite settlements from homeowners' insurance carriers, now claimed that Stu had "dragged her back and forth across the floor." De la Rosa says she was seeking six million dollars in damages.

Stu with former Animal Services Board Commissioner Marie Atake. Atake famously resigned in 2007, frustrated in her attempts to increase Department integrity and professionalism
Following LAAS policy, a hearing was held to determine whether Stu had a history of aggression and whether he was likely to bite again if released. While the Hearing Examiner found that Stu had caused an injury, he felt it was sufficient to revoke the dog's license, which would have given de la Rosa the opportunity to find a place for Stu outside City limits, or to move. It was a verdict that would have given Stu back his life.
But that's when Animal Services Departmental policy went off the rails. Although LAAS policy was, and is, that the Hearing Examiner's recommendations determine the outcome, a Department captain apparently unrelated to the matter, a Captain Helen Brakemeier, interceded, telling then-General Manager Guerdon Stuckey in a memo that, "After reviewing the [Hearing Examiner's] report and all of the exhibits, I disagree with [his] recommendation and think that the dog should be deemed dangerous." Nowhere in the memo does Brakemeier indicate that she has personally met or evaluated the dog, nor what if any authority she has to overrule the hearing officer's verdict. Nevertheless, Stuckey concurred with Brakemeier, allegedly without even reading the report. His decision to deem Stu a "dangerous dog" was a sentence of death.
Animal Services Commissioner Kathy Riordan told me, "That's the first time I'd ever seen a General Manager increase the penalty [for an animal]." Within days, Stuckey was fired as General Manager by Mayor Villaraigosa, ironically, according to the L.A. Times, for failing to reduce shelter killing. De la Rosa says he was never informed about the role Brakemeier had played in condemning Stu. Her seemingly irregular participation in the process of determining the dog's fate came to light only after de la Rosa requested all documents related to the case in the wake of the unexpected LAAS verdict that Stu was too dangerous to live.
Since then Stu has been held by the City, or in City-designated facilities, and de la Rosa has been fighting to save his dog's life. Respected dog behaviorists, including Dr. Richard Polsky, who in 1987 helped formulate the City standards for assessing dangerous dogs; and Bobby Dorofshar of New Leash on Life, who has also worked with the City and been a member of the Spay/Neuter Advisory Committee, have stated that Stu is not aggressive toward humans. Their opinions are based on behavioral evaluations, assessments of his behavior prior to the incident, and an understanding of the ways the victim's actions towards Stu when he was injured may have unintentionally provoked the bites. In Dorofshar's case, he has voluntarily housed Stu at his own facility and has had the opportunity to get to know Stu over many months.
Nevertheless, Animal Services and the City Attorney's office have refused to budge, continuing to insist that the now-elderly Stu must die. Arguments in the Court of Appeals are scheduled for June 18th.

Stu, on the day he was impounded by L.A. Animal Services
Ironically, de la Rosa's fight to ensure humane treatment for his dog while in custody, and to save Stu's life, may have made his battle tougher. Allegations of a pattern of retaliatory behavior on the part of Animal Services management towards critics have surfaced repeatedly in the humane/rescue community over the years. In the days prior to the forced resignation of the most recent General Manager, Ed Boks, the City Council rebuked him publicly for blogging against his critics, including de la Rosa, on City time.
Even the Animal Services Commission, which was instituted as a supervisory body to the Animal Services Department, has fought for mercy for Stu. Commissioner Archie Quincey, who boasts a thirty-year career in L.A. County animal control, authored a motion that directs the City Attorney to drop his opposition to de la Rosa's appeal. Quincey wants the case returned to the Superior Court and wants that court to set aside Stu’s sentence based on evidence that the dog was denied due process. However, in subsequent meetings Commissioner Quincey's motion has not appeared on the agenda. Then, without warning or explanation, the June 8th meeting, the last scheduled before Stu’s Appeals Court arguments, was cancelled.
This points out another puzzling aspect of this story: the fact that even though the Animal Services Commission has a supervisory role over the Animal Services Department, it's unclear who determines the agenda for Commission meetings. Although nominally the Board President sets the agenda, in the minutes for the April 14th meeting, after Commissioner Quincey introduced his motion to free Stu, it was Department Assistant General Manager Linda Barth, not Board President Tariq Khero, who tells the Commission that, "the item is already agendized for the next meeting." Reached for comment, Barth stated that the Board President sets the agenda. She said the matter was subsequently discussed in closed session, but it was unclear if she meant specifically Commissioner Quincey's motion or Stu's case in general. She referred further questions to the City Attorney's office. A call to Deputy City Attorney Todd Leung, who has spearheaded the City's case against Stu, was not returned. Nor was a call to Board President Tariq Khero, and a call and email to incoming City Attorney Carmen Trutanich, who takes office July 1st.
[June 18th: Interestingly, although Assistant General Manager Linda Barth referred all further inquiries to the City Attorney's office, when I called the City Attorney's office today they were referring calls back to L.A. Animal Services.]
The next Commission meeting is scheduled for June 22. When asked if the motion would be discussed, Commissioner Quincey said, "If it's not on the agenda, I'm going to raise hell." He said, "I think it's gone too far. I have a lot of Animal Control experience. I saw the pictures [of the human victim's injuries], there were a couple of small puncture wounds -- and the dog was injured when it happened. On that one bite Stu gets the ultimate penalty? That's like getting the electric chair for a misdemeanor!"
When asked what he thought would be a just outcome, Quincey said, "I think Stu should go home."
If you would like to register your opinion on Stu's fate, you can contact the City Attorney's office at: (213) 978-8100
(end of repost)
If you would like to urge Carmen Trutanich to take immediate action to stop this madness as soon as he takes office on July 1, write, call and fax him at:
|
Trutanich Mitchell, LLP 180 East Ocean Boulevard |
Long Beach |
CA |
USA |
90802-4079 |
(Tel: 562) 216-4444 |
Fax: (562) 216-4445 |
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
An Open Letter to the Animal Services Board of Commisioners
Kathleen Riordan
Archie J. Quincey
Irene Ponce
Ruthanne Secunda
Board of Commissioners
Department of Animal Services
City of Los Angeles
221 N Figueroa St. , 5th floor
Los Agneles CA 90012
RE: LA Superior Court Case no. BS104936/Court of Appeals Case B202071
Dear Commissioners,
As you may know, I requested a continuance/postponement of my oral argument in the Court of Appeals. which is scheduled for Thursday 6/18. It was my hope that the additional time might assist us all in coming to a reasonable solution.
Today, I received word that the Court denied my request. I also received a copy of the letter from Mr. Leung to the Court, vigorously opposing my request. I attach it for your info. As usual, Mr. Leung's writing is full of venom and loaded accusations. He asserts that I have no interest in settlement. I think that you know that is far from the truth. I have asked several times to have discussions. Just like the Corwins had...for hours....and hours.....two appeal hearings. A hearing which went on so long, that you had no time to discuss Stu's case.

What the City Attorney's office has proposed is an impossible situation which comes with the following realities:
1. Some unknown approved "facility" which will step up and take on the legacy of Stu. I spoke to Bobby Dorafshar yesterday and his feeling is that there is no such "facility" that would accept what the City is proposing. If you have not read the contract which Bobby had to sign, it is a very unfair and constraining agreement. Is is Bobby's opinion, and I agree, that there is no organization who will agree to do what the City is proposing. If any of you have suggestions, i would ask you to make them now.
2. For me to find an organization to take in Stu would require a lot of research ,networking and time. More time than Stu has. Mr Leung's proposal states that this all must be finalized and approved by Council prior to the Court's decision which could be announced in 3 days or 3 months. Nobody knows.
3. I must "bear the expense" of this facility's care for Stu. Truthfully, this fight has tapped me out I have nothing to offer anyone, which makes it less likely that a group will appear out of thin air.
4. Although I asked for clarification of the terms of the proposal over a month ago, Mr. Leung only sent them on June 8th. Then he made a bold statement to the Court that I have had the terms for "over a month." This is your lawyer. He works for you. Ironically, he works for me, too and the rest of the people in the City. Ross Pool also works for you. It is not the other way around.
All of these terms in Mr. Leung's proposal force me to agree that :
1. Stu is a dangerous dog. We and all the experts know that this is not true. If my hearings had been fair and if the proper file had been submitted to the Courts, Maeve, Stu and I would be out for our evening walk right now.
2. That Stu and I received a fair hearing and a fair appeal in your Department.
3. That I am incapable of properly caring for Stu. Anyone who knows me will tell you that I am more than capable. In fact, the absolute best place for Stu is with me, at home. Anywhere else his future is uncertain. Some organizations may decide to forego veterinary costs should he develop a health
problem--aside from the severe dental disease he already has. Who is going to spend money to prolong a 10 year old mutt's life? Only me.
None of these are true. You cannot wait for the Court's opinion. I am confident they will deny me. This is no time for politics and the whims of higher ups. You were entrusted to care for these animals and Stu is one of them. Please care for him.
So I ask you. I beg you. Please ensure that you meet on Monday and that you take meaningful and conclusive action to right this wrong and send Stu home. Believe it or not, you do have the power to send him home. You know the truth. You know he was treated unfairly. If you'd like to have a new hearing, let's do that; BUT PLEASE, DO NOT DO NOTHING; and DO NOT allow a pissed off City Attorney to take his wrath for me out on an innocent animal. This matter is as simple at this:
* Stu is not dangerous.
* The department screwed up.
* The lawyers screwed up.
* Judge Chalfant saw that this is true.
* Judge Yaffe did not have all of the facts. Neither does the Court of Appeals.
* The right thing to do is to amend your motion and overturn Mr. Stuckey's decision.
* Courts have this power. YOU HAVE THIS POWER. Mr. Leung will tell you that you don't. Why not ask the Attorney General's Office? They would be happy to give their opinion.
Rather than make me show you where it says that you can do this. SHOW ME WHERE IT SAYS YOU CANNOT. The Corwins still have their dog which has attacked 7 times. If I were white and rich, would I have Stu home already...?
This City Attorney's department will undergo major changes in a few days. Please let Stu benefit from what Mr. Trutanich is calling "public integrity enforcement" The last person who used that word --integrity--in this case was Marie Atake. There is no General Manager. There is a lame duck City attorney with some underlings who despise me. You are the Department. Please do the right thing.
Please do not be manipulated into making a decsion, or failing to act which will result either Stu's death or eternity behind bars...without comfort, love and the securtiy of his dad.
Thank you,
Jeff de la Rosa
Ed Boks's New Job--MOVIE CRITIC
Ed's hyping a good film. An important film. Ed has lots of time to go to the movies while he's raking in the last few $8000 pay checks. That's right...we're STILL paying him--even though it is common knowledge that he is not working, will not be back and is sitting at home...or at the Playboy Mansion. You wish, Ed.
We'll wait for the last word, I guess. Here's one of them.
"This past weekend I saw an important film entitled "Food, Inc."
In Food, Inc., filmmaker Robert Kenner lifts the veil on our nation's food industry, exposing the highly mechanized underbelly that's been hidden from the American consumer with the consent of our government's regulatory agencies, USDA and FDA."
While this film is certainly an important film, we don't need to hear about it from Ed Boks. Do we?
We don't really want to hear anything from you , Ed. We just want you to go away. Quietly
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Birthday Letter to the Board of Commissioners
Email addresses for your convenience:
"Tariq Khero" <tariqkhero@gmail.com>,
"Kathy Riordan" <ninekitties@aol.com>,
"Archie Quincey" <ajq1trq2@aol.com> ,
"Irene Ponce" <ireneponce@earthlink.net>,
"Ruthanne Secunda" <secundar@unitedtalent.com>,
Jeffrey de la Rosa
1880 Morton Ave.
Los Angeles CA 90026
June 7, 2009
RE: Cancellation of the June 8, 2009 Board Meeting.
Board of Animal Services Commissioners
City of Los Angeles
221 N. Figueroa St. 5th Floor
Los Angeles CA 90026
Dear Commissioners,
At the April 14, 2009 meeting of your Board, Commissioner Archie J. Quincey introduced the following motion:
“I would like to make a motion that the Commission overturn Mr. Stuckey’s decision on the Stu case based on an unfair hearing. Errors were made in the records of Stu; and the evidence must be considered in the case. The two small pieces of Maeve’s record are material to Stu’s case and should be included therein.
I therefore move that the Board direct the City Attorney to withdraw opposition to the appeal.
I further move that the City Attorney send a letter to the Court of Appeals asking them to send
the case back to Superior Court and direct the court to issue a Writ of Mandate for Stu’s decision to be set aside based on due process considerations".
Yet, the motion has not been placed on any agenda and has not been acted on by your Board. Six weeks later, at the May 26, 2009 meeting of your Board, Commissioner Irene Ponce requested that the motion be placed on the very next agenda for a vote by the Board. That vote would have taken place on June 8, 2009. At the last minute on Friday June 5, 2009 this meeting was cancelled without explanation. We are not fooled, Commissioners. We suspect that you did not cancel this meeting. So why was it cancelled and by whom?
For too long, this Board has been controlled by a dishonest and corrupt General Manager. Ed Boks was forced to resign because he betrayed the trust of the City, its citizens and its animals. Two prominent lawsuits, on two coasts, showed that he was not only inept, but that he abused his position and power by discriminating against an employee based on race in New York City; and that he wrongfully terminated a female employee/volunteer who sued for sexual harassment. This last case cost the taxpayers of Los Angeles a $130,000 settlement which was recently approved by City Council.
Now, even as Ed Boks slowly backs out the door and continues to collect a huge salary paid from my taxes, you are allowing the mismanagement and interference with your Board to continue. I will not stand by silently and allow this to happen.
While I appreciate the recent efforts this Board has made to correct is lax and unlawful practice of failing to hold meetings, the cancellation of the June 8, 2009 meeting of your Board is a despicable act. I am well aware that your Board desires to have jurisdiction of this case returned to you so that a fair and just decision can be made which will result in Stu being allowed to return to his loving home after 4 years of horrible imprisonment. I am aware that your Board was to address and act on Stu's case at the meeting scheduled for June 8, 2009. We in the animal community are not stupid; and we see, very clearly, what is happening and how your Board is being manipulated in order to prolong and continue the persecution of this poor dog Stu and me.
I believe that Mr. Boks, various City Attorneys, Asst. General Manager Linda Barth, and Ross Pool are actively blocking an equitable and fair settlement of this issue. This is wrong. You have proposed settlement but are now permitting that negotiations on settlement to be obstructed by those who seek to continue to corrupt the work of the Board.
I believe that these people caused the cancellation of this meeting in order to silence the Board and keep them from taking action on Stu's case.
This has to stop. Now.
I am appalled that your Board allows itself to be manipulated by the very “staff” and Department which is, by law, under your control.
Please adhere to the law, search your consciences, back-up your words and immediately schedule a Special Meeting to take place without delay and well prior to the June 18, 2009 hearing in the Court of Appeals regarding Stu's appeal.
There is no need for another closed session. You have all of the information you need; and the City Attorney, who will soon have a new boss, has had ample opportunity to further his agenda by persuading and strong-arming you to refrain from doing the right thing. Please, instead of doing the work of the City Attorney, do the work of the animals and the people of the City of Los Angeles and take your position on the Board of Commissioners as an assignment of the public trust. You need only amend your motion and/or pass Commissioner Quincey’s motion to put this matter to rest. For you convenience, I attach a written motion. This is what all Board actions should look like, according Los Angeles [Administrative] Code Section 503 (c).
You must end this horrible tragic miscarriage of justice now with meaningful, definitive and unquestionably clear and bold action.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey de la Rosa (and Stu)

Enc. 4/14/09 Motion by Council member Dennis Zine
CC: everyone
Stu-Thanksgiving 2008
We Are Not Stupid, Commissioners!
Email Blocks
To: Commissioners
"Tariq Khero" <tariqkhero@gmail.com>, "Kathy Riordan" <ninekitties@aol.com>,
"Ed Boks"
Board of Animal Services Commissioners
City of Los Angeles
221 N. Figueroa St. 5th Floor
Los Angeles CA 90026
Dear Commissioners,
At the April 14, 2009 meeting of your Board, Commissioner Archie J. Quincey introduced the following motion:
“I would like to make a motion that the Commission overturn Mr. Stuckey’s decision
on the Stu case based on an unfair hearing. Errors were made in the records of Stu
and the evidence must be considered in the case. The two small pieces of Maeve’s
record are material to Stu’s case and should be included therein.
I therefore move that the Board direct the City Attorney to withdraw opposition to the appeal.
I further move that the City Attorney send a letter to the Court of Appeals asking them to send
the case back to Superior Court and direct the court to issue a Writ of Mandate for
Stu’s decision to be set aside based on due process considerations".
Yet, the motion has not been placed on any agenda and has not been acted on by your Board. Six weeks later, at the May 26, 2009 meeting of your Board, Commissioner Irene Ponce requested that the motion be placed on the very next agenda for a vote by the Board. That vote would have taken place on June 8, 2009. At the last minute on Friday June 5, 2009 this meeting was cancelled without explanation.
We are not fooled, Commissioners. We suspect that you did not cancel this meeting. So why was it cancelled and by whom?
For too long, this Board has been controlled by a dishonest and corrupt General Manager. Ed Boks was forced to resign because he betrayed the trust of the City, its citizens and its animals. Two prominent lawsuits, on two coasts, showed that he was not only inept, but that he abused his position and power by discriminating against an employee based on race in New York City; and that he wrongfully terminated a female employee/volunteer who sued for sexual harassment. This last case cost the taxpayers of Los Angeles a $130,000 settlement which was recently approved by City Council. This is not how I want my tax dollars and the resources of my City Attorney's office used.
Now, even as Ed Boks slowly backs out the door and continues to collect a huge salary paid from my taxes, you are allowing the mismanagement and interference with your Board to continue. I will not stand by silently and allow this to happen.
While I appreciate the recent efforts this Board has made to correct is lax and unlawful practice of failing to hold meetings, the cancellation of the June 8, 2009 meeting of your Board is a despicable act. I am well aware of the case involving Jeff de la Rosa's dog, Stu; and that your Board desires to have jurisdiction of this case returned to you so that a fair and just decision can be made which will result in Stu being allowed to return to his loving home after 4 years of horrible imprisonment. I am also aware that your Board has opened discussions with Mr. de la Rosa in order to achieve an out of court settlement of this issue and a soon to be filed lawsuit against Mr Boks and other Department employees, as well as the City of Los Angeles. I am aware that your Board was to address and act on Stu's case at the meeting scheduled for June 8, 2009. We in the animal community are not stupid; and we see, very clearly, what is happening and how your Board is being manipulated in order to prolong and continue the persecution of this poor dog Stu and his owner. I do not want my tax dollars spent defending the vengeful actions of the Department of Animal Services and the City Attorneys which wrongfully condemned an innocent dog named Stu and turned the life of a citizen, Jeff de la Rosa, upside down for the last 4 years.
I believe that Mr. Boks, various City Attorneys, Asst. General Manager Linda . Barth, and Mr. Ross Pool are actively blocking an equitable and fair settlement of this issue. This is wrong. You have proposed settlement but are now permitting that settlement to be blocked by those who seek to continue to corrupt the work of the Board.
I believe that these people caused the cancellation of this meeting in order to silence the Board and keep them from taking action on Stu's case.
I want this to stop. Now.
I am appalled that your Board allows itself to be manipulated by the very staff and Department which is, by law, under your control.
Please adhere to the law, search your consciences and immediately schedule a Special Meeting to take place without delay and well prior to the June 18, 2009 hearing in the Court of Appeals regarding Stu's appeal. Please do the work of the animals and the people of the City of Los Angeles and take your position on the Board of Commissioners as an assignment of the public trust. We will not
stand by and allow this injustice to continue.
Please include me on a list of people who will be notified of the immediate scheduling of a special meeting, at which Commissioner Quincey's motion regarding Mr. de la Rosa and his dog Stu may be heard, seconded and passed.
You must end this horrible tragic miscarriage of justice now. Please take meaningful action now.
Sincerely,
[YOUR NAME] DELETE THIS FROM YOUR LETTER/EMAIL
Monday, May 25, 2009
City Attorney (the old one) offers "Stu" Life without Parole.

"At the next meeting (4/27) , I would like to make a motion that the Board direct the City Attorney to withdraw opposition to Jeff's de la Rosa's appeal in the Court of Appeals; and to direct the City Attorney to request that the Court of Appeals return the case to the Superior Court; and direct the Superior Court to issue a Writ of Mandate which shall order this Board to set-aside the decision declaring the dog, Stu as dangerous. I make this motion because the hearings in our Department were unfair and violated Due Process. This has gone on long enough."
Well, following that, the Board held a "closed session" on April 27, 2009. That's when they throw everyone out and talk to their "attorney." In this case, the City Attorney is Todd Leung, who lost to me in Court on my other dog, Maeve--same reason-Due Process was violated in that they refused to summon my requested witnesses and thereby did not afford me a fair hearing before depriving me of my "property." That's the 14th Amendment at work. After 3 years, Maeve is exonerated and according to Boks and Linda Barth, "the case is closed." Great, but what about Stu?

Stu Supporter, Marie Atake with Stu
(The only Commissioner to ever meet him. Atake quit the Board of Commissioners
partially because of the unfair treatment in Stu's case and impound)
For the last several months, I (and other Stu supporters) have been lobbying the Board of Commissioners to settle this matter before the final hearing in the Court of Appeals on June 18, 2009. With a defective record, I could lose the case and Stu would then be killed based on Stuckey's last word before he left with the door swinging. Boks picked up where he left off and made Stu out to be a vicious terrorist of a dog and tried to make this into L.A.'s own Whipple case, which it is not, by any means.
Experts and trainers (including New Leash on Life's and K9s ONLY's Bobby Dorafshar and Richard Polksy, Ph.D. http://dogexpert.com ) have examined and evaluated Stu. He is "not dangerous", they say.
In 5 years of being with me , he never hurt another animal or a human, until he was left with my former girlfriend/assistant when my mother was on her death bed in Ohio. Tatiana did something to cause a fight to break out in which Stu was injured-his ear was torn. Ignoring my instructions to let him out of the locked small office to chill out , she went in and closed the door behind her, and then cornered Stu. Then, she attempted to slide a harness over his torn ear, when he already was wearing a collar. He apparently bit her, though we are taking her word for this...it's probable that he did. He bit her twice on the same arm and retreated to a corner, so said she on her first explanation to me. However, once her mother convinced her to sue me for $6 MILLION (she settled for $300K), her "dog-bite" lawyer instructed her to weave a dramatic and tearful tale for Animal Control which included her being "dragged" back and forth across the floor by a, supposedly, death-seeking Stu. "I knew he would kill me." "I was screaming...I had to crawl out of the room after playing dead."
Well, not even that story persuaded the Hearing Examiner. He found Stu to be "NOT DANGEROUS" and reasoned that Stu had been provoked. But Captain Helen Brakemeir stuck her big thumb in the pie and before the report from the Hearing Examiner could even get to the GM, she wrote what is now known as The Brakemeir Memo, in which she disagrees with Mossman and lobbies for Stu to be killed because it was a "mauling" and he is "dangerous." Stuckey, who had just been asked to resign, rubber stamped the letter written by Brakemeir.
Now, four years later, it seems that someone in the Mayor's office (or perhaps Debbie Knaan, because I exposed her for having ex parte communications with appellant parties and witnesses while she was already selected to be a "quasi judge") still has it in for me and will not allow the Board to do what the Board seems to want to do--put an end to this nightmare and send S
tu home.
The City Attorney's offer is this (in an email...not even a letter):
They won't kill Stu as settlement of the case (and my lawsuit against the City), but he cannot come home. He must go to a "sanctuary" or "approved kennel." Basically, he will spend the rest of his life, like the last 4 years, confined. He does not deserve that and has not deserved any of this. If you agree, then please come to the Commission meeting on Tuesday May 26, 2009 and tell the Board they are wrong to listen to the City Attorney. Especially since the City Attorney has just lost his job!
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
6:00 P.M.
Exposition Park
Dr. Mary McLeod Bethune Regional Branch Library
3900 South Western Avenue.
Los Angeles, CA 90062
click for Google map
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Let's PARTY! Really. Boks's demise is cause for a BASH!
A couple hours of speakers from various groups and factions in the L.A. animal world, and then a big fracking SHINDIG! I know a house with a bunch of space ;).
I'm sure we can get Council to give us some money--some of Ed's frickin cash, all of which he should cough up for really screwing everyting up. They give money to everyone for anything. Or we can all toss in $20 (300 heads =$6K) and get a creative event coordinator to handle it. Hmmmm? I can throw a huge party for $6K. More? I'm sure we can easily put 1000 people together who are happy to kick Ed's ass down the track to come celebrate.
Friday, April 24, 2009
ED BOKS RESIGNS AND LIES ALL THE WAY OUT THE DOOR!



















































I am informing all LA Animal Services employees and volunteers that I am resigning as General Manager effective June 30, 2009.
I plan to take leave for a couple of weeks but will be back in time to help close out the current fiscal year and work with our management team to ensure a smooth transition. While on leave I am naming Kathy Davis as the Acting General Manager.( *Eww*) Your support of Kathy is appreciated. (You mean the bump on the log that hasn't done a lick of work for her salary? Yeah, right..she has our support while they try to force Barth down our throats...Cold...Day....In.....HELL!)
I want to let you know how proud I am of the work we were able to accomplish over the past three and a half years including, but not limited to, development of the most successful municipal pet adoption program in the nation (over 26,000 adoptions annually); successfully opening six new state-of-the-art animal care centers; embarking on the Department’s first Strategic Planning process; updating and standardizing policies and procedures to ensure a well-run Department; and building the finest animal care and control medical and executive teams in the nation. Gratefully, all of this, along with all your hard work and commitment, has successfully contributed to the lowest three years of pet euthanasia rates in the Department’s recorded history; and we have every reason to expect continued improvement.
This was all accomplished while the Department experienced its largest, fastest, and most historic growth in service demand. LA Animal Services is finding its balance in an environment of severe budget cuts, unprecedented demand for expansion of services, and a severe staffing shortage. I am proud to have served as your General Manager during these difficult years. I know I am leaving a Department committed to valuing the integrity of each employee, volunteer and partner all contributing to the professional delivery of excellent customer service, in an atmosphere of open, honest communication, predicated on your trust in and respect for each other.
I wish you all the very best. Thank you for your commitment, dedication and support for the Department's life saving mission.
[end of tripe train]
Ed...nice exit deal. How much did you screw the taxpayer for in severence or bogus "consulting" contracts?? Did you f8ck them on the pension too?? ---------Your friends at BW
ADL-LA was able to speak with many individuals including volunteers, employees and rescuers who work or have worked with Barnette on a daily basis and we even spoke to one of the individuals involved with the superb and large foster network program that Brenda Barnette set up herself and which has been so successful in saving the lives of hundreds upon hundreds of animals who would otherwise be dead right now.
In fact, in complete contrast to what we were told by employees in NYC and AZ regarding how inept, disorganized and duplicitous Ed Boks was while in charge of the homeless and lost animals of their cities, we have gotten irrefutable evidence and information about Barnette's programs that she set up with the Seattle humane community, the public and her employees which has saved the lives of thousands of animals since Barnette was appointed CEO of SHS in 2006. This is why (and we can't believe we are saying this,) but we at ADL-LA are asking our readers and supporters to e-mail Jim Bickhart, Jimmy Blackman and Mayor Villaraigosa and thank them for doing something that will save the lives of THOUSANDS of our city's homeless and lost animals. Their
e-mails are at the end of this post!
Unfortunately there are a few people, (there always are) who ironically have NEVER even worked with Barnette or even MET the woman who are circulating confusing, nasty and false e-mails about her. It is quite incongruous that all the people we spoke to that know Barnette personally and/or have worked along side Barnette at SHS and at ARF (Animal Rescue Foundation) have said nothing but amazing things about her. Yet a minority of so called animal welfarists here in LA who don't even know the woman, spreading nasty and completely false information about her. They definitely have their own personal axes to grind and it saddens ADL-LA tremendously (and the animals inside the LAAS shelters right now,) that a small minority are putting their ego's and their misinformation BEFORE what is best for the lost and homeless animals of LA. It's no wonder why many view LA's humane welfare community as a bunch of competitive, mean spirited, negative individuals who want change, yet fear that very change. Some have even called the animal welfare community here in LA 'kooks' who will never "get their act together!" We must prove these people WRONG! We can and MUST "get our act together" and get behind a woman who will not only be the first female to be appointed as General Manager for LAAS, but who is one of the most progressive, humane shelter leaders in the nation.
One of these individuals spreading untruths about Barnette we are very saddened to say, was a candidate for the GM position who obviously didn't get the job. She began spearheading a witch hunt against this superb and progressive shelter leader immediately after hearing the Mayor's decision. ADL-LA admits that this candidate is very knowledgeable about LAAS and has great ideas, and suggestions regarding reducing the killing inside our six city shelters, BUT. . . . she has no track record of ever doing it herself. Barnette on the other hand has a PROVEN STELLAR RECORD of implementing programs, policies and procedures in conjunction with employees, volunteers, a huge foster network, rescuers and even the PUBLIC that has brought the Seattle Humane Shelter to a 92% SAVE RATE! The numbers, and we have checked them out thoroughly through the Asolimar Accords (and they DON'T lie) show her save rate as consistently being between 91% and 92% for the past three years.
It would take ADL-LA hours to type in all the quotes and information we have obtained on this lady and needless to say it would be way too long for one post; so we're going to have to send them out in a series of posts. So here goes installment #1!
From what we have found out Barnette is a female shelter LEADER who is nationally recognized and who not only has the skill set to implement live saving programs and think outside the box, but has the vision as well. So please delete any e-mails from those people who have never worked with Barnette or have axes to grind with her personally and who are attempting to obstruct her appointment. ADL-LA says SHAME ON THEM! Not ONE of these obstructionists has ever run a shelter or better yet, turned a high kill shelter into a shelter that now saves 92% of the animals they take in (and they are an OPEN shelter by the way; they don't turn ANYONE away.) Instead of our entire humane community rejoicing and rallying around the Mayor and Ms. Barnette, a few bad apples are trying to spoil her stellar reputation of saving more animal lives on record than practically any other shelter in the of nation.
This time around the Mayor has chosen a winner to lead LAAS and he's handing her to us on a silver platter and we should all rejoice, not only for the animals whose lives WILL BE SAVED by having such a capable leader at the helm, but for ourselves. In fact some people from other states who know of her abilities are actually JEALOUS that Los Angeles was able to get someone of Barnett's caliber to run our city shelters! They want her!!
So we give you two of the many quotes we have gotten over the past four days.
This first one is a quote from Amber Yoo who worked along side Barnette for three years at SHS. We will be sending out more quotes in our future installments.
" I have worked closely with Brenda for three years at Seattle Humane and I can confidently say she is one of the nation’s best leaders in animal welfare. The numbers speak for themselves. She took an aging, overwhelmed shelter that was high kill, killing many of the animals it “rescued” and transformed it into a cutting-edge community center that saved 91.5% of the animals that came through its doors. She did this by inspiring the staff to embrace a no kill philosophy * and by engaging the community in its mission.
Wonderful things happen when you have a leader who inspires staff and engages the community in creative, life-saving solutions. Soon we were able to expand our concern from the animals coming through our doors to the animals in our region. We traveled several times a week to other shelters in the community and rescued animals from death row.
As our life-saving reputation grew, the community called on us to help in emergency situations. In June 2009 we rescued 90 American Eskimo dogs during one of the largest puppy mill busts in the country. Brenda immediately reached out to the volunteer foster network she had established. When the rescue van pulled into the driveway, we literally had a line of foster families waiting to take them home. The foster families provided the one-on-one attention that these scared and neglected dogs needed in order to learn what it was like to be a cherished pet. Today, all 90 dogs are happy, healthy and loved.
The volunteer foster network is one of many examples of how Brenda engaged the community in our mission. As Brenda always says, foster homes “literally expand the shelter walls—allowing us to save even more lives.” For example, only 150 cats could comfortably be housed at our shelter, but thanks to our foster network, we were able to care for upwards of 400 cats at any given time.
Another way Brenda involved the community was by partnering with local rescue groups. In 2008, Brenda’s vision of a community-wide partnership to save lives came to fruition with the first annual “Catapalooza”. Seattle Humane hosted six organizations in a community-wide, family-oriented, fun-filled cat adoption bonanza and in two days found homes for 146 orphaned kitties.
Ultimately, by uniting the community in our mission to save lives, we began to break adoption records. For the fiscal year of 2008-09, our adoption rate was the second highest in Seattle Humane’s 113-year history. That same year, we also experienced the lowest return rate ever – which means we were making quality, long-term matches. When I left Seattle Humane, this trend was continuing. It seemed like every month, we were breaking an adoption record.
As I said above, wonderful things happen when you have a leader who inspires staff and engages the community toward creative, life-saving solutions. If the community of Los Angeles' goal is to save as many animal lives as possible, then Brenda is the leader who can make that vision a reality.
* There were only two scenarios where we considered euthanasia: for those animals who were so sick that they could not be saved and for those who were a danger to the community. The decision to end a life was extremely serious—and always saddening."
***************************************************
This next quote is from Lisa Simmons who was the Executive Assistant when Barnette was Executive Director of Pets in Need (1998-2003)
"Brenda Barnette is a true visionary in the animal welfare movement. As Executive Director of Pets In Need, Brenda implemented a number of programs that today are incorporated in most shelters striving to reduce and end the killing of our companion animals.
Under her direction, Pets In Need became one of the core shelters in the UC Davis Koret Shelter Medicine Program, a program training veterinarians and veterinary technicians how to best practice humane, progressive and compassionate shelter medicine.
She started a program where the shelter could help those community members who were feral cat caregivers wanting to practice TNR. Cat traps and trapping training was provided at no charge, and a list of low to no cost spay/neuter feral cat clinics was provided.
She also created the foster kitten program which saves on average 500-600 kittens annually. Many of these kittens come from feral cats. Brenda created other successful programs that saved the lives of hundreds of our animals. If you need more information please let me know. Los Angeles is so lucky to have Brenda as their new general manager."
Please send thanks to:
mayor@lacity.org
Jim.Bickhart@lacity.org
Jimmy.Blackman@lacity.org
***********************************************************************
ADL-LA Disclaimer: Nothing contained in this publication is intended to encourage or incite illegal acts. Some of the information in the posts have been received anonymously and ADL-LA cannot make any guarantees for the accuracy of these reports. Any views or comments stated in this report are not necessarily the views of ADL-LA.