Multnomah County Animal Services: A public shelter fails its vulnerable animals and citizens.

What went wrong

It could be described as the art of the con. Years turned into decades of failed government oversight and absent accountability leading inexorably to an animal shelter agency that has become independent from the rest of county government and turned its back on its funded service mission.

“Historically, the primary role of MCAS has been animal control enforcement and stray animal sheltering. In harmony with County equity goals and the MCAS North Star of providing quality care for animals and equitable services for the community, MCAS is shifting resources toward supporting pet owners to care for and retain their animals. The aim is to prevent animals from needing shelter due to surrender or abandonment, and to intervene prior to the need for enforcement activity (https://www.multco.us/budget/fy-2023-adopted-budget)”

Multnomah County Animal Services (MCAS) now operates as an insular authoritarian regime in service to the managers. Its funded mission is fiction, the fact is it is intended as crowd appeasement.

The current Multnomah County Chair, Jessica Vega Pederson, and the Board of County Commissioners have paid no attention to this public agency’s devolution from service back to control despite multiple media investigations and reports, some listed below.

After media investigations, an internal review was ordered by the county chair to reported to focus on correcting MCAS’ failures including its failure to implement county audit recommendations from 2016 and 2018. The internal review is also failing because there is much to protect internally. A fraternal review replaced ordering an independent investigation to correct current management misconduct and indifference to the public and homeless animals that has nothing to do with failures to honor 2016 and 2018 audit recommendations. The indifference of county government to seek real answers and solutions served to embolden MCAS managers who are now assured that in Multnomah county, collegiality will trump public service every time, leaving only the animals and the public to suffer.

Among the many concerns highlighted in the media has been the decision making process and trustworthiness of MCAS’ managers’ euthanasia decisions (https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2024/02/multnomah-county-animal-shelter-drops-language-stating-animals-wont-be-euthanized-for-space.html).

Before 2016, it was an open process. In addition to the agency managers, participants included trainers, behavior experts, volunteers, and staff, indeed anyone from the public c with an idea or resource. After 2016, under a new director, the only participants allowed since are in house managers with few or no animal behavior qualifications. The Shelter disposition review meetings are not open to public review and the managers’ decisions may not be questioned. When two volunteers recently did question management decisions, they were fired. One volunteer has filed a first amendment rights lawsuit that is pending. (https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2024/01/former-multnomah-county-animal-services-volunteer-sues-county-alleging-it-retaliated-against-her-for-trying-to-save-dog.html )

Since 2016, every dog killed has been labeled “unhealthy and untreatable.”

These designations have never been corroborated by external expert review and are not open for review. When any reasons or justifications are listed at all, overwhelmingly they do not meet objective professional or ordinary citizens’ definitions of “unhealthy and untreatable.” In fact, rarely do they even meet MCAS interpretations of the Asilomar Accord definitions for “healthy”, “treatable/manageable”; “treatable/rehabilitatable;” and “unhealthy and untreatable” meant to standardize definitions across the country for the purpose of cross shelter comparisons. As an example from MCAS Asilomar interpretation manual (attached) an animal whose veterinary care expenses exceed $750 is designated “unhealthy and untreatable.” That is despite the fact that MCAS has a public donation fund, Dolly’s Fund, specifically designated to the special medical care needs of shelter animals that exceeds one million dollars with on going collections from the public. The monies appear to be seldom spent. Regardless, if an expense of over $750 were to be unaffordable, the accurate description would be “treatable” but “unaffordable” if a county agency indeed could not afford care.

MCAS animal disposition designations where all animals killed are described as “unhealthy and untreatable” seems dishonest and contrived. When records are reviewed most are unsupported by public records. The term “unhealthy and untreatable” seems to have another intended purpose: to relieve the agency of all responsibility and effort by making the animal responsible for his/her death. The deception then is that the managers have “No choice:” the dog is “unhealthy and untreatable.” Reviewing public records is the only recourse to account for and logically analyze reported dispositions. There is no other recourse: Meetings are closed. No notes are kept, making it impossible to understand decisions made by the managers.

There is a second disturbing pattern from Asilomar Accord agency records concerning the increase in animals labeled “unhealthy and untreatable.”

It is that in the MCAS Asilomar Reports, after 2016 every every animal killed is de facto labeled “unhealthy and untreatable.” No animals after 2016 are killed as treatable. Before 2016 they were. And there is a second trend after 2016. After 2016, while few are labeled “unhealthy and untreatable” on intake significant numbers become unhealthy and untreatable and are then killed as “unhealthy and untreatable” at the end of their stay.

The possible explanations are: 1) MCAS is an extremely toxic shelter environment where animals succumb to temporary extreme stress, in effect, what does it take to break them, ; 2) The designation “unhealthy and untreatable” is about convenience euthanasia, space by another name. Both are related in the sense that the state of shelter stress can be manipulated to imply a permanent incurable personality trait. That is convenient.

The Asilomar Accords from 2014 through 2022, (the last year they are on record), and the MCAS diagnostic/prognostic guidelines are both attached. Listed at the end below are some of the media investigations of MCAS. The actual list is far longer. None have had any effect or made any difference in turning MCAS around into becoming a humane animal shelter.

That requires people. It also requires government transparency. Towards that goal, individual cases of animals killed with agency decisions and descriptions from public records will be posted. Public records for each animal are also available upon request.

The contact information for the County Chair and County Board of Commissioners is provided in another tab to contact and address this government’s lack of transparency and its failure to hold MCAS management accountable for the lives of animals and the people it serves.

Gail O’Connell-Babcock, PhD
Gocbwatchdog23@gmail.com
Citizens for Humane Animal Legislation/Watchdog
Sherwood, Oregon

---

---

---